Israel

[badgerx16]

11 minutes ago, whelk said:

Loathe to quote Trump about shit hole countries but they aren’t terrorist threat to western civilians. Yes SOG their lives are worthless and I love Katie Hopkins

So why did we pile into ISIS when they were holed up in Syria and Iraq ? Were they then a threat to the West ?

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, badgerx16 said:

So why did we pile into ISIS when they were holed up in Syria and Iraq ? Were they then a threat to the West ?

They were a threat to kids at a concert in Manchester....

[egg]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

No they aren’t. Current estimates are around 10,000 Gazans killed in the month this conflict has been ongoing. Horrific but if they really wanted to kill as many civilians as possible, they could have done that in half an hour.

Hamas, without any heavy armour or an air force, managed to kill 15% of that total in half a day.

 

You’ve got it completely arse about face with regards to who is trying to do what. 

Indeed. The idea that Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah could wipe out Israel, even if they wanted to, is nonsense. That Israel could decimate them is a factor as to why it's not even a vague possibility.

Israel do not want to live peacefully alongside a Palestinian state. That is demonstrated by their behaviour in West Bank. They don't want Gaza, and have been given a gilt edged opportunity to make it uninhabitable, and are taking it. 

[hypochondriac]

Good to see the Met coming out now and saying the obvious - that protests are wholly inappropriate this weekend. Assuming any of these protests are genuinely designed to be peaceful and to avoid any sort of clashes, you would assume that the organisers will respond to the police request and cancel any action. To do otherwise would suggest they do want to cause disruption and disorder. 

[badgerx16]

 

[inspectorfrost]

7 hours ago, whelk said:

And how do you think Israelis think when they receive a WhatsApp of their mum being beheaded and celebrating it? Let’s negotiate and ceasefire so they can re-arm and do it again? Israel isn’t dancing when civilians die either - Hamas caused it and Palestinians are getting fucked as everyone knew would happen.

Your long term argument is no doubt correct but think you have no idea of the pain and anger Israel feel. And don’t give a shit about McDonald’s protests in Oxford Street.  They are a nation of ‘no one likes us we don’t care’

 

Hamas didn't exist until 20 years after Israel first started occupying the West Bank/Gaza in the 1960s. It's entire extremist existence was born out of decades of frustration/anger from Israeli occupation.

Jewish settler violence/land grabs against Palestinians have been going on for decades, with government/army support. It was actually increasing before Hamas launched their recent attack.

Ever wondered why the Hamas attack was so systematic and brutal, when they knew full well what Israel's response would be? The fact that Hamas are utterly barbaric doesn't even scratch the surface. The whole point was to provoke this reaction from Israel

Edited 6 November, 2023 by inspectorfrost

[Lord Duckhunter]

4 hours ago, egg said:

 

Israel do not want to live peacefully alongside a Palestinian state. That is demonstrated by their behaviour in West Bank.

You keep coming out with this, but this is how it went according to The Guardian (hardly pro Israeli) when Israeli PM agreed a deal in advance with Clinton. The Palestine representatives turned it down. 

 

Clinton had "slowly" - to avoid misunderstanding - read out to Arafat a document, endorsed in advance by Barak, outlining the main points of a future settlement. The proposals included the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on some 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, with some territorial compensation for the Palestinians from pre-1967 Israeli territory; the dismantling of most of the settlements and the concentration of the bulk of the settlers inside the 8% of the West Bank to be annexed by Israel; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, in which some Arab neighborhoods would become sovereign Palestinian territory and others would enjoy "functional autonomy"; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem (the Muslim and Christian quarters) and "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state though with no "right of return" to Israel proper; and the organisation by the international community of a massive aid programme to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation.

Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.

Edited 6 November, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[badgerx16]

54 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

You keep coming out with this, but this is how it went according to The Guardian (hardly pro Israeli) when Israeli PM agreed a deal in advance with Clinton. The Palestine representatives turned it down. 

 

Clinton had "slowly" - to avoid misunderstanding - read out to Arafat a document, endorsed in advance by Barak, outlining the main points of a future settlement. The proposals included the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on some 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, with some territorial compensation for the Palestinians from pre-1967 Israeli territory; the dismantling of most of the settlements and the concentration of the bulk of the settlers inside the 8% of the West Bank to be annexed by Israel; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, in which some Arab neighborhoods would become sovereign Palestinian territory and others would enjoy "functional autonomy"; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem (the Muslim and Christian quarters) and "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state though with no "right of return" to Israel proper; and the organisation by the international community of a massive aid programme to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation.

Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.

Arafat was being steered by Egypt and Saudi Arabia, who both thought the thing could be postponed until Dubyah became President three weeks later. They saw this as Clinton's bid for a Legacy and felt that GWB would be more amenable to their demands.

History proves otherwise.

[egg]

53 minutes ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

You keep coming out with this, but this is how it went according to The Guardian (hardly pro Israeli) when Israeli PM agreed a deal in advance with Clinton. The Palestine representatives turned it down. 

 

Clinton had "slowly" - to avoid misunderstanding - read out to Arafat a document, endorsed in advance by Barak, outlining the main points of a future settlement. The proposals included the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on some 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, with some territorial compensation for the Palestinians from pre-1967 Israeli territory; the dismantling of most of the settlements and the concentration of the bulk of the settlers inside the 8% of the West Bank to be annexed by Israel; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, in which some Arab neighborhoods would become sovereign Palestinian territory and others would enjoy "functional autonomy"; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem (the Muslim and Christian quarters) and "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state though with no "right of return" to Israel proper; and the organisation by the international community of a massive aid programme to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation.

Arafat said no. Enraged, Clinton banged on the table and said: "You are leading your people and the region to a catastrophe." A formal Palestinian rejection of the proposals reached the Americans the next day. The summit sputtered on for a few days more but to all intents and purposes it was over.

That's a real over simplification of why the Clinton parameters fell down. The details are out there if you want to look, including Yarafats letter to Clinton. 

The plans were flawed - no map detailing who had what, most of east jerusalem to Israel, and a suggestion that the Palestinian west bank would be a series of islands. Throw in no Palestinian army being allowed, an Israeli military presence in Palestine, an Israeli tunnel (possibly more) under and possibly through Palestinian land (essentially dissecting it), it's pretty obvious that Palestine weren't being offered what the article suggests they rejected. 

In any event, the Palestinians did not reject the deal. That's a fallacy. Israel demanded concessions beyond those in Clinton's parameters. The position has been misrepresented.

This article explains. If you don't read it all, the summary in the last 4 sentences explains very clearly. 

https://www.jadaliyya.com/Details/45169

Since then, the Israeli's have behaved in a way which we've all seen. Within a year they put the Gaza airport out of action, ploughing up the runway. They then continued eating into West Bank with more settlements, generally tightening the screw on the Palestinians ability to live, increasing the barrier, making it all but impossible to travel between communities, generally harassing them, arming settlers and supporting them in attacks an Arabs, etc, etc. 

I cannot believe that anyone can say with a straight face that the Israeli behaviour since the collapse of the Clinton attempts is consistent with a wish to allow Palestinians to live peacefully alongside them. 

[Weston Super Saint]

Sadly, this is the level of lunacy that some people think will be easy to negotiate with - they deny killing civilians in Israel despite evidence from their own fighters' helmet cams!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67321241

Quote

A senior Hamas leader has refused to acknowledge that his group killed civilians in Israel, claiming only conscripts were targeted.

Moussa Abu Marzouk told the BBC that "women, children and civilians were exempt" from Hamas's attacks.

His claims are in stark contrast to the wealth of video evidence of Hamas men shooting unarmed adults and children.

 

[egg]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Sadly, this is the level of lunacy that some people think will be easy to negotiate with - they deny killing civilians in Israel despite evidence from their own fighters' helmet cams!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67321241

 

Easy to negotiate, no. Necessary, yes. Both sides have been a disgrace. Unless people think that the fairies will find a solution, and that fighting can carry in until they do, something needs to happen. One difficulty we have is that the Israeli's are still angry, and have this belief that they can bomb their way to peace. 

[hypochondriac]

Goodness. In a totally unexpected development, it appears that half the people organising this peace march on Saturday have links to Hamas. That's quite a different narrative from what you were posting about last week @egg. I assume you're concerned by this revelation?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/06/former-hamas-chief-behind-pro-palestine-armistice-day-march/#:~:text=Muhammad Kathem Sawalha led the,in a London council house.

[harvey]

8 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Goodness. In a totally unexpected development, it appears that half the people organising this peace march on Saturday have links to Hamas. That's quite a different narrative from what you were posting about last week @egg. I assume you're concerned by this revelation?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/06/former-hamas-chief-behind-pro-palestine-armistice-day-march/#:~:text=Muhammad Kathem Sawalha led the,in a London council house.

But, but, but......

[hypochondriac]

A very important twitter thread that everyone should read. 

 

[rallyboy]

It's humbling to see that even when he has the right to be full of hatred, Amir's critical of his own government response.

Thankfully, his two kids survived the horrific terrorist attack.

I see the current death toll in Gaza includes 4,000 children.

I don't know what the exchange rate for revenge is these days - do we know how many kids Israel need to kill before they call it even?

 

But, but Rallyboy, the toddlers were all human shields, and Hamas are hiding in playgroups so they have to kill everyone there, it's the law, and the Palestinians bombed their own convoys, and Israel only attack fighters, and only in self defence, and if you and the leftie Wokerati Islington elite, tofu-eating, sandal-wearing Hate Marchers had your way, Israel would just be targeting terrorists and protecting civilians on both sides while trying to find some sort of peace. 

Rather than committing war crimes that with every passing day look as bad as those committed by the terrorist group that everyone sane wants destroyed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[egg]

1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Goodness. In a totally unexpected development, it appears that half the people organising this peace march on Saturday have links to Hamas. That's quite a different narrative from what you were posting about last week @egg. I assume you're concerned by this revelation?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/11/06/former-hamas-chief-behind-pro-palestine-armistice-day-march/#:~:text=Muhammad Kathem Sawalha led the,in a London council house.

 

On 04/11/2023 at 21:56, egg said:

Seeing the way that those idiots have behaved today, and knowing about the counter, the risk has definitely increased. If I was the organiser, I'd be reflecting on my decision. 

That was one of my posts that didn't confuse you Hypo. You even liked it. Do keep up. 

[hypochondriac]

56 minutes ago, egg said:

 

That was one of my posts that didn't confuse you Hypo. You even liked it. Do keep up. 

That post didn't mention the organisers. Imo the organisers should have no say in whether this goes ahead or not given that many of them have links to a terrorist group. 

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, rallyboy said:

It's humbling to see that even when he has the right to be full of hatred, Amir's critical of his own government response.

Thankfully, his two kids survived the horrific terrorist attack.

I see the current death toll in Gaza includes 4,000 children.

I don't know what the exchange rate for revenge is these days - do we know how many kids Israel need to kill before they call it even?

 

But, but Rallyboy, the toddlers were all human shields, and Hamas are hiding in playgroups so they have to kill everyone there, it's the law, and the Palestinians bombed their own convoys, and Israel only attack fighters, and only in self defence, and if you and the leftie Wokerati Islington elite, tofu-eating, sandal-wearing Hate Marchers had your way, Israel would just be targeting terrorists and protecting civilians on both sides while trying to find some sort of peace. 

Rather than committing war crimes that with every passing day look as bad as those committed by the terrorist group that everyone sane wants destroyed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Source?

 

[rallyboy]

21 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Source?

 

BBC, Reuters, the UN - the same sources for Israeli casualty figures.

You come across as more concerned about the source of the news than the actual news that Gaza is being described as a children's graveyard, but I'm sure that isn't the case.

Any thoughts on the exchange rate?

 

[whelk]

3 hours ago, rallyboy said:

It's humbling to see that even when he has the right to be full of hatred, Amir's critical of his own government response.

Thankfully, his two kids survived the horrific terrorist attack.

I see the current death toll in Gaza includes 4,000 children.

I don't know what the exchange rate for revenge is these days - do we know how many kids Israel need to kill before they call it even?

 

But, but Rallyboy, the toddlers were all human shields, and Hamas are hiding in playgroups so they have to kill everyone there, it's the law, and the Palestinians bombed their own convoys, and Israel only attack fighters, and only in self defence, and if you and the leftie Wokerati Islington elite, tofu-eating, sandal-wearing Hate Marchers had your way, Israel would just be targeting terrorists and protecting civilians on both sides while trying to find some sort of peace. 

Rather than committing war crimes that with every passing day look as bad as those committed by the terrorist group that everyone sane wants destroyed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3 hours ago, rallyboy said:

It's humbling to see that even when he has the right to be full of hatred, Amir's critical of his own government response.

Thankfully, his two kids survived the horrific terrorist attack.

I see the current death toll in Gaza includes 4,000 children.

I don't know what the exchange rate for revenge is these days - do we know how many kids Israel need to kill before they call it even?

 

But, but Rallyboy, the toddlers were all human shields, and Hamas are hiding in playgroups so they have to kill everyone there, it's the law, and the Palestinians bombed their own convoys, and Israel only attack fighters, and only in self defence, and if you and the leftie Wokerati Islington elite, tofu-eating, sandal-wearing Hate Marchers had your way, Israel would just be targeting terrorists and protecting civilians on both sides while trying to find some sort of peace. 

Rather than committing war crimes that with every passing day look as bad as those committed by the terrorist group that everyone sane wants destroyed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Doesn’t get it, never will. That’s smug intellectuals for you. Oh and oh so comedic

[Lord Duckhunter]

2 hours ago, rallyboy said:

BBC, Reuters, the UN - the same sources for Israeli casualty figures.

 

 

No it’s not. 

[Weston Super Saint]

3 hours ago, rallyboy said:

BBC, Reuters, the UN - the same sources for Israeli casualty figures.

You come across as more concerned about the source of the news than the actual news that Gaza is being described as a children's graveyard, but I'm sure that isn't the case.

Any thoughts on the exchange rate?

 

Nope.

The source is Hamas.

I thought you were supposed to be bright.

[egg]

10 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Nope.

The source is Hamas.

I thought you were supposed to be bright.

The UN have said that Gaza is becoming a graveyard for hundreds of children a day. Are you disputing that? 

[badgerx16]

27 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Nope.

The source is Hamas.

I thought you were supposed to be bright.

Chap from the UN interviewed on the radio today said that Hamas' casualty figures in previous attacks have proved to be quite accurate, and he sees no reason to think the current numbers are far from accurate.

[Weston Super Saint]

26 minutes ago, egg said:

The UN have said that Gaza is becoming a graveyard for hundreds of children a day. Are you disputing that? 

Nope.

[Weston Super Saint]

9 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Chap from the UN interviewed on the radio today said that Hamas' casualty figures in previous attacks have proved to be quite accurate, and he sees no reason to think the current numbers are far from accurate.

The same Hamas that claim they didn't kill any women or children during their attack on 7/10?

They seem a reliable source.

[badgerx16]

9 minutes ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The same Hamas that claim they didn't kill any women or children during their attack on 7/10?

They seem a reliable source.

One part is the people trying to manage the heakth services and carry out search and rescue, and recovering the bodies - the other part is the political leadership living their comfortable lives in exile in the Arabian Gulf.

 

Those external agencies involved on the ground in Gaza seem to think the local figures are accurate. They probably know more than you or I.

Edited 7 November, 2023 by badgerx16

[Lord Duckhunter]

1 hour ago, egg said:

The UN have said that Gaza is becoming a graveyard for hundreds of children a day. Are you disputing that? 

I think he’s disputing the ridiculous notion that Hamas casualty numbers and Israeli numbers come from the same source. Frankly anyone who thinks that really shouldn’t be commenting. 

[rallyboy]

I'm not even sure what you guys are arguing about now.

The amount of personal hostility chucked at posters on this thread has been ridiculous, stuff you would never say face-to-face - it does the forum no favours.

Kids have been killed on both sides, casualty figures have been gathered through several sources and the serious news organisations are only using ones they are comfortable with.

And what is wrong with people suggesting that a route towards peace might be nice?

 

 

 

 

[aintforever]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

The same Hamas that claim they didn't kill any women or children during their attack on 7/10?

They seem a reliable source.

Whilst Israel claim there is no humanitarian catastrophe unfolding.

[egg]

1 hour ago, Weston Super Saint said:

Nope.

If you accept that Hundreds of kids are dying daily, then thousands have died. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

[hypochondriac]

3 hours ago, rallyboy said:

I'm not even sure what you guys are arguing about now.

The amount of personal hostility chucked at posters on this thread has been ridiculous, stuff you would never say face-to-face - it does the forum no favours.

Kids have been killed on both sides, casualty figures have been gathered through several sources and the serious news organisations are only using ones they are comfortable with.

And what is wrong with people suggesting that a route towards peace might be nice?

 

 

 

 

Of course peace would be nice. I'm not sure anyone would disagree with that. I'm not sure why anyone is bothering to discuss something that isn't going to happen. Hopefully once Hamas has largely been destroyed, there can be some steps to improve things and move more towards some future peace but I doubt it will happen in our lifetimes sadly. 

[hypochondriac]

2 hours ago, egg said:

If you accept that Hundreds of kids are dying daily, then thousands have died. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

I'm not sure why this is being argued. It's indisputable that people are dying including children. The actual numbers aren't really relevant to the discussion. 

[AlexLaw76]

 

[egg]

From Biden:

"We believe the time is now to start the conversation for the future. Not tomorrow, not after the war, today."

Some sense at last, and addresses the notion that people can't negotiate with people who have harmed them, or want to. 

His wishes in summary:

a. the need for both sides to accept a 2 state solution

b. Israel to accept no reduction in the Gaza land, no reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict ends, no attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza

c. Palestine not to allow the use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism or violent attacks, and to ensure "no terrorist threats can emanate from the West Bank"

Easier said than done, and the devil is in the detail, but it's hard to disagree with those objectives. 

[Lighthouse]

39 minutes ago, egg said:

From Biden:

"We believe the time is now to start the conversation for the future. Not tomorrow, not after the war, today."

Some sense at last, and addresses the notion that people can't negotiate with people who have harmed them, or want to. 

His wishes in summary:

a. the need for both sides to accept a 2 state solution

b. Israel to accept no reduction in the Gaza land, no reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict ends, no attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza

c. Palestine not to allow the use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism or violent attacks, and to ensure "no terrorist threats can emanate from the West Bank"

Easier said than done, and the devil is in the detail, but it's hard to disagree with those objectives. 

 

[egg]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

 

Is it Israel or Hamas/PA that you are implying are akin to 1938 Nazi Germany? Although they're both (well, not PA) cruel and murderous machines, that feels a bit of a stretch. 

Edited 8 November, 2023 by egg

[egg]

3 minutes ago, egg said:

 .

 

Edited 8 November, 2023 by egg

[Sheaf Saint]

Came across this earlier. Angelina Jolie's father (actor John Voight) has had a pop at her on social media for daring to be outspoken about the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. He said:

Quote

"I am very disappointed that my daughter, like so many, has no understanding of God's honour, God's truths. This is about destroying the history of God's land - the Holy Land - the land of the Jews. This is justice for God's children of the Holy Land".

He's talking about divine retribution, which sounds an awful lot like religious fundamentalism to me. And I found it interesting because this aspect of the conflict never seems to be discussed in the western media. Obviously there has been an overwhelming amount of stuff printed/broadcast about Islamic fundamentalism since the turn of the century, but nobody ever seems to want to talk about the fact that the Zionist movement is itself underpinned by a fervent belief in the ancient scriptures that tell of God promising the land to Abraham and his descendants (probably for fear of being accused of being antisemitic).

[Lighthouse]

15 minutes ago, egg said:

Is it Israel or Hamas/PA that you are implying are akin to 1938 Nazi Germany? Although they're both (well, not PA) cruel and murderous machines, that feels a bit of a stretch. 

No, that wasn’t the point at all. I was pointing out the futility of signing a peace accord which at least one side clearly has no intention of adhering to. I could also have used the 2015 Minsk protocols but you get the idea.

[hypochondriac]

19 minutes ago, egg said:

Is it Israel or Hamas/PA that you are implying are akin to 1938 Nazi Germany? Although they're both (well, not PA) cruel and murderous machines, that feels a bit of a stretch. 

He's doing neither. He's suggesting that like Neville, he's coming out with soundbites that make people feel good but which has no effect on the reality. You can use all the nice words you like but when Hamas is never ever going to agree on these terms, it's all hot air. 

Edited 8 November, 2023 by hypochondriac

[egg]

2 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Came across this earlier. Angelina Jolie's father (actor John Voight) has had a pop at her on social media for daring to be outspoken about the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. He said:

He's talking about divine retribution, which sounds an awful lot like religious fundamentalism to me. And I found it interesting because this aspect of the conflict never seems to be discussed in the western media. Obviously there has been an overwhelming amount of stuff printed/broadcast about Islamic fundamentalism since the turn of the century, but nobody ever seems to want to talk about the fact that the Zionist movement is itself underpinned by a fervent belief in the ancient scriptures that tell of God promising the land to Abraham and his descendants (probably for fear of being accused of being antisemitic).

Interesting, and it shows the imbalance in the discussion. I saw a piece on itv news last night. It showed armed Israeli's in the west bank evicting Palestinians from their land. They followed up with an interview with a settler and the journalist put to him that natives were being evicted. His response was that they are not, that it is Israeli land, and that the Israeli's are merely helping the Palestinians to emigrate.

That attitude underpins this. We're told that the Palestinians want from the river to the sea, but it gets ignored that the Israeli's want so much more than they have, and are taking it in the name of holy land. 

[whelk]

6 minutes ago, egg said:

shows the imbalance in the discussion

Really? Don’t know what media you are exposing yourself to

[egg]

9 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

No, that wasn’t the point at all. I was pointing out the futility of signing a peace accord which at least one side clearly has no intention of adhering to. I could also have used the 2015 Minsk protocols but you get the idea.

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

I prefer Biden's approach though. Both sides will need assurances as a prerequisite to a deal. That there's been threats, posturing, charters, rockets, wars, etc, is only a barrier to talks if you want it to be.

Biden seemingly takes the view that no dispute is incapable of resolution, and that this dispute needs a resolution. He's right on both fronts. 

 

[hypochondriac]

18 minutes ago, egg said:

Interesting, and it shows the imbalance in the discussion. I saw a piece on itv news last night. It showed armed Israeli's in the west bank evicting Palestinians from their land. They followed up with an interview with a settler and the journalist put to him that natives were being evicted. His response was that they are not, that it is Israeli land, and that the Israeli's are merely helping the Palestinians to emigrate.

That attitude underpins this. We're told that the Palestinians want from the river to the sea, but it gets ignored that the Israeli's want so much more than they have, and are taking it in the name of holy land. 

Do you have evidence that Palestinians are native to Palestine? 

[whelk]

16 minutes ago, egg said:

Apologies for the misunderstanding.

I prefer Biden's approach though. Both sides will need assurances as a prerequisite to a deal. That there's been threats, posturing, charters, rockets, wars, etc, is only a barrier to talks if you want it to be.

Biden seemingly takes the view that no dispute is incapable of resolution, and that this dispute needs a resolution. He's right on both fronts. 

 

Many have tried. Sounds simple but always breaks down.

Maybe Trump will sort after he has sorted Ukraine conflict within 24 hours

 

[Lord Duckhunter]

33 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

He's doing neither. He's suggesting that like Neville, he's coming out with soundbites that make people feel good but which has no effect on the reality. You can use all the nice words you like but when Hamas is never ever going to agree on these terms, it's all hot air. 

He’s made one of the best analogies made during this discussion. 
 

Whilst every German wasn’t a Nazi, they were who we had to negotiate any ceasefire with. They had to be crushed &  had to surrender to face the consequences of their action. Only after this could Germany could be rebuilt & peace achieved . During this process lots of innocent Germans lost their lives including the elderly, children & even those opposed to the Nazis. Totally innocent Germans died as a result of what the Nazis started & the fact the Allies wanted to crush them & wipe them off the face of the earth. I doubt there were many calls for a “humanitarian pause” or for a Nazi led Germany to live beside the countries it had attacked in a 6 state solution. 
 

 

Edited 8 November, 2023 by Lord Duckhunter

[hypochondriac]

44 minutes ago, Sheaf Saint said:

Came across this earlier. Angelina Jolie's father (actor John Voight) has had a pop at her on social media for daring to be outspoken about the humanitarian disaster in Gaza. He said:

He's talking about divine retribution, which sounds an awful lot like religious fundamentalism to me. And I found it interesting because this aspect of the conflict never seems to be discussed in the western media. Obviously there has been an overwhelming amount of stuff printed/broadcast about Islamic fundamentalism since the turn of the century, but nobody ever seems to want to talk about the fact that the Zionist movement is itself underpinned by a fervent belief in the ancient scriptures that tell of God promising the land to Abraham and his descendants (probably for fear of being accused of being antisemitic).

I think it's fair to say there's religious loons on both sides. The whole conflict is in some way due to religion. 

[badgerx16]

2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

 

One of the most misrepresented images in history.

[hypochondriac]

10 minutes ago, whelk said:

Many have tried. Sounds simple but always breaks down.

Maybe Trump will sort after he has sorted Ukraine conflict within 24 hours

 

We laugh but Trump actually kept a lot of peace. Primarily because he was a loose cannon and that uncertainty made people nervous. Being a headcase can have it's advantages on occasion.