Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, October 10th, 2025 - 59 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/09/gaza-ceasefire-deal-first-phase-trump-peace-plan
Just curious but how many people here want this to fail because they don't want Trump to succeed
(Be honest)
[This the second time you troll here with the same stupid and leading framing of a complex and sensitive issue – I’d classify it is a wicked problem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_problem).
The first time (https://thestandard.nz/open-mike-04-10-25/#comment-2045983) you got no response, thankfully. It only diverts away from the real issue and makes it all about Trump with all the consequences and you know it.
A telltale sign of a troll is that he starts a fishing expedition (or flame war) without declaring and arguing for his own position. It’s intrinsically dishonest and you know it, as we can tell by your imperative “Be honest”.
You’re lucky that I was fielding messages on another platform because you were fishing for a much longer ban from me. Hopefully next time I’ll get there first – Incognito]
I feel it is not for Trump to succeed or fail, but to get him the Nobel Peace Prize. His murderer friend, Ben nominated him and they both want to look good. Whether he is awarded or not, as soon as the award is announced the war will be back on for some spurious reason or other.
Pretty sure most people in power do things to make themselves look good
In this case doubly so but if something good comes from it then that's a good thing surely?
he shouldn't get the peace prize.
If successful, why not?
because he's a lying, racist, misogynistic, sex offending, traitorous, proto-fascist attempting to break the US constitution.
Nobel Foundation needs to retain its integrity too.
And if (when) those horrible woke liberal committee Norwegians deny him the glory-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/09/norway-braces-for-trumps-reaction-if-he-does-not-win-nobel-peace-prize
"If successful, why not?"
Because even if the ceasefire agreement holds, it's not a peace agreement. There's only ever a 'ceasefire agreement' because the aim of Israel's opponents remains overturning the UN's 'unjust' decision to allow Jewish self-determination in a Muslim land. If the agreement holds, Hamas will re-establish itself and create new rockets and a new military force for the next "Al Aqsa Flood." A new leadership cadre will appear from among the terrorists released in exchange for the hostages. The PA will continue to sponsor individual terrorist attacks on Israelis. Muslim countries and useful idiots in western countries will continue to fund all the above via "humanitarian aid." Israelis will enhance their abilities to defend against attacks, so the next round will be even bloodier than this one. No need to see anything positive in this agreement, the only thing to be said for it is that there'll be fewer civilian casualties for a while.
Too much on the other side of the ledger.
The USA has vetoed a UN resolution for a ceasefire in Gaza 6 times since the start of Israel's illegal invasion of Gaza, including several times under President Trump.
"The United States vetoed on Thursday a draft United Nations Security Council resolution that would have demanded an immediate, unconditional and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and that Israel lift all restrictions on aid deliveries to the Palestinian enclave."
Since being elected Trump has publicly suggested that Gaza be cleared of its current population so that its real estate could be developed-he was suggesting ethnic cleansing to follow the genocide that he also supports.
They don't give Nobel Peace prizes to people like this. Not a snowflakes chance in hell.
https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/us-vetoes-un-demand-ceasefire-aid-access-gaza-2025-09-18/
On the contrary they do give the peace prize to people like this. They gave one to Henry Kissinger.
Bit vague. Let's have a synopsis,
Those are all very good things. I hope they succeed.
And, it's the start of a process. For peace to work, more than this is needed, and what happens next will tell us a lot.
And, I don't trust Trump's motives, or anything about the lying, racist, misogynistic, sex offending, traitorous, proto-fascist he is. He wants a Nobel Peace Prize, so I expect is committed to making it work. I don't believe he is altruistic. There may be additional motives that aren't clear.
And, in case it escaped some people's notice, this process with Palestine and Israel is happening at the same time as the presidency is breaking the US constitution by attempting to use military to assert control in some of the states.
And, yes, I want ceasefire to work.
Aid.
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cx2nzlj2j4kt?post=asset%3A3b015acd-037d-4ad8-bc33-d99bf790191e#post
thanks 👍
I read those 2000 or so hostages were all kidnapped after Oct 7.
PR, why should anyone want an end to sickening violence to fail? The worst thing in the world is the death of innocent people.
I saw a peace sculpture today in Italy where the local Umbrian mayors have hosted Palestinian visitors. The two regions have a shared passion for growing olives. The mayors used this link to wish the people of the Middle Eastern region the best in a time when death, destruction and inhumanity rained upon them, that they still were concerned to grow a good harvest of olives for their people.
The peace sculpture in Spoleto was that of an olive with a tiny branch and leaf attached.
Hope, the future, life going on and meeting needs, sharing, and peace at last. Who could deny that?
Because there are people want this to fail because they don't want Trump to succeed
I'm just curious if there are any people on here that think this and how they justify it
who specifically is saying they want it to fail. Please provide examples.
Yawn
[You’re in premod until you back up your claim:”there are people want this to fail because they don’t want Trump to succeed” Other comments from your will go to Trash in the meantime. Alternatively, you can withdraw the claim. What you can’t do is troll on TS, so I’m putting a stop to that early on this time. You know how things work here. – weka]
[going by your comment in Trash, I take it you don’t want to stop trolling. 1 month ban – weka]
mod note.
Was about to moderate him too!
👍 trolling pattern and blatant as.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Sanders_Spam/comments/1ij8lf8/what_on_earth/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
'I hope it fails but I understand why Jewish voters might feel abandoned by the Democratic Party. Not necessarily on Israel, but as the analysis said, on the lack of consequences for the antisemitic actions we all saw on college campuses and directed at Jewish neighborhoods and businesses.
I’m not Jewish and I was heartbroken'
I assume you asked ChatGpt to find an example because you didn't actually have any yourself.
Unfortunately (for you), the thread you link to is from 8 months ago. The original post is about Trump's proposal that the Gaza Strip be handed over to the US.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Sanders_Spam/comments/1ij8lf8/what_on_earth/
The reply you quote is in response to that and is a discussion about Trump's motives in gaining more Jewish voters in the US
https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Sanders_Spam/comments/1ij8lf8/comment/mbepegx/
This is an exemplar of the problems with using AI.
That was Feb 2025. Same month, Trump posted this video about Trump Gaza.
We can add to my list above 'nutjob'.
2nd mod note.
I note the lack of celebration on the left about the ceasefire and the staged peace process. I note this amongst my left wing friends . The silence is deafening. I notice from the Green Party who have been calling for a ceasefire for months.
my opinion is that anyone who cared about the Palestinian people would be cheering this development but they are not. This could get me kicked off this site and really if that is the case, no worries from me. I hardly ever visit it anymore. But the people on the left I refer to look like rampant hypocrites over this. They look seriously silly. Pukesh Rogue think you are wasting your valuable time here
Maybe because.
The problem you have is that you appear to have forgotten how things work here. You seem to think that you making an observation about the left would get you banned. That doesn't happen.
The last time you got moderated it was because you made potentially defamatory comments that put the site owners at legal risk, and then wouldn't take responsibility for that.
If you can't see the difference between that and saying something about the left, then it looks to me like you have lost the ability to reason on this issue.
The problem I have (without my mod hat on) is that it's easy to address your concerns about the left you, but *you* won't stay and engage in the debate. You want to do a bit of light left bashing and then leave. What's the point? What we want here is people who will argue their position and listen to people that disagree with them, and then respond. If you think that doesn't happen here, try reading Psycho Milt's comments on Israel/Palestine.
This isn't FB or twitter. We have a particular, now rare, debate culture here. You can take part in that if you wish and want to remember how it works.
Straw man.
Who doesn't want Peace?
Apart from Israel.
It is unlikely that this piece of performative theatre will result in lasting peace. So long as Israel is intent on expansion."From the river to the sea". A project that started long before 1948.
Re-the ceasefire – Robert Patman on RNZ this morning:
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2019007845/robert-patman-on-the-latest-developments-in-gaza
In a nut shell:
The turning point came when Israel attacked Qatar. The powerful Middle Eastern countries were furious and let Trump and co. know in no uncertain terms. The last thing Trump and co. wanted to do was take on the big ME boys so they bullied Israel into accepting a ceasefire. So, the current position had less to do with stopping the vile killing and more to do with staying in Saudi Arabia's (in particular) good books?
He sounded pessimistic about a peace deal. There’s a lot of water to go under that bridge.
thanks for that nut shell Anne.
I don't believe you are curious at all. I think you are convinced that some people on here "want this to fail" and you are looking for someone to say something that you could (mis)interpret as evidence that they do. Sorry, but none of us are going to indulge you.
My own position is that I want something better (by which I mean more even-handed) than this to succeed. And also, that if this plan succeeds, it is in itself a form of failure, because there is no guarantee of Palestinian self-determination. But if people stop dying in the short term, that’s good. Trump as an individual does not feature in this thinking at all, he is simply a global malignancy that sooner or later will have to be cut out at great pain and cost.
I'm curious, in terms of peace, big picture, what does that look like to you?
For example, is there a Palestine?
Where is the border between Palestine and Israel?
Is there a war crimes tribunal as part of peace?
Sincere questions, as to whether this is just a bit of a wind up using word play or you might be on the same page in respect to peace.
"Just curious but how many people here want this to fail because they don't want Trump to succeed"
I don't want it to fail, I just recognise that it will fail, as a matter of 'when' rather than 'if.' Both sides have been arm-twisted into it by their sponsors and neither will have any intent of abiding by it long-term.
Mod note
Lebensraum dressed up as a real estate deal.
/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/documents/f86dd56a-de7f-4943-af4a-84819111b727.pdf
Another of the thousand cuts that will kill off USA democracy (how many are we up to now?):
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/oct/09/why-is-the-us-house-speaker-refusing-to-seat-an-elected-democrat
On the June quarter figures, 158 000 unemployed.
But it is 9000 18 to 19 year Olds that are the problem?
Of course it is. Young people don't vote so much, and when they do, it's generally not for the right. So nothing to lose, eh?
Or maybe you can make them so stressed and depressed by removing their financial support, that they are even less like likely to enroll to vote at least two weeks before the election?
The 18 to 19 year olds are just convenient collateral damage as National tries to hole on to probably 100,000 votes from small business owner and tradies who are going to the wall due to Luxon and Nicolala's economic miss-management. These are voters that voted Labour in 2020, probably for the first time, went back to National because everyone was saying how bad Labour were, and might have a bit of voter's remorse. Kicking 'lazy yoouf' is one easy card Nats can play to speak to this demographic. And it'll probably work and lift them back over 30%
Which says a great deal about the punitive and self-centred mindset of a significant portion of NZers.
How National survive, they tap into that part of our collective psyche and milk it for all it's worth, well practiced and very effective. Usually it takes two and a bit terms for enough of the country to see through the bully boy antics, hopefully this lot's incompetence might swing it a bit sooner
"Mission Accomplished", and some brave young Kiwis are voting with their feet.
From a purely financial perspective people on benefits are a cost to the country – correct?
https://www.msd.govt.nz/documents/about-msd-and-our-work/publications-resources/statistics/insights-reporting-series-docs/insights-reporting-series-young-people.pdf
This reports suggests that young people who go onto a main benefit tend to be whole of life larger consumers of benefits. So the savings multiplier over years is very significant if you can preempt that situation.
I think the evidence is pretty clear that the social cost of young people going on to becoming long term beneficiaries is generally acknowledged to be significant, for example:
https://www.myd.govt.nz/documents/youth-parliament-/transport-and-industrial-relations-sc-background-paper.pdf
There are plenty of other references that cover this both domestically and internationally.
So, its possible that the Governments approach lets call it "tough love" is arguably them acting in what they see as the best interests of those young people.
Acknowledging that being in that situation is not fun for anybody, especially those with less resources to fall back on.
It is quite possible that we are seeing the first signs of a tectonic shift in employment patterns thanks to the rapid emergence of new AI technologies. According to a number of well informed people in this space the rate at which AI tools replace employees is accelerating and will continue to do so at an exponential rate. The people that is going to hit hardest are the ones closest to the margins – this is the case in every downturn historically – those with the least skills feel the pinch the most – eg young people entering the workforce, those with limited skills or barriers (literacy, numeracy, life history etc) or even age.
I confess to being deeply depressed by this prospect having grandkids just starting out on this journey. If this plays out the way it looks like its going to, the notion of um, a right to a job may be about to get tested in ways we have not seen before.
Id much rather be confident that the Government (of any persuasion) was taking this seriously.
Imho, the CoC is govt by and for the sorted – bent on growing division by wealth.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/society/16-08-2022/the-side-eyes-two-new-zealands-the-table
I could be wrong, of course – anything's "possible".
From a purely financial perspective people on benefits are a cost to the country – correct?
On the flip side- and try as I might, I can't find a link to back this up, but some time ago it was widely accepted that it was volunteering beneficiaries that were keeping many charities and non-profits going. Be it staffing the local op-shop, doing health-related education and advocacy, etc.
Much of this comes from people on the long term benefits, where a paid job just isn't possible for whatever reason, but volunteering is.
Maybe- technically- we're an inconvenient financial cost to society, but those of us who can contribute to society in our own way. Unfortunately, 'work' is only considered work if it's paid and taxed, so it means nothing.
"People on benefits are a cost to the country".
Not necessarily. If you tax the wealthy who would salt it away overseas to pay benefits, which are then spent locally, for example.
Or. In many cases the effects of poverty on health, crime, social cohesion and general well being, as well as the economic effects of more spending money in the community, far out weigh the costs of welfare.
BTW lifelong beneficiary's are a small number. Most are on welfare for less than two years and, if supported into real jobs, not Luxons Mc jobs, most end up paying more tax than they cost. An even smaller number are free of mental and/or physical issues that affect employment.
Making youngsters even poorer, “tough love” makes them less likely to become functioning adults.
I was going to do a post about the new UK Green Party leader Zack Polanski, because he's been doing some great videos. Unfortunately he also went on Piers Morgan arguing that women can have a penis. This will lose them votes, just like it did with the Tories and Labour, both of whom have had to adjust their positioning. Lib Dems maybe too.
It's worth watching the vids to see just how good he is, and then I will explain why the gender/sex position will fail them (and I hope NZ Greens are paying attention, because sure as hell the NZ right are and they will know exactly what questions to ask NZ GP next year).
Let's Make Hope Normal Again – Green Party Political Broadcast
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxt4HCjd7VA
This is so good. It's exactly the kind of political messaging the left needs because it's telling a story of how things can be left, different, and better than now.
Polanski's media release after the terrorist attack on the Manchester synagogue a few weeks ago,
https://greenparty.org.uk/2025/10/02/green-party-leader-zack-polanski-reacts-to-manchester-terror-attack/
Again, very good messaging. It's unequivocally supportive of the UK Jewish community, it creates a personal connection, there is no 'but the Palestinians', and after that there is simple statement about the necessity of interfaith work and community building (with the implications in that for both sides but without having to insult Jewish people at this sensitive time).
I think NZ GP can learn from this. It's possible to support Palestine and Jewish communities.
Speaking to concern about immigration in the UK on BBC Question Time,
https://x.com/Bushra1Shaikh/status/1976406085981614460
He speaks personally to the person who asked the question, saying he hears their anger (affirming their validity as a person who is worried), then taking the question and putting it into leftist terms. His message here is about bringing people together, and that the problems are about lack of services and wealth not being taxed.
(sorry, can't find a non-twitter version yet).
Then this on Piers Morgan. It's trainwreck, not least because Polanski doesn't seem to understand the zeitgeist. The whole interview is worth watching, but this bit matters because it's what is being shared on social media, and it's what the right in NZ will pick up on.
https://youtu.be/CBvNpbK9iLc?t=3001
Polanski is speaking to the already converted liberals who no longer believe biological sex matters. Meanwhile, in the UK, this is what polling shows Brits think about transgender people: they want trans people to have human rights, and they draw the line at access to women's spaces, services and sports.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/explore/topic/Transgender
The major problem here is if swing voters are liking his messaging about wealth taxes to increase services, will they be turned off by him saying that males should be playing in women's sports? Or that women's sex based rights don't matter. There is already a strong grassroots political movement against the Greens because of how they have blocked gender critical feminists within the party. These are GC movements who've been winning court cases, and forced the MSM and political parties to revisit positions on gender and sex.
The UK is fortunate that much of the GC movement is still left and socially liberal right, in NZ that's not the case, many left/liberal voices have been suppressed and the discourse is dominated by the right.
"…males should be playing in women's sports? Or that women's sex based rights don't matter."
That would be a great discussion to have here with our comrades with a view of getting some healing.
Most of the heat has dissipated from this subject. Now those questions can be asked and the just listen to the answers.
It would be a great to hear from leadership of The Greens how to circle the square.
Clearly inclusion in sports is easier sorted- an open class along with male and female.
Is your power bill high?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/business/575459/government-deficit-of-9-point-3b-shows-progress-finance-minister-nicola-willis-says
The Coalition helps sucking people dry and points the finger to 18- and 19-year-olds with health and/or disability problems. This is sick.
"Sick" it is. Can't help wondering how much better off 'everyday Kiwis' would be now were it not for the Nat’s 'Bradford reforms' and 'Key asset sales', but a(t)las, that privatisation boat has sailed (saled?) – unlike the iReX ferries (thanks Nicky No-Boats).
Still, sorted Kiwis did and continue to do well – laughing all the way to the bank even. The NAct1 CoC is govt by the sorted, for the sorted.
Learning from the past is important but dwelling on it is a waste of time. IMO, too much time & energy is wasted on what-if’s and hypotheticals that will never happen and we cannot change the past (although some like to re-write history).