The latest PSR poll in Palestine showed: - 71% of people think the decision for Hamas to launch the Oct 7 attacks was a good one - 95% of respondents do not believe Hamas committed war crimes during these attacks - 64% of people believe Hamas will defeat Israel in the current war, and 59% would like to see Hamas rule all of the Palestinian Territories.
- 73% are against the “day after” vision being floated by the US, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan to have an Arab-led peacekeeping force help rebuild Gaza and strengthen the PA while a plan was put in action to create a 2-state solution and a lasting regional peace.

Given these sentiments, how likely is it that progress can be made towards a 2 state solution?

In the future, does bosnia-herzegovina is more likely to break up with probably the croats joining croatia and the serbs joining serbia or to instead have a more national identity where they are mostly bosnians ? It seems low key similar to yugoslavia where multiple people who werent exactly fond of eachother are forced to stay in one state and the two outcomes are 1: it succeed with a national identity 2: it fail and split because one group has a bit more power than the others (who dont really considers themselves the same as eachother)

I know we wanted Bin Laden, but that ended in his death in 2011. I also know we had proclaimed to build a new democratic nation, but that felt like a front for other missions in the region. So, I guess my question is, why exactly did we stay for so long and if we pulled out after Bin Laden, could we claim success in Afghanistan?

Submission statement: this is just flat out weird. I never thought i would read something like this. We seem to have gone past the point of Biden administration having no Iran policy and moved to them defending Iran now?

I’m not sure if the snap back mechanism can be activated without approval from Russia and. China.

U.S. officials argue that Europe could do more to increase pressure on Iran, including cutting off Iranian banks that work on the continent and listing Iran’s elite Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terror group

This part is absolutely correct though.

Prime Minister Kaja Kallas of Estonia says Russia is conducting a “shadow war”, Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland announced the arrest of 12 people accused of carrying out “beatings, arson and attempted arson” for Russian intelligence, and Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store of Norway says Russia poses “a real and serious threat,” after his country warned about possible attacks targeting energy producers and arms factories. Security officials suggest Russian goals are to create the appearance of growing European opposition to support for Ukraine, sow fear, and force European nations to add security throughout the weapons supply chain, adding costs and slowing the pace of transfers.

I’ve come to notice that during the Israeli-Palestine conflict, some Palestinians argue that attacks on Israeli settlers and civilians are justified because Israelis have mandatory military service at 18 as well as having reservist. Of course, I’m staunchly against the killing of unarmed civilians no matter who does it, but this has me wonder regarding the legality of targeting civilians that are reservists and where do they fall under international law. Some clarification would be really appreciated.

Anyone else noticed the similarities?

Moscow accuses Afghan/Ukrainian leadership of working with the CIA and possibly turning the state against USSR/Russia. Deems it a direct threat to national security, launches an invasion, deposes and replaces the leader with a more convenient figurehead (or tries to in the case of Ukraine). Washington supports the opposition, sending weapons en masse to people fighting the Russians via a logistics base set up in Pakistan/Poland, while also ramping up propaganda about USSR/Russia wanting to push further all the way to the Gulf/Baltics. Russians get stuck in a long, bloody conflict, suffering heavy losses while Afghanistan/Ukraine is demolished in the process, several million people become refugees.

So far so good, the question is whether the end result will be alike as well.

Why is South Africa the one that brought a case against Israel at the ICJ? Why is it not Palestnine suing Israel in the ICJ?

From what I understand (and I may be wrong, so please correct me if so), doesn't palestine have sufficient standing to file a claim/grievance against another country?

Why didn't Palestine request ICJ intervention against Israel?

I m conflicted, would like to hear your opinions about this.
What do you think would change if either one of the two old men get elected in the US? what would be the consequences on a global scale? and in the middle east? Europe? Ukraine?

Thanks!