> As it is, they’ve already had a de facto death penalty with settlers and Tsahal officers allowed to shoot Arabs for sport.

If it was, it would happen a lot more often. But it doesn’t. Instead, nearly all Palestinians who get killed is in firefights from both sides, and there have been plenty of times where settlers were arrested if they killed Palestinians.

This is also why on r/CombatFootage you’ll often see Israeli soldiers not even shooting at Palestinians holding guns where Israeli soldiers are operating because their rules of engagement forbid them from doing so.

Simple conclusion then is that pretty much everyrhing you wrote is verifiably false.

Naturally. Iranian deployments into Syria and military supplies to Hezbollah are Israel’s biggest conventional national security threat.

Supplying Ukraine with military systems won’t reduce Russian reliance on Iran, will make bombings in Syria more difficult, and also weaken Israeli defenses (especially if missile defenses).

Basically, in contrast to most countries sending weapons, Israel has actual tangible national security threats to their own cities to deal with.

ICBMs are not comparable to cruise missiles

> emm, ballistic missile means it’s exo-atmospheric….no?)

Not necessarily. Ballistic can fly within the atmosphere, but at longer distances they probably won’t because it’s not practical. Arrow 3 would intercept like above Iraq, whereas Arrow 2 would intercept at much closer distances to Israel.

> Though I’m pretty sure arrow 2 could be used against paveh, no? 1650 KMs shouldn’t be considered a long-range missile?

The problem is more related to the fact that Arrow 2 is designed to intercept in the upper atmosphere, whereas cruise missiles fly much lower. David’s Sling and Patriot have targeting systems and maneuvering that are more suitable for that.

The name of the game when it comes to Israeli (and American) missile defenses is to just have many different systems with different targets they are focused on.

Just for the sake of completeness, Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 would be used against long-range ballistic missiles. In particular, Arrow 3 was designed for exo-atmospheric interceptions, which would never involve a cruise missile.

More likely that David’s Sling and/or Patriot would be deployed against cruise missiles.

It can. Israel claims it has been tested against guided missiles as well. However, this would not be the preferred Israeli system anyway. David’s Sling has much more range, carries more speed, and has a more modern targeting system and would be used.

Arrow 3 is for exo-atmospheric interceptions. Given that cruise missiles fly within the atmosphere, this would fall squarely on David’s Sling.

Probably, yes. Until either side makes concessions that would be politically explosive on their own side, resolution isn’t likely. A one-state solution also certainly will not happen.

I mean, both nations rely on desalination for a stable water supply. There are many unnecessary uses of fossil fuels, but guaranteeing a stable water supply sure isn’t one of them.

It’s not reasonable to expect countries to forego stability of water supply for the sake of using a bit fewer fossil fuels.

Oh yeah. Any leader who makes those concessions immediately makes them target number 1 of many extremists on their respective side.

Yeah. Even in this post-civil war period, they’re so dysfunctional they have been going through one of the worst economic crises ever recorded (according to the World Bank). It just doesn’t work.

Neither side wants this because it’d immediately devolve into a dysfunctional sectarian state likely to descend into civil war.

At this point, the Biden administration (and pretty much most governments in the world) accept that neither side is willing to make the politically explosive concessions necessary for a peace deal. For example, the Palestinians would likely need to give up their right of return, and Israel would need to give up many settlements and more.

I guess they’re just waiting until either side has their own Anwar Sadat. Until then, they mostly just want to avoid war with many casualties.