Every time Guterres opens his gob the UN drops down to a new low. He, and the ridiculous organisation itself should be disbanded.

Singer criticises Guterres for his inability to secure a ceasefire in Gaza. It's important to acknowledge, however, that the UN Secretary-General's role is largely diplomatic. Guterres' capacity to influence the decisions of member states and conflicting parties is limited. The success of a ceasefire largely depends on the willingness of these parties to negotiate and agree, which often involves geopolitical considerations beyond the Secretary-General's control.

Singer's assertion that Guterres has been inhumane for not facilitating the evacuation of Gaza's civilian population to safe havens oversimplifies the situation. Organizing such evacuations in conflict zones is extraordinarily complex, requiring the cooperation of the conflicting parties, host countries, and international agencies. The Secretary-General's power is not unilateral in coordinating these efforts. The reluctance of Arab countries and UNRWA to accommodate Gazans is influenced by a wide range of political, logistical, and security factors. The dynamics here extend well beyond the purview of Guterres' direct influence.

The legal interpretations surrounding Jewish settlements and Article 80 of the UN Charter are highly contentious. The stance of the UN, which Guterres may represent, reflects a broader international perspective and not merely his personal view.

While Singer proposes the HKOPS as a potential solution, the feasibility of such proposals is subject to the agreement of the involved parties. The Secretary-General's role is to facilitate dialogue, not to impose specific solutions.

Singer criticizes Guterres for adhering to the two-state solution. However, this has been the internationally recognized framework for peace for several decades. The challenges in realizing this solution stem from factors that are largely outside the control of the UN Secretary-General.

Singer's call for Guterres' resignation appears to overlook the intrinsic complexities and limitations of his role in managing international conflicts.

While critique and accountability are vital, it is equally important to consider the multifaceted nature of international diplomacy and conflict resolution. The Secretary-General's role, while influential, is bounded by the collective actions and decisions of member states and conflicting parties.

The bottom line for me now is that I no longer give a flying fig for all the claims and counterclaims of historical, religious or political justifications either side present. Nothing, absolutely nothing can excuse the killing of thousands of children as Israel’s “… right to self-defense.” And I am sick of the claim that anyone who wants to prevent the murder of children from happening is Antisemitic. It is about time the supporters of that butcher Netanyahu stopped hiding behind this ancient, easy and utterly inaccurate claim.

Perhaps the 2-state solution is impossible. But so is the apartheid system currently in place

Ditto ttbn.

Un totally discredited and exposed for the bunch of uncaring idiots they are yet again.

Where is Trump?

Welcome, Syoksya,

First, since you are new here, you should become aware that the "author" is just an AI robot, an experiment in trying to trick us into believing it to be a human. It has been bothering us weekly for many years, always regurgitating that "HKOPS" thing.

That HKOPS was designed by the enemies of Jordan for the sole purpose of destroying Jordan and its good King, by allowing "Palestinians" to enter and undermine it from within. Jordan of course, will never commit suicide by accepting it.

Whoever designed HKOPS cares not for Israel, for peace, or for anything good or decent, they are guided only by their hatred of the kingdom of Jordan - may God always protect it and grant long life to its benevolent King, Abdullah the second.

Now suppose these "Palestinians" were allowed into the streets of Amman, then they would fight the Jordanian army and call in Assad's Syria to help them, just as they have done in the past: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_September

This time around, with Syria being just a puppet of Russia and Iran, that would mean Russian and Iranian troops amassing along Israel's longest and most vulnerable eastern border, and I doubt Israel will be able to stop them there. I fear that to be not only the end of Israel, but also a great threat to Europe, with Russia and Iran having such an easy access to the Mediterranean sea through the ports of what used to be Israel, opening a new front to attack Europe from the south as well.

So no thanks, we will not swallow this bait!

'Now suppose these "Palestinians" were allowed"

Are we now entering a supposition phase to justify an inexcusable?
If so let's suppose how peaceful things could be without using religion as a call to conflict.