Gaza

https://www.the-smile-project.com/single-post/2020/01/08/is-it-true-is-it-necessary-is-it-kind

This might be a useful reminder to some

Tidy - all sounds fair enough, thank you.

Changed my mind

Loved what he did in Euro 96 against Scotland.

Before you hit that ‘Submit’ button. read what you have typed

You MUST NOT resort to personal insults. You can disagree with a POV but as son as you step over the line

😉

Wow, you must have really wanted to avoid further flounces 😀

Thanks mods.

I have generally been of the opinion that it is reasonable for Israel to persist with the war while Hamas still holds hostages, but yesterday with Netanyahu's "these things happen in war" I was pretty angry.

Israel is alienating a lot of it's friends, but doesn't seem especially bothered.

Wouldn't it be amusing if this thread got completely derailed into a discussion about something completely different.

All through this 'situation' I have been wondering WHY America is such a major supporter of the Israeli's can anyone tell me?

Are there simply a lot of very wealthy Jewish folk in America? Do they have some control over American politics?

Without the support of the Americans Israel would have been stopped by now and thousands of Palestinians would still be alive!

My view from the start was that Israel had a right to defend itself and it's citizens, but has crossed the line into war crimes very early on.

The west needs to rethink it's support for the Israeli regime. Whether Israel's enemys can then be persuaded not to seek retribution against ordinary Israeli citizens if it's perceived as being weaker as a result is a whole other ball game

All through this ‘situation’ I have been wondering WHY America is such a major supporter of the Israeli’s can anyone tell me?

Its because Israel is a 'Western friendly' foothold in the Middle East...

The west needs to rethink it’s support for the Israeli regime

I don't understand WHY we support them at all. Is it just 2nd World War guilt?

The country was formed by terrorists and has an extremely right wing Government - who we allow to get away with all manner of 'stuff'

Without the support of the Americans Israel would...

...not exist right now. And that goes for a lot of countries in the world. I think that in the case of Isreal, that support needs to be far more qualified though, and I strongly suspect it's going to be given what is happening right now.

There was a right to a proportionate response after the original Hamas atrocity. What has followed is egregious and in some cases is no better than the treatment meted out in the early 40's death camps. Today we were treated to an article on amputations caused by 24 hour restraint in handcuffs, it appears no lessons were learned from earlier atrocities and someone is using 1984 as a manual for political survival.

I don’t understand WHY we support them at all.

Because we don't want to witness another holocaust.

Sadly, we have turned a blind eye to their actions in the past which has made their extreme right believe they can get away with anything.

Are there simply a lot of very wealthy Jewish folk in America? Do they have some control over American politics?

You know that bit where Mark said "think before you post"...? You know this is conspiracy theory/trope right? That Jews control other countries politics? That they use money and influence to control things from behind the scenes? I think that some of them are so culturally deep-rooted that folks don't even realise.

But, jus' so's you know for next time.

but has crossed the line into war crimes very early on.

It was doing that long before 7/10. Many people on various threads tried to point that out and were invariably labelled as anti-semites or other offensive tropes. It would appear many people have now realised what Netanyahu and his ultra-right supporters are. Unfortunately for him there are limits to how much the world can remain wilfully ignorant and stand aside while atrocities are committed in plain sight.

Which is why it needs to be stated repeatedly for the hard of thinking on both sides that criticising Israeli policy is not automatically anti semitic.

Pro Palestinian march just gone past in Copenhagen

All through this ‘situation’ I have been wondering WHY America is such a major supporter of the Israeli’s can anyone tell me?

Are there simply a lot of very wealthy Jewish folk in America? Do they have some control over American politics?

Without the support of the Americans Israel would have been stopped by now and thousands of Palestinians would still be alive!

In a word, yes.

European Jews have been persecuted for centuries. Not just the well known 1930s. When presented with the opportunity for a new life in the USA is it surprising that a lot of them (especially the wealthier ones) packed up and took the first available boat to Ellis Island?

To become president you would likely need to be a nominal Christian, to get votes in the rural states, but politics, business, finance, especially in the older East Coast cities, the Jewish will be well represented.

ETA...

I don't mean some shady backoffice cabal of orthodox jews, just "average" people with vaguely Jewish heritage.

I've got several unrelated US-Jewish friends. Apart from a surname ending in -ovich and an off hand joke about "of course my cousin is a lawyer" you really woulnd't know. They eat pork, have never mentioned religion once etc etc.

They are also all fairly left wing, anti-US-interventionism, allround live and let live, nice people.

And as I found out last autumn, they are all 100% pro-Isreal in the current conflict.

"Israel is alienating a lot of it’s friends, but doesn’t seem especially bothered."

I think because it suffers no consequence for breaching international law or going against the wishes of its allies.

This article below may help explain the severe reaction German policing took towards public criticism of Israel/support for Palestine, as well as explaining the unwavering support of Israel due to the ties that are enshrined in the German constitution.

Germany/Israel relationship explained

Which is why it needs to be stated repeatedly for the hard of thinking on both sides that criticising Israeli policy is not automatically anti semitic.

This has definitely changed over the last couple of months. Previously any criticism of Israeli policy was shouted down as antisemitic and worse, even when it was entirely aimed at their governance of Palestinian areas such as illegal settlements, settler violence etc. and nobody seemed able or willing to push back against it. I hope that tactic doesn't return when this current crisis is resolved.

And for a view into why there's guilt in the US, this series is excellent (as Ken Burns always is)

https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/us-and-the-holocaust

Because we don’t want to witness another holocaust.

Absolutely, but arguably, and certainly from a Palestinian point of view, we're probably witnessing one now.

Just to add, it's possible to be both pro-Israel & pro-palestine. If only the 2 state solution was actually properly implemented.

To me Gaza is a complete show of how the world is screwed up.

My own personal opinion is that I have no idea why the Palestinians did  what they did (taking hostages) that then provoked a retaliation (yes I know the wider context etc). I think Israel had the right to use proportional force. Proportional force does not include Genocide.

The world has let them continue on their rampage, yesterday we learned the UK is selling arms to them to help them carry on their Genocide, and the American Giant McDonalds is fuelling them to do this with free McDonalds food.

Its all seriously screwed up

@FunkyDunc

American Giant McDonalds is fuelling them to do this with free McDonalds food.

The Israeli franchise holders have given the food not McDonalds America...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-68735706

And the UK sells sod-all to them in global terms...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68737412

I think Israel had the right to use proportional force. Proportional force does not include Genocide.

100% agree with this.

My own personal opinion is that I have no idea why the Palestinians did what they did

They didn't, any more than 'The Jews' did what they did in retribution

Hamas is not Palestine

The RW Israeli Gov / IDF is not Israel and certainly isn't the Jews

Hamas is not Palestine

ok so slight playing devils advocate, why are the west not condoning Israel for starting a war in Palestine, and why are war crimes not being drawn against Israel ?

  The Israeli franchise holders have given the food not McDonalds America…

Being pedantic it was the Americans because they allowed it to happen, and have now decided it wasn't appropriate and have closed the franchise down.

And the UK sells sod-all to them in global terms…

May be sod all in global terms, but why sell arms to a country committing War Crimes/Genocide - doesn't sit well with me

It appears from some news articles this week that even many Israeli citizens are coming to the conclusion that Netenyahu is prolonging this war, and some accusations accuse him of looking to expand it (Hezbollah/Iran) to keep himself in power. I get the impression that he really only has support amongst the hard right and their supporters.

I 'think' that Hamas (on the 7th October) had simply had enough of the Israeli repression of them, of Muslims and of the people and state of Palestine.

The attack they launched was a desparate attempt to get the world, and the Israeli population, to realise what was happening and to intervene - in some way. They probably didn't expect such a massive response but they obviously expected some sort of retaliation hence the hostages.

The October attack was the equivaent of squeezing a big zit or boil - it hurts like hell but you hope it leads to healing of some sort.

I have no idea why the Palestinians did what they did (taking hostages)

I'm guessing that was just carelessly worded but it's important to remember "the Palestinians" didn't do that. It was Hamas. They're not "the Palestinians"any more than the IRA was "the Irish".

To think otherwise leads to collective punishment of a civilian population being characterised as a legitimate response.

- my apologies, already covered a couple of posts up. But I'll leave this here in case anyone else has missed it.

I don’t understand WHY we support them at all.

In international relations, the answer is always, "It's complicated."

Part of it, as I understand it, is that the Egyptian-Israeli peace deal that was sorted out in the 1970s guaranteed that the U.S. would provide military aid to both countries. Prior to that, there were major wars in 1956, 1967, and 1973 (plus of course, the 1948 war that established Israel as a country.) Israel won all of those wars and Egypt suffered huge losses. In the 1970s, Israel developed nuclear weapons as an open secret. That made the Arab League's goal of destroying Israel a suicide pact - if Arab countries did succeed in destroying Israel, their own cities would be incinerated in nuclear fireballs. Egypt finally accepted the reality that they would have to coexist with a Jewish state as a neighbour and signed a peace treaty (and were exiled from the Arab League), but that was on condition of U.S. financial and military support. Part of that deal, as I understand it, was that the U.S. would also provide guarantees of military aid to Israel.

So, just dropping aid to Israel would mean scrapping a peace deal that has seen 50 years of Egypt and Israel coexisting peacefully, compared with three major wars in 17 years before that. So, aid to Israel is complicated.

On top of that, the U.S. has treaties and deals with numerous countries in the region, many of which have worse human rights records than Israel. Israel is still a relatively liberal democracy in a region dominated by harshly repressive autocracies. Israel seems to be sliding into autocracy, thanks to Netanyahu, but it still has independent courts and free elections. Hopefully it can be turned away from autocracy. Turkey is another regional power that is slipping into autocracy (and is a NATO member), but can hopefully be turned back towards liberal democracy. Saudi Arabia is a repressive monarchy that receives U.S. aid, so is Jordan. Syria and Iran are run by two of the most brutally repressive regimes on the planet. As bad as those countries are, Hamas are even worse.

So, any regional peace deal will have to be between governments that are extremely illiberal and have terrible histories of human rights abuses. Refusing to deal with Israel but maintaining treaties with the other repressive countries would be utterly hypocritical. One option would be for the U.S. to just walk away from the region and tell them all to sort it out for themselves, but that would unleash a devastating war. Saudi Arabia, Iran, The UAE, Egypt, and Turkey would all race to develop nuclear weapons and Israel would probably pre-empt those with military strikes. Israel would look to Russia or China for support and both of those countries would desperately want Israeli military technology, but China has more money. So, you'd end up with China replacing the U.S. as Israel's backer, except that China's leaders don't face any domestic criticism for backing regimes that violate human rights so the Palestinians would be even worse off than they are now.

So, why does the U.S. support Israel and would Palestinians be better off if the U.S. just cut ties with Israel? It's very complicated, we don't know, and the nightmare scenario is that it might actually make things much worse. So, we keep supporting Israel because the status quo is better than many of the alternative scenarios.

Also, criticizing Israeli policy is not antisemitic. I've been extremely critical of the policies of Israeli right-wingers over the last few decades. It has nothing to do with them being Jewish. However, when people claim that U.S. foreign policy/media is dominated by Jews, that's just an expression of the classic antisemitic view that Jews secretly run the world behind the scenes. Best to talk about policies and separate them from the people who are making the policies.

Netanyahu is fighting for his political future as well - it was on his watch that the Hamas terrorists crossed into Israel with such ease on 7th October, despite intelligence received that something big was in the offing. The more brutally he responds the more chance he has of staying in power.

ok so slight playing devils advocate, why are the west not condoning Israel for starting a war in Palestine, and why are war crimes not being drawn against Israel ?

Assume you mean condemn not condone...... but it's covered in a few earlier posts - being a 'friend of the west' in an otherwise generally not a huge fan of the west region; others may assert that there is a substantial business interest in keeping wealthy investors of jewish / Israeli descent on side (I'd stop short of the shady cabal argument, OMMV).

But taking the analogy further, everyone needs a friend who'll tell them to stop being a dick when they overstep and it's time 'the west' did that and things do seem to be changing.

Whatever the lead up to it, HAMAS/PIJ are a terrorist organisation*, and the clues in the name, their intent is to cause terror and that comes by the kinds of atrocities we saw. Their very nature makes it hard to sanction them as you would a nation.

Israel is a nation state and nation states are better than that, subject to laws (including laws pertaining to war) and should be accountable if they break them.

Neither gives you the right to wage your war on civilians of the other side, but of the two i can 'understand' the terrorists doing it because as I say, clues in the name. Nation states have to be better, it's just how it is (IMHO)

* correct me - HAMAS also has a political governing element and I'm not sure myself of the distinction / where the boundary is

About time.

Are we allowed to link to sources?

For what it's worth I think Isreal is committing genocide and there's enough evidence from both its military, politicians and population calling for the death of Palestinians and the colonisation of the Gaza Strip.

Hamas only exist because of Isreal and it's actions.

Something like 65% of Hamas fighters are orphans thanks to Isreal.

I'm unsure if it needs to be said that Israel ≠ Israelis, but I do wonder some times. There are a great many Israelis that despair at the actions of the current government here, but as usual we only ever hear about the fringe nutters on either side.

I work in Israel, I'm here at the moment wondering what Israel, Hezbollah and Iran are about to do, and I was here when the October 7th stuff kicked off. There was rightly a whole lot of disbelief and anger those first few days, in particular at the literal hours it took for any kind of response from the Israeli armed forces, and some of the videos I've watched from my Israeli colleagues will likely be playing through my head for the rest of my life. I could describe them but I doubt the complete and utter lack of humanity on display would be believed. There was certainly nothing I viewed that could be classed as a necessary organised uprising designed to highlight Palestine's plight to the world.

I believe Israel has a right to protect itself against these kinds of attacks, and given Hamas' stated intent to do it all again the first chance they get, I support them in rooting out Hamas to the very last one. I can just about persuade myself that the systematic squeezing of the Palestinian population to the far south has been a measured act to allow the IDF to sweep through the north destroying Hamas infrastructure and hunt down the remaining militants. This comes from a belief that ultimately Gaza will be rebuilt and there will be a managed return for all the displaced civilians. I, like very many of my Israeli colleagues, do not support some of the actions and decision-making displayed by the IDF but there has to be a realisation that as utterly shit as it is, in war there will always be civilian casualties. I wonder how many would have been marching on Downing Street to end the war against Germany should Twitter and TikTok and Facebook had been around to give talking head influencers a medium for their 15 second one-sided hot-takes on the fire-bombing of Dresden, for example, with no thought for the consequences of just packing up and going home.

The onus absolutely lies with the Israeli armed forces to ensure civilian casualties are kept to an absolute minimum. This is their gargantuan failing at the moment and it is a failing they must answer for. But whenever there are cries for immediate ceasefire my mind goes back to those terrible videos and what awaits Israel should Hamas get a chance to recuperate and resupply.

I ‘think’ that Hamas (on the 7th October) had simply had enough of the Israeli repression of them, of Muslims and of the people and state of Palestine.

The attack they launched was a desparate attempt to get the world, and the Israeli population, to realise what was happening and to intervene – in some way. They probably didn’t expect such a massive response but they obviously expected some sort of retaliation hence the hostages.

The October attack was the equivaent of squeezing a big zit or boil – it hurts like hell but you hope it leads to healing of some sort.

You can read a translation of the Hamas Covenant here:

https://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hamas.asp

Here's an explanation of what it means:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/hamas-covenant-israel-attack-war-genocide/675602/

The most relevant of the document’s 36 articles can be summarized as falling within four main themes:

The complete destruction of Israel as an essential condition for the liberation of Palestine and the establishment of a theocratic state based on Islamic law (Sharia),
The need for both unrestrained and unceasing holy war (jihad) to attain the above objective,
The deliberate disdain for, and dismissal of, any negotiated resolution or political settlement of Jewish and Muslim claims to the Holy Land, and
The reinforcement of historical anti-Semitic tropes and calumnies married to sinister conspiracy theories.

Do not confuse Hamas as speaking for the Palestinian people. Hamas have no interest in any peace treaty with Israel. October 8 was not a protest that has been misunderstood, it was what Hamas was established to do. Nobody, including Arab leaders, is going to sign any agreement with Hamas. They are an antisemitic murder cult.

how my head works.... sorry.

if we ( Britain ) had not given Palestine to the Jewish people after world war 1, would the area be in such a horrific state ?

and am i right in think the we and the Jewish state that was formed after world war 2 are to blame really for the entire shitshow.

For what it’s worth I think Isreal is committing genocide

Genocide has a legal definition, part of which is intent. Proving genocide is difficult (especially given that Israel has nuclear weapons and could exterminate every Palestinian within minutes if that really was their intent.) However, war crimes and human rights abuses are much easier to prosecute.

The problem, though, is that trying to prosecute Israeli soldiers or leaders for war crimes or human rights abuses would also require prosecuting Hama for their crimes (plus, of course Iranian's, Syrians, Turks, Saudis, etc.) If only Israelis were prosecuted in a region overflowing with human rights abuses, the defense lawyers' first question would be, "Why are only Jews on trial?" Why not Syrian or Saudi or Iranian leaders? And why not Hamas leaders?

Russia and China have seats on the U.N. Security Counsel. Are they going to vote to send U.N. troops into a sovereign country to arrest political and military leaders on human rights abuses for trial in an international court? (The answer is "no," it's a rhetorical question.)

"You can read a translation of the Hamas Covenant here:"

Just as a point of order, the 1988 Hamas charter has been superceded - the updated version (2017, is it? Or '18?) no longer calls for the destruction of Israel.

"if we ( Britain ) had not given Palestine to the Jewish people after world war 1, would the area be in such a horrific state ?"

Probably not? In gifting large swathes of land to what would become Isrsel, we kind of forgot to ask what the people who already lived there thought.

Just as a point of order, the 1988 Hamas charter has been superceded – the updated version (2017, is it? Or ’18?) no longer calls for the destruction of Israel.

poor use of version control to be added to the charge sheet!

if we ( Britain ) had not given Palestine to the Jewish people after world war 1, would the area be in such a horrific state ?

Nobody knows, it's the butterfly effect. Yes, the UK has huge responsibility for setting it all up, but we have absolutely no way of knowing what the alternative timeline would be like. The problem for policy makers is that we are locked into this timeline and have to deal with the situation we inherited. We can't undo what happened 100 years ago, we have to find some way to make the future better given the hand we were dealt.

Just as a point of order, the 1988 Hamas charter has been superceded – the updated version (2017, is it? Or ’18?) no longer calls for the destruction of Israel.

The October 8 attacks superceded that - Hamas have made it very clear what they are about. They are not interested in a peace deal, their aim is to drive Jews out of the region.

Don't confuse Hamas for Palestinians. You can support Palestinians' right to have a state but oppose Hamas, just like you can oppose right-wing Israeli settlers but support the right for Israel to exist.

I could describe them but I doubt the complete and utter lack of humanity on display would be believed.

My thoughts and feelings about what happened then is completely coloured by what was aired on TV in the USA soon afterwards (where I was staying)... they were prepared to show stuff from those attacks that UK TV never would. Yes, of course, there is footage just as vile from before and after the attacks of the hell that people have been through all over Palestine and Israel... but what happened that week wasn't a "protest", it wasn't war, it was terrorism of the worst kind, and it would have been impossible for the Israeli authorities not to respond. Their response was wrong and futile, and the human cost horrific in my opinion... they're shouldn't have gone after Hamas... there is no way of doing so that doesn't sacrifice huge numbers of innocents... but how could an Israeli military response have been avoided? Send in security forces from a third country? Who would have been prepared to go in there?

Just as a point of order, the 1988 Hamas charter has been superceded – the updated version (2017, is it? Or ’18?) no longer calls for the destruction of Israel.

When the Hamas attacks in October became widely known, the Iranian Parliament all stood up and chanted "Death to Israel" Read about it here.

So yeah, it's been taken off the manifesto, I don't think it's made much of a difference. It's one of the ironies of the struggle for peace. No one thinks that you can have any sort of lasting peace without Hamas' inclusion in some form; on the other hand, Hamas don't want lasting peace with Israel at any price...

"The October 8 attacks superceded that – Hamas have made it very clear what they are about. They are not interested in a peace deal, their aim is to drive Jews out of the region."

Nope. But if you're saying Hamas's charter calls for the destruction of Isrsel, I'm telling you it doesn't. In 1988, yes - now, no. The 2017 charter advocates for a Palestine based on the 1967 borders.

"Don’t confuse Hamas for Palestinians. You can support Palestinians’ right to have a state but oppose Hamas, just like you can oppose right-wing Israeli settlers but support the right for Israel to exist."

What do you think I believe? 🙂

"So yeah, it’s been taken off the manifesto, I don’t think it’s made much of a difference. It’s one of the ironies of the struggle for peace. No one thinks that you can have any sort of lasting peace without Hamas’ inclusion in some form; on the other hand, Hamas don’t want lasting peace with Israel at any price…"

I think it's a fundamentally crucial difference - a Hamas that pledges the destruction of Israel will never get what it wants, but a Hamas that accepts a 2 state solution just might.

But if you’re saying Hamas’s charter calls for the destruction of Isrsel, I’m telling you it doesn’t.

Actions speak louder than words. October 8 showed what Hamas is about.

but a Hamas that accepts a 2 state solution just might.

The cold blooded murder of 1200 people is pretty odd opening gambit for negotiations. Hamas is a tool of Iran. Take a look at Iran, that's what Palestine would be if Hamas was in charge in a 2 state solution. Do you think Israel would allow that on its border?

Like I said, there's no chance any Israeli govt would go into an election on a manifesto of negotiating with Hamas for peace, while at the same time; Hamas will have to be involved in some way if there's to be lasting peace.

"Actions speak louder than words. October 8 showed what Hamas is about."

October 9 through to April 5 does exactly the same for Israel.

That's kind of the bizarre thing about this whole mess - each side at the extreme end is as bad as the other, and the solution lies somewhere in the middle. For as long as neither side is willing to make a concession, neither will know peace.

"The cold blooded murder of 1200 people is pretty odd opening gambit for negotiations. Hamas is a tool of Iran. Take a look at Iran, that’s what Palestine would be if Hamas was in charge in a 2 state solution. Do you think Israel would allow that on its border?"

Yet without Israeli oppression of Palestine, there would be no Hamas. It's a mess they've created themselves. It takes two sides to negotiate, and neither seems particularly willing to.

"Like I said, there’s no chance any Israeli govt would go into an election on a manifesto of negotiating with Hamas for peace, while at the same time; Hamas will have to be involved in some way if there’s to be lasting peace."

Strong agree. Rabin and Arafat both got Nobel peace prizes for agreeing the bones of a 2 state solution - for Rabin (who'd been chief of staff of the IDF in 1967) it meant assasination and the swift removal from power of his party.

each side at the extreme end is as bad as the other,

Yes, but Israel is a democracy and Netanyahu can be voted out of power peacefully (and put on trial and imprisoned for his corruption). Hamas is a different thing, they can't be voted out of power peacefully. A peace treaty can only be negotiated by moderates who are willing to accept that the other side has legitimate interests. Right-wing Israelis can't be part of a peace negotiation, neither can Hamas. Problem is, an Israeli government can be voted out of power, Hamas will only leave at gunpoint.

An Israeli government can put Hamas out of business, if it chooses.

Yet without Israeli oppression of Palestine, there would be no Hamas.

The Muslim Brotherhood and the violence that it promoted against Jews spread across the whole region, and was never limited to Israel. The modern day groups, such as Hamas, that continue their cause through violent means are not unique to Israel and Palestine today either.

An Israeli government can put Hamas out of business, if it chooses.

How?

I could be wrong, but I thought that Hamas had been elected in Gaza (beating Fatah).

You're not wrong.

I could be wrong, but I thought that Hamas had been elected in Gaza (beating Fatah).

They came to power through an election, but then they established a repressive autocracy and refused to hold any more elections. Saying that they have democratic legitimacy is like saying that Hitler had democratic legitimacy because he initially came to power by being elected. The problem is what they did after being elected. Voting them out of power is not an option because they refuse to allow democratic opposition.

Fair enough, I wasn't aware of that, thank you.

"The Muslim Brotherhood and the violence that it promoted against Jews spread across the whole region, and was never limited to Israel. The modern day groups, such as Hamas, that continue their cause through violent means are not unique to Israel and Palestine today either."

I don't doubt. It was a pretty fringe group until 1967, though.

""An Israeli government can put Hamas out of business, if it chooses."

"How?"

Hamaa exists because Palestine is oppressed. End the oppression.

 I, like very many of my Israeli colleagues, do not support some of the actions and decision-making displayed by the IDF but there has to be a realisation that as utterly shit as it is, in war there will always be civilian casualties.

There was an item on Channel 4 News last night about how the IDF wait until minor Hamas people get home and then bomb their houses, killing the family and (maybe) the target. Apparently this goes by the name of "Where's Daddy". This is not "collateral damage" in my view, it's depraved blood lust that cannot be justified under any circumstances.

There was an item on Channel 4 News last night about how the IDF wait until minor Hamas people get home and then bomb their houses, killing the family and (maybe) the target. Apparently this goes by the name of “Where’s Daddy”. This is not “collateral damage” in my view, it’s depraved blood lust that cannot be justified under any circumstances.

It's really difficult to know what official Israeli policy is. The movie Munich is an excellent example of Israel's strategic failure on this sort of thing. Their policy is based on deterrence, so any attack on Israel will face a disproportionate response (this is the moral dilemma of deterrence - it's justified on the basis that it deters a greater evil, but for it to work, it requires a disproportionate response.). The moral aspect isn't the only issue here, the problem is that it doesn't seem to have actually deterred attacks on Israel. So, Israel based their security strategy on a deterrence theory that has never actually worked against non-state opponents and now their response is handcuffed by those decades of reliance on deterrence (the evidence on nuclear deterrence against other countries is a different matter.)

Yes, but Israel is a democracy and Netanyahu can be voted out of power

Pseudo democracy.  Try exercising democratic rights if you are arab.

One thing is for sure.

Israel's response (it's government) will create another 10 fighters for every Hamas terrorist they kill.

Kids barely old enough to hold a pencil will grow up longing to hold a rifle instead.

Short term Israel's response is tragically disproportionate and long term it has done more to recruit Hamas fighters than all the Hamas propaganda in the world could ever do.

Israel has a right to respond to an horrific terrorist attack but tragically, it's arguably managed to attain moral parity.

On that note, I've not got anything else to say.

Yes, but Israel is a democracy and Netanyahu can be voted out of power

Can we conclude from this that the majority of Israelis are in favour of the slaughter?  Whereas the citizens of Gaza have not approved the actions of Hamas at the ballot box.

I could be wrong, but I thought that Hamas had been elected in Gaza (beating Fatah).

In 2007 at which point they stopped holding elections perhaps because their majority wasnt exactly sweeping. It made the brexit referendum look like will of the people with 44.45% for Hamas vs 41.43% for Fatah.
Israel could possibly do a deal with the clans to help get rid of Hamas but they would need to offer some improvements and unfortunately with the current extremist government that isnt going to happen.
An balancing act they could have done whilst attacking Gaza would have been to offer improvements to the west bank. Unfortunately though if anything they have upped their land theft and acts of violence there as well. Indeed it seems part of why Hamas inflicted so much damage was the Israeli army were diverted to helping out the extremist settlers in the west bank.

Pseudo democracy.  Try exercising democratic rights if you are arab.

I think "troubled democracy" is a more useful term, similarly to Turkey, for example. They have a democratic structure, but are drifting towards autocracy. I'm deeply pessimistic about the direction that both those countries are taking, but it's not impossible that they will reverse and become more liberal. The plight of Palestinians rests pretty directly on keeping Israel as a liberal democracy so promoting that needs to be a major priority - same goes for Turkey. In a region full of unelected autocracies, flawed democracies are better than the alternative.

thols2 :

In international relations, the answer is always, “It’s complicated.”

Part of it, as I understand it, is that the Egyptian-Israeli peace deal that was sorted out in the 1970s guaranteed that the U.S. would provide military aid to both countries. Prior to that, there were major wars in 1956, 1967, and 1973 (plus of course, the 1948 war that established Israel as a country.) Israel won all of those wars and Egypt suffered huge losses. In the 1970s, Israel developed nuclear weapons as an open secret. That made the Arab League’s goal of destroying Israel a suicide pact – if Arab countries did succeed in destroying Israel, their own cities would be incinerated in nuclear fireballs.

You can thank Germany for providing them with the equipment and knowledge to start on a nuclear program, along with submarines that hold ballistic missiles. It's in my link above yours.

This comes from a belief that ultimately Gaza will be rebuilt and there will be a managed return for all the displaced civilians.

Doubt there will be many Palestinians around given the there are Jewish organisations already selling off the newly claimed lands.

and am i right in think the we and the Jewish state that was formed after world war 2 are to blame really for the entire shitshow.

Think Germany might be partly to blame. Should have given the Jewish population Bielefeld or the state of Hessen.

You can thank Germany for providing them with the equipment and knowledge to start on a nuclear program

Nuclear weapons were only invented once, in the U.S., heavily influenced by work by Jewish refugees from Hitler. That design was then leaked to the USSR, so the first Soviet A-bomb was just a copy of the US Fatman bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki. Every nuclear bomb program since has been based on leaks from existing programs.

My thoughts and feelings about what happened then is completely coloured by what was aired on TV in the USA soon afterwards (where I was staying)… they were prepared to show stuff from those attacks that UK TV never would.

The attack by Hamas and the 9 associated factions was utterly horrific and there is no excuse for attacking what is primarily an occupying civilian population as they did - the occupying military force and the machinations of the state are legitimate targets under ICRG law set out by the Red Cross but I have to take issue with the vile propaganda that Israel deployed afterwards - talk of dozens of beheaded babies, some placed in ovens and cooked, multiple rapes of all the women, babies cut from pregnant mothers and such like.

This has been verifiably debunked as false by multiple news agencies but once that thought has been implanted into the population of Israel then the hatred and desire for revenge at all costs is understandable, any amount of atrocities and rage can be justified against a population that "harboured" such terrorists.

The sooner Palestine is recognised as a nation state then Israel WILL have to stop occupation and come to the negation table.

I can recommend Palestine - Joe Sacco if you wish further reading, dont be put off by the fact it is a graphic novel 

also Footnotes in Gaza - Joe Sacco

Nuclear weapons were only invented once, in the U.S., heavily influenced by work by Jewish refugees from Hitler. That design was then leaked to the USSR, so the first Soviet A-bomb was just a copy of the US Fatman bomb that was dropped on Nagasaki. Every nuclear bomb program since has been based on leaks from existing programs.

That was not my point but yes , you are correct.

If you have the time then do read the article I posted.

Yet without Israeli oppression of Palestine, there would be no Hamas. It’s a mess they’ve created themselves.

Yet without Israel there would be no oppression of Palestine, therefore there would be no Hamas. It’s a mess we’ve created ourselves.

Doubt there will be many Palestinians around given the there are Jewish organisations already selling off the newly claimed lands.

I'm not denying it, and certainly the issue of settlements in the West Bank is ongoing, but I can't find anything about Israel claiming/selling off land in Gaza. Mind posting a link?

multiple rapes of all the women

Is that careful wording? Many women were raped, yes? Not "all" the women of course.

I didn't see footage of any of the things you describe. That wasn't the kind of broadcasting I was talking about (this wasn't Fox or any equivalent). But I don't want to get into discussing the horrors of what was shown.

I don't have much to add to the discussion, but I have been seeing a lot more cars around here with supporting Israel type stickers. Often along with the blue lives matter US flag, 'Don't tread on me' or 'Let's go Brandon' stickers. What this says about the people driving the car I'm not sure.

Every few pages I'm going to post to remind any new readers/posters to check my OP before you post anything.

Just a polite reminder is all.

This is not a response to any particular reply.

Yet without Israel there would be no oppression of Palestine, therefore there would be no Hamas. It’s a mess we’ve created ourselves.

All fair points, but exactly how does this oft repeated mantra actually contribute to a solution? What value does it bring to the table?

The perspective of history is always 20/20 and too often used as a cudgel to stifle any meaningful work to a resolution and as a means to justify actions in the present.

However tenuous and fragile that argument may be.