World News
5 major risks looming over Israel’s ground offensive on October 21, 2023 at 10:00 am

Israel faces immense risks as it prepares for a massive ground invasion of Gaza.
A sweeping operation from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) into the coastal enclave will almost certainly intensify the humanitarian crisis there, along with civilian casualties. It also risks costing the lives of Israel’s soldiers, turning global and domestic sentiment against Israel — as well as opening a second front in the war.
But Israeli leaders have pledged to conduct the operation, known as Operation Swords of Iron, to destroy the Palestinian militant group Hamas for a deadly Oct. 7 attack on Israel that claimed the lives of 1,400 people.
“Our maneuvers are going to take the war into their territory,” Israel’s Southern Command officer, Yaron Finkelman, told soldiers this week. “We’re going to defeat them in their own territory.”
Increasing civilian deaths
Any ground operation could be long, bloody and involve house-to-house urban fighting, posing an immense risk to the civilian population in the Gaza Strip.
Air strikes alone have already killed more than 3,000 Palestinian civilians — more than 1,500 of whom were children, according to Hamas officials. And more than one million people who have been forced to flee their homes have nowhere to go, trapped in southern Gaza without a corridor out.
David Cortright, professor emeritus at the University of Notre Dame’s global affairs school, said fighting in Gaza carries an immense risk for Israel’s standing, suggesting they should instead “convene an international tribunal to bring to justice” those responsible in Hamas for attacking Israel, while seeking a political solution with the Palestinian people.
“It is understandable that Israelis are outraged and vengeful after the heinous terrorist attacks of Hamas, but the continued siege of Gaza will only cause more death and destruction and will widen the war, and could end up benefiting Hamas,” Cortright said in an emailed statement.
“Already, public sympathy and attention around the world are shifting from the innocent Israelis who were butchered by Hamas gunmen to the children of Gaza who are dying under Israeli bombs,” he added. “It is a trap that Israel must avoid.”
In the 2014 Gaza War, Israeli infantry battalions fought in a northern neighborhood of Gaza City, a battle that killed more than 1,600 innocent bystanders and wounded more than 10,000 in a little more than a month — with Israel eventually retreating with no significant strategic victories.
The upcoming military operation is threatening to be even more deadly, with Israel’s leaders vowing to eliminate Hamas outright.
“Every Hamas member is a dead man,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said after the attack in Israel.
Netanyahu, however, said in a meeting with President Biden this week that Israel “seeks to minimize civilian casualties.”
“Israel will do everything it can to keep civilians out of harm’s way,” he pledged.
Cost to the Israeli military
In 2014, Israel lost 66 soldiers in the fighting with Hamas.
Troops struggled at the time to battle in urban jungles, tunnels and booby traps across Gaza, getting picked off by mines, ambushes and snipers. That was a conflict of just a few weeks, and Israeli forces only entered parts of the territory held by Hamas.
This time, Israel is promising a full-fledged operation to destroy Hamas, calling up a record 360,000 reservists to report for duty. The larger operation will likely require significantly more time and resources, risking more lives.
Hamas also has an extensive underground tunnel network, an advantage that can be used to attack Israeli troops.
Alp Sevimlisoy, a millennium fellow at the Atlantic Council, said Israeli forces must designate “small success parameters” district-by-district if they want to overcome the many traps and obstacles within Gaza.
“Stage one has to be gaining district by district control until they at least attain 75 to 80 percent of geographical control,” he said, predicting that could take a few months.
“In terms of stage two — administering — they need to make sure that they’ve eliminated the entire top brass of Hamas,” Sevimlisoy added.
Waning public support
The Israeli public is enraged over the deaths of nearly 1,400 people at the hands of Hamas, and the roughly 200 hostages taken by the group, driving widespread support for efforts to defeat the militants in Gaza.
But if the Israeli military suffers severe losses in a prolonged conflict with no end in sight, that could change.
A poll by Israeli daily newspaper Maariv published Friday found 65 percent of citizens support a ground invasion, while 21 percent are opposed.
Bilal Saab, an associate fellow for the Middle East and North Africa at Chatham House, also cautioned that U.S. support could change over time.
Saab said Israel “is more than capable of destroying Hamas.”
“But an offensive will not take place in isolation: the military must account for the opinion of its allies, the threats of its enemies and wavering public opinion at home,” he wrote in an analysis. “All are significant, and highly unpredictable. “
Israel has also already fought four wars with Hamas, with every attempt to wipe out the group failing.
But Israeli military spokesman Lt. Col. Jonathan Conricus said in a video message that by the end of this conflict, Hamas will not hold the ability to “threaten or kill Israeli civilians” anymore.
Opening a second front
Since the deadly Hamas attacks, Israel has been trading daily fire with Hezbollah, a militant group in Lebanon on the northern border.
The exchange of attacks on the Lebanon-Israel border has been the deadliest in years and likely would have sparked an all-out war already if Israeli forces were not focused on Hamas.
Hezbollah leaders have recently met with Iran, which backs their military as well as Hamas, as the fighting takes place. And Iranian officials have repeatedly warned they may have to take action if the attacks on Gaza continue. Tehran considers Israel’s attacks on the Palestinian people an act of genocide.
“Time is running out and if the warmongers think that they can remove the resistance and Hamas from Gaza, they are mistaken,” said Iran’s Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, according to state-run media.
Imad Harb, director of research and analysis at the Arab Center in Washington, D.C., told the Hill he was skeptical of Hezbollah invading Israel during a period of economic unrest in Lebanon, but it also depended on Iran’s wishes and how the operation in Gaza unfolds.
“If Hamas is defeated,” he said, “it’s a threat against [Hezbollah] because Hamas is no longer there.”
Weaker relations with the Arab world
The Arab world has already erupted in anger over the crisis in Gaza and has stood in solidarity with the Palestinian people amid an intense Israeli bombing campaign on the coastal strip.
Arab anger was only amplified after a deadly explosion near a hospital in Gaza City this week killed hundreds of people, though U.S. officials say the evidence points to a misfired Palestinian Islamic Jihad rocket.
But a prolonged campaign in Gaza presents a major risk of sparking more anger in the Middle East and North Africa, which has long sympathized with the Palestinian cause. And that could set back diplomatic efforts to normalize relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, as well as further isolating Israel in the region.
Harb, of the Arab Center, said Israel has already lost political support among the Arab population and was risking a groundswell of anger by invading Gaza.
“It’s definitely going to be very bloody for Hamas and for the population,” he said. “The people around the Arab world are going to be pressuring their governments.”
Israel faces immense risks as it prepares for a massive ground invasion of Gaza. A sweeping operation from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) into the coastal enclave will almost certainly intensify the humanitarian crisis there, along with civilian casualties. It also risks costing the lives of Israel’s soldiers, turning global and domestic sentiment against Israel —…
News
US May Completely Cut Income Tax Due to Tariff Revenue

President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.

What Trump Is Saying
Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.
How Taxes Work Now
Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.
Questions From Experts
Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.
What Congress Must Do
The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.

What It Means Right Now
For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.
News
Epstein Files to Be Declassified After Trump Order

Former President Donald Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to declassify all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death in 2019 continues to fuel controversy and speculation.
The order, signed Wednesday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, instructs the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies to release documents detailing Epstein’s network, finances, and alleged connections to high-profile figures. Trump described the move as “a step toward transparency and public trust,” promising that no names would be shielded from scrutiny.
“This information belongs to the American people,” Trump said in a televised statement. “For too long, powerful interests have tried to bury the truth. That ends now.”
U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that preparations for the release are already underway. According to sources familiar with the process, the first batch of documents is expected to be made public within the next 30 days, with additional releases scheduled over several months.
Reactions poured in across the political spectrum. Supporters praised the decision as a bold act of accountability, while critics alleged it was politically motivated, timed to draw attention during a volatile election season. Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, emphasized caution, warning that some records could expose private victims or ongoing legal matters.
The Epstein case, which implicated figures in politics, business, and entertainment, remains one of the most talked-about scandals of the past decade. Epstein’s connections to influential individuals—including politicians, royals, and executives—have long sparked speculation about the extent of his operations and who may have been involved.

Former federal prosecutor Lauren Fields said the release could mark a turning point in public discourse surrounding government transparency. “Regardless of political stance, this declassification has the potential to reshape how Americans view power and accountability,” Fields noted.
Officials say redactions may still occur to protect sensitive intelligence or personal information, but the intent is a near-complete disclosure. For years, critics of the government’s handling of Epstein’s case have accused agencies of concealing evidence or shielding elites from exposure. Trump’s order promises to change that narrative.
As anticipation builds, journalists, legal analysts, and online commentators are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential information releases in recent history.
Politics
Netanyahu’s UN Speech Triggers Diplomatic Walkouts and Mass Protests

What Happened at the United Nations
On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, defending Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza. As he spoke, more than 100 delegates from over 50 countries stood up and left the chamber—a rare and significant diplomatic walkout. Outside the UN, thousands of protesters gathered to voice opposition to Netanyahu’s policies and call for accountability, including some who labeled him a war criminal. The protest included activists from Palestinian and Jewish groups, along with international allies.

Why Did Delegates and Protesters Walk Out?
The walkouts and protests were a response to Israel’s continued offensive in Gaza, which has resulted in widespread destruction and a significant humanitarian crisis. Many countries and individuals have accused Israel of excessive use of force, and some international prosecutors have suggested Netanyahu should face investigation by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, including claims that starvation was used as a weapon against civilians. At the same time, a record number of nations—over 150—recently recognized the State of Palestine, leaving the United States as the only permanent UN Security Council member not to join them.
International Reaction and Significance
The diplomatic walkouts and street protests demonstrate increasing global concern over the situation in Gaza and growing support for Palestinian statehood. Several world leaders, including Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, showed visible solidarity with protesters. Petro called for international intervention and, controversially, for US troops not to follow orders he viewed as supporting ongoing conflict. The US later revoked Petro’s visa over his role in the protests, which he argued was evidence of a declining respect for international law.

Why Is This News Important?
The Gaza conflict is one of the world’s most contentious and closely-watched issues. It has drawn strong feelings and differing opinions from governments, activists, and ordinary people worldwide. The United Nations, as an international organization focused on peace and human rights, is a key arena for these debates. The events surrounding Netanyahu’s speech show that many nations and voices are urging new action—from recognition of Palestinian rights to calls for sanctions against Israel—while discussion and disagreement over the best path forward continue.
This episode at the UN highlights how international diplomacy, public protests, and official policy are all intersecting in real time as the search for solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains urgent and unresolved.
Advice3 weeks agoHow to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker
News3 weeks agoHow Misinformation Overload Breaks Creative Focus
Entertainment3 weeks ago7 Filmmaking Lessons From Michael B. Jordan’s Oscar Moment
Entertainment3 weeks agoThis scene almost broke him. And changed his career.
News1 week agoThe Timothée Chalamet Guide to Ruining Your Image
Advice2 weeks agoStop Waiting for Permission — The Film Industry Just Rewrote the Rules
Entertainment1 week agoThe machine isn’t coming. It’s aleady the room.
News2 weeks agoHow ‘Sinners’ Won The Oscars: Filmmaker Notes



















