A top adviser to Egypt's president said that Israeli forces and Hamas militants will cease fire later Tuesday, ending nearly a week of fighting in the Gaza Strip that continued throughout the day, CBS News correspondent Clarissa Ward reports from Cairo.


The unnamed adviser to Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi said Morsi would announce the cease-fire at 2 p.m. ET (9 p.m. Cairo time) and that it will go into effect three hours later, Ward reports.
Possible Israeli, Palestinian cease-fire delayed as Gaza Strip fighting intensifies - CBS News


Although the word hudna does not actually appear in the Koran, it was the term used by early koranic commentators for an event described in the Koran’s 48th sura, known to Muslims as Al-Fath. “The Victory.” (Wherefrom, incidentally, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah took its name.) There, the Koran relates how, in 628 C.E. Mohammed marched from Medina with 1500 believers of his native city of Mecca, from which a numerically superior anti-Muslim army came out against him; rather than fight, however, the two sides, meeting at a place called Hudaibiyah, declared a hudna in which each made concessions. Although some of Mohammed’s closest followers, such as his general Umar Ibn al-Khatib, were opposed to this truce, which they thought dishonorable, they had no choice but to accept the prophet’s decision. Two years later, it was vindicated in their eyes when Mohammed annulled the truce, marched again on Mecca with a far larger force and took the city.

The message is clear: Although Hamas may agree to a truce with Israel for tactical reasons, such a hudna like that accepted by Mohammed at Hudaibiyah is only temporary. When the right time comes, the war will be renewed and fought until final victory.

The message has been clear from the start, perhaps all this has been a strategy to force Israel to lift its embargo, but we have seen from their actions that agreements with the Palastinians, particularly those in Gaza, mean nothing.

Heard that Egypt Prez Morsi refuses to guarantee cessation of weapon smuggling to the Gaza Strip and Sinai. Does Jerusalem stand down anyway? Does Iran resupply Islamic Jihad with Fajr-5s and prepare the ground for the next salvo?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

The message has been clear from the start, perhaps all this has been a strategy to force Israel to lift its embargo, but we have seen from their actions that agreements with the Palastinians, particularly those in Gaza, mean nothing.

---

I say expand the embargo and force ALL supplies to Gaza to go through those tunnels to the Sinai . If they have to transport medical supplies and food through the tunnels then maybe they won't have the time or the room to smuggle in arms.

Tom the whole thing has grown, they have tunnels large enough to drive trucks through, so forcing the traffic there does nothing, no, they need to invade and destroy the tunnels, that will give them better security for a short time and then the invasion needs to destroy the stockpiles not an easy task in a built up area, they probably have mosques full of rockets.

The Muslim Brotherhood taking over in Egypt was a game changer. Israel needs to enforce its embargo in the Red Sea and intercept contraband crossing into Sinai

Here's another message of victory, how convenient was it that those poor Palastinians had big bad Israel pounding on them just before the vote
UN rebuffs Israel to recognise Palestinians

Its Hamas vs a renewed Abbas.

Abba dabba do

The Palestinians could've gotten that vote any time they wanted it in the last 4 years. For that matter they could easily have had a state with recognized borders if they would give up the premise of their charters that Israel must be destroyed .

Yes Tom we know and when you get past that sticking point there is repatriation and there is the issue of borders.

I still don't see how a divided Palastine can work, with all the goodwill in the world Israel is not going to allow free transit between Gaza and the West Bank, that would mean it doesn't have secure borders

Repatriation my a**. They have no more a right to return than the Jews who were driven from neighboring countries have.

What countries are they banned from and why?

Who ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

What countries are they banned from and why?

---

They left Israel and they cannot go back. The point was made that the Jews are in the same boat but that changed in 1948 ushering in an era when the Palastinians were displaced by war or left Israel volunteerally.

They left voluntarily . They were NOT expelled by the Israelis and the Israeli's have a sizable Arab population already who did not voluntarily leave.

The right to return is a non-starter and a deal breaker for any negotiations. No one is fooled by the Palestinian strategry behind the demand . Demographically they would overwhelm the Jewish population of Israel from within and destroy it . So forget it... it isn't happening .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

They left voluntarily . They were NOT expelled by the Israelis and the Israeli's have a sizable Arab population already who did not voluntarily leave.

The right to return is a non-starter and a deal breaker for any negotiations. No one is fooled by the Palestinian strategry behind the demand . Demographically they would overwhelm the Jewish population of Israel from within and destroy it . So forget it .....it aint happening .

---

Tom I only suggested it is one of the reasons there is an empasse. As I said they were displaced by war, that is like many refugees they preferred to be some other place than the fighting or in the case of the Palastinians they were misled by the Mad Mufti. Politically and constitutionally the return could be solved by reservation of a majority of seats in the jewish parliament for jewish candidates but there are other considerations, what would the Israeli's do with them, build some potemkin high rises, may as well do that in Gaza. Jerusalem is also a sticking point, I can't see the Israeli's sharing the city, it is too emotive an issue on both sides. What I don't get is why Israael cannot be permited to keep its conquered territories, so long as the palastinians are treated fairly

Here is the real irony... On Nov 29,1947 the UN voted to partition the land and create a Jewish State and a Palestinian state . The Jews in Israel accepted the plan ;the Arabs didn't and have waged non-stop war (including 4 major wars ) since . 65 years later ,on the anniversary of the partition ,the UN recognized a Palestinian state .
Had the Arabs accepted the plan ,they would've been celebrating 65 years of an independent Palestinian state yesterday . What a waste !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Here is the real irony .... On Nov 29,1947 the UN voted to partition the land and create a Jewish State and a Palestinian state . The Jews in Israel accepted the plan ;the Arabs didn't and have waged non-stop war (including 4 major wars ) since . 65 years later ,on the anniversary of the partition ,the UN recognized a Palestinian state .
Had the Arabs accepted the plan ,they would've been celebrating 65 years of an independent Palestinian state yesterday . What a waste !

---

Yes, the whole thing was an exercise in both UN and Muslim stupidity, if UN had made something more than a dictorial edict removing recognition of palastinian ownership however tenuous, They expected Palastinians to migrate to "Palastinian lands" and the same solution was used in India with the same result, on going belligerence and wars. In Palastine Jews and palastinians were living side by side in occupied territory, with the jews far more highly developed politically. Solving the problem of a homeland for the jews created an enmity that may never end