Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
  On 21/05/2024 at 18:56, badgerx16 said:

We have done very bad things in that part of the World since the Crusades. However, this thread is not about the UK, and false equivalence does not provide justification for the actions of the IDF, Israeli Police, Netanyahu's Government, or the illegal settlers.

Expand  

I think the term is, lets get our own house in order before lecture others.

  • Haha 2
Posted
  On 21/05/2024 at 19:00, AlexLaw76 said:

I think the term is, lets get our own house in order before lecture others.

Expand  

So what you're saying is that we're not allowed to comment on inhumane actions by the IDF, on a thread specifically about Israel, because the British military has done bad things as well.

Amazing logic.

  • Like 3
Posted
  On 21/05/2024 at 19:46, Sheaf Saint said:

So what you're saying is that we're not allowed to comment on inhumane actions by the IDF, on a thread specifically about Israel, because the British military has done bad things as well.

Amazing logic.

Expand  

Do what you want…:

Posted
  On 21/05/2024 at 12:45, Lord Duckhunter said:

The West Bank wasn’t occupied by Isreal until the 60’s. It was occupied by Transjordan, who at the time denied Israel should even exist. In Western Europe a country could co exist with a neighbour shaped like Israel is, but it makes invasion pretty easy when there’s hostile nations all around you. In places the original 1948 border is 9 miles from the sea. It would be so easy for a hostile force to split the country in two. 
 

It could be argued that had isreals neighbours lived beside it in peace from 1948 (as most do now), then maybe they would give up the West Bank. But I realise this is crossing into tit for tat territory. 
 

There will never be a Palestinian state acceptable to The Palestinians without the West Bank & they’ll never be a Palestinian state with the West Bank acceptable to the Israelis. That’s the long and short of it. Maybe a few generations from now a Northern Irish type fudge will satisfy both sides, but you & me will be long gone by then. 

Expand  

You talk about Israelis neighbours as though they are evil states for not wanting Israel to be formed, "who at the time denied Israel should even exist", is a bit dramatic. It was an understandable response to their region being changed forever by a remote organisation. It's easy for you to talk this way with the luxury of time and distance, but it shows a lack of understanding. Telling people how they should feel won't solve the problem.

  • Like 4
Posted
  On 22/05/2024 at 07:25, Weston Super Saint said:

Which is largely irrelevant if Israel don't.

Expand  

It's very relevant. States that don't recognise the existence and legitimacy of Israel are seen as pariah states. Israel are already being seen for what they are on many quarters, and major international support at this level for one of their protagonists will doubtless apply pressure. Also, it's a victory for commonsense. 

Posted (edited)
  On 22/05/2024 at 07:32, egg said:

It's very relevant. States that don't recognise the existence and legitimacy of Israel are seen as pariah states. Israel are already being seen for what they are on many quarters, and major international support at this level for one of their protagonists will doubtless apply pressure. Also, it's a victory for commonsense. 

Expand  

And yet, if Israel (and the US) don't recognise Palestine as a state, it is irrelevant.

Whilst one 'half' of Palestine is governed by a proscribed terrorist group, I suspect the US will not be changing its mind.

Edited by Weston Super Saint
Posted (edited)
  On 22/05/2024 at 07:37, Weston Super Saint said:

And yet, if Israel (and the US) don't recognise Palestine as a state, it is irrelevant.

Whilst one 'half' of Palestine is governed by a proscribed terrorist group, I suspect the US will not be changing its mind.

Expand  

By Israel, that means Netanyahu at present, but of course this will be the start of putting pressure on Israel to have a more balanced government if it wants to supply of heavy weaponry to continue. General elections in both US and UK later this year could affect that picture and the European elections may see some volatile results. Add in the ICC arrest warrant and the pressure is building on Netanyahu.

The Palestinian leaders would certainly need to do their part and cut the cord with Iran and thereby reduce Hamas’s role. 

As with Northern Ireland, the two sides have got to make the bold moves and accept some compromises- all the international community can do is create the environment for that to be possible but if they won’t then the status quo is not guaranteed either without getting back on a 2-state track. Otherwise the West is writing a blank cheque indefinitely rather than supporting a regional ally to key to our strategic interests with a long-term negotiated plan to bring the conflict to a manageable level.

Iran will have a new and presumably equally hardline Conservative PM but it can’t be 100% certain that they will carry on supporting Hamas and Hezbollah to the same extent, especially as sanctions are throttling their economy and unlike Putin they don’t have a cheque from Beijing, although the price for that will be horrendous of course for Russia.

Edited by Gloucester Saint
  • Like 1
Posted
  On 22/05/2024 at 07:37, Weston Super Saint said:

And yet, if Israel (and the US) don't recognise Palestine as a state, it is irrelevant.

Whilst one 'half' of Palestine is governed by a proscribed terrorist group, I suspect the US will not be changing its mind.

Expand  

Where's that been said? The fact is that Israel is recognised. Palestine isn't. It being recognised internationally is a start. 

Posted
  On 22/05/2024 at 12:03, egg said:

Where's that been said? The fact is that Israel is recognised. Palestine isn't. It being recognised internationally is a start. 

Expand  

Before today, 143 of 193 UN member states recognised the state of Palestine.

The fact that Spain, Norway and Ireland have now agreed to do the same isn't going to make a blind bit of difference to Israel.  Israel isn't relying on any of those countries to fund / provide munitions to its war efforts.

Posted
  On 21/05/2024 at 20:09, Fan The Flames said:

You talk about Israelis neighbours as though they are evil states for not wanting Israel to be formed, "who at the time denied Israel should even exist", is a bit dramatic. It was an understandable response to their region being changed forever by a remote organisation. It's easy for you to talk this way with the luxury of time and distance, but it shows a lack of understanding. Telling people how they should feel won't solve the problem.

Expand  

I’m not telling people how they should feel, their feelings are irrelevant. I was merely stating why Israel occupied the West Bank. Being surrounded by countries who deny your right to exist, means you have to protect yourselves military which is why the Israelis eventually launched the 6 day war. Had the Arab league not attacked Israel the morning  after the British mandate ended, things might have been different. 

 

Egypt & most other countries now seem to accept Israelis right to exist, so they’ve moved on since 1948. I imagine this is due to Israelis military strategy & strength, rather than some sort of enlightenment. 

Posted
  On 22/05/2024 at 12:38, Lord Duckhunter said:

I’m not telling people how they should feel, their feelings are irrelevant. I was merely stating why Israel occupied the West Bank. Being surrounded by countries who deny your right to exist, means you have to protect yourselves military which is why the Israelis eventually launched the 6 day war. Had the Arab league not attacked Israel the morning  after the British mandate ended, things might have been different. 

 

Egypt & most other countries now seem to accept Israelis right to exist, so they’ve moved on since 1948. I imagine this is due to Israelis military strategy & strength, rather than some sort of enlightenment. 

Expand  

That's irrelevant. Israel were willing to cede almost all of the west bank in 2000/01. That only changed when they had a change of PM and pulled out of the talks. We then got the Hamas charter in the aftermath of that. 

Posted
  On 22/05/2024 at 12:38, Lord Duckhunter said:

I’m not telling people how they should feel, their feelings are irrelevant. I was merely stating why Israel occupied the West Bank. Being surrounded by countries who deny your right to exist, means you have to protect yourselves military which is why the Israelis eventually launched the 6 day war. Had the Arab league not attacked Israel the morning  after the British mandate ended, things might have been different. 

 

Egypt & most other countries now seem to accept Israelis right to exist, so they’ve moved on since 1948. I imagine this is due to Israelis military strategy & strength, rather than some sort of enlightenment. 

Expand  

Of course you are telling people how to feel, you're saying the surrounding countries should just have accepted things gracefully from day one, with not an ounce of empathy for how they might have felt.

The west came in did their arrogant bossing people around thing for a bit, then fucked off out of the area leaving it fundamentally changed forever. And you expect the inhabitants to not react, that's why you lack a level of understanding. If that happened in our region and we didn't react you'd be calling them wet, pinkos, son-in-laws.

There were people when Israel was form who wanted to take the West Bank and there are people now that want it as part of Israel proper. They would have gone in there at some point.

You do know that a country is a political/administrative construct and that you can dislike it and not the people. Isreal is the Milton Keynes Dons of countries.

Anyway the only solution to this situation is a two state one.

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 22/05/2024 at 07:17, badgerx16 said:

Spain, Ireland, and Norway recognise the existence and legitimacy of the Palestinian state. More likely to follow.

Expand  

It seems a no brainer to recognise the Palestinian state and their right to self determination as Israel has it. Why should it be used as a carrot to encourage Palestine to a negotiated settlement when they are not on a level playing field with Israel? What carrot is being dangled in front of Israel to work towards a negotiated peace settlement?

https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-palestinian-state-recognition-what-to-know-ed18d4cc50b20c8238e0de0068080eb0
 

The idea that this somehow rewards terrorism is a bit rich when you consider the actions of the Israelis when they used terrorism and military force to get what they wanted.

Be it a two state solution or not (and it seems that the two state solution is favoured by many) both sides should be sitting at the negotiating table with equal footing. 

The Palestinians are not some sub human race who need to be treated as second class citizens (despite what some members of the Israeli government think) and they have every right to be treated as equals in any future negotiations about their own future.
 

 

  • Like 1
Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 08:18, Weston Super Saint said:

Really?

If there is only one state, there is no "opposition". If there is no opposition, there is no war.

I'm not sure why that's something you'd struggle with.

Expand  

Presumably you are assuming Israel 'from the river to the sea', in which case where are the former population of the West Bank and Gaza ? If they stay put they would surely be an 'opposition' within, if displaced an opposition without. How do you satisfy their demands for self determination and a voice, or are they not worth consideration?

Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 08:55, badgerx16 said:

Presumably you are assuming Israel 'from the river to the sea', in which case where are the former population of the West Bank and Gaza ? If they stay put they would surely be an 'opposition' within, if displaced an opposition without. How do you satisfy their demands for self determination and a voice, or are they not worth consideration?

Expand  

I'm not assuming anything.

I've raised the point that a two state solution is not the 'only answer' and that there is a 'one state' solution as well.

I'm also not presuming that Israel will exist 'from the river to the sea' and have not suggested this.

How a one state solution is implemented is not for me to decide. 

Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 10:40, Weston Super Saint said:

I'm not assuming anything.

I've raised the point that a two state solution is not the 'only answer' and that there is a 'one state' solution as well.

I'm also not presuming that Israel will exist 'from the river to the sea' and have not suggested this.

How a one state solution is implemented is not for me to decide. 

Expand  

I find it highly unlikely that anybody suggesting a 'one state solution' sees it as anything other than being founded on Israel.

  • Like 2
Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 10:48, badgerx16 said:

I find it highly unlikely that anybody suggesting a 'one state solution' sees it as anything other than being founded on Israel.

Expand  

Historically it has been muted that everyone works together :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-state_solution#:~:text=The "one-state solution",Gaza Strip and Golan Heights.

Whilst currently Israel has the upper hand, that doesn't preclude Palestine receiving 'external' help to overthrow Israel.

How likely, or not, that is to happen is irrelevant.  A couple of tactical suitcase bombs would change the landscape considerably - and let's not pretend that Iran, Syria, Lebanon etc wouldn't be able to get their hands on something like that, or be happy to see them used!

 

Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 07:46, sadoldgit said:

The Palestinians are not some sub human race who need to be treated as second class citizens (despite what some members of the Israeli government think

Expand  

Some Arab countries clearly think they are, this is what Jordan’s King Abdullah said , “No refugees in Jordan, no refugees in Egypt.” Shocking…

Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 08:18, Weston Super Saint said:

Really?

If there is only one state, there is no "opposition". If there is no opposition, there is no war.

I'm not sure why that's something you'd struggle with.

Expand  

There are a lot of leaps in that statement. So for now I'm still in the 'only way to solve this is a two state solution' camp.

Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 12:38, Lord Duckhunter said:

Some Arab countries clearly think they are, this is what Jordan’s King Abdullah said , “No refugees in Jordan, no refugees in Egypt.” Shocking…

Expand  

Egypt - signed the 1951 refugee convention

Jordan - didn't sign the 1951 convention, but did sign a memorandum of understanding in 1998

Therefore, both are legally obliged to accept refugees - odd then that he would say that...

Posted (edited)
  On 23/05/2024 at 12:38, Lord Duckhunter said:

Some Arab countries clearly think they are, this is what Jordan’s King Abdullah said , “No refugees in Jordan, no refugees in Egypt.” Shocking…

Expand  

Said in the context of 'the humanitarian situation in Gaza must be dealt with in Gaza, don't try pushing people out to achieve political aims'.

There are estimated to be over 2 million Palestinian refugees in Jordan.

Shocking !

Edited by badgerx16
  • Like 2
Posted
  On 23/05/2024 at 12:47, badgerx16 said:

Said in the context of 'the humanitarian situation in Gaza must be dealt with in Gaza, don't try pushing people out to achieve political aims'.

Expand  

I think you’d have something to say if The Tories refused to help Ukrainian women and children for the same reason. 

Posted

The ICJ has ordered Israel to cease its military offensive in the Rafah governate.

In other, completely unenforceable rulings, they've also demanded the immediate and unconditional release of all the hostages.

I can't see either of those being complied with.

Posted

The recognition of Palestine as a state seems crucial in the way forward. Netanyahu needs to recognise that this is not about rewarding terrorism, but finding a way forward to a lasting peace and security for both Israel and Palestine. He also needs to tell the world what his plans are when the fighting stops but seems to be holding off because a continuing military conflict keeps the far right of his government happy whereas they are not interested in giving anything to the Palestinians. An international body aligned with a Palestinian presence would seem to be the way forward for governance of both Gaza and the West Bank as a starting point.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-69059863.amp

Posted
  On 26/05/2024 at 08:09, sadoldgit said:

The recognition of Palestine as a state seems crucial in the way forward. Netanyahu needs to recognise that this is not about rewarding terrorism, but finding a way forward to a lasting peace and security for both Israel and Palestine. He also needs to tell the world what his plans are when the fighting stops but seems to be holding off because a continuing military conflict keeps the far right of his government happy whereas they are not interested in giving anything to the Palestinians. An international body aligned with a Palestinian presence would seem to be the way forward for governance of both Gaza and the West Bank as a starting point.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-69059863.amp

Expand  

Hamas or the Palestinians?

Posted
  On 28/05/2024 at 09:15, sadoldgit said:

Yet another “tragic mishap” over the weekend in Gaza leaves more women and children dead.

Meanwhile another example of how the current Israeli government feel that the rules don’t apply to them.

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/28/israeli-spy-chief-icc-prosecutor-war-crimes-inquiry

Expand  

Do the others play by ‘the rules’, you know rocket attacks into Tel Aviv, raping Israeli soldiers? 

Posted
  On 28/05/2024 at 14:32, whelk said:

Do the others play by ‘the rules’, you know rocket attacks into Tel Aviv, raping Israeli soldiers? 

Expand  

Can their really be any complaints about Hamas firing off rockets given the attack they're under? It's apparently a war, but their rockets cannot be used on the same breath of what happened on Rafah. That was unforgivable, and I don't buy the "mishap" line. 

Re the rape tactics, I hadn't appreciated until the other day that it was an Israeli tactic in 1948. There's videos out there of old Israeli men laughing about how their mates took Palestinian girls aside and raped them to the point that they were rag dolls. 7/10 was hideous, and has hallmarks of what happened in 1948. Possibly delayed revenge. Hideous regardless.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted (edited)
  On 28/05/2024 at 14:32, whelk said:

Do the others play by ‘the rules’, you know rocket attacks into Tel Aviv, raping Israeli soldiers? 

Expand  

Do you understand the difference between a democratically elected government that aligns itself to the Western values and a prescribed terrorist group?

Also, if you read the article you will see that both the Israeli government and Hamas have officials being investigated for alleged war crimes. The difference is that one has its national intelligence agency threatening UN officials to drop the case and that one is the party who present themselves as being on the moral high ground.

And for those easily confused, if you are innocent of charges brought against you, why wouldn’t you be confident of proving your case in court rather than going down the route of threatening people to drop the charges?

Also for those who believe that the Israelis are the victims -

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/5/15/the-nakba-five-palestinian-towns-massacred-75-years-ago
 

Or behave in a morally superior way -

https://amp.theguardian.com/world/2024/feb/22/claims-of-israeli-sexual-assault-of-palestinian-women-are-credible-un-panel-says

Again for those who believe this started on 7th October, educate yourself about the Safsaf massacre and rape of Palestinians in 1948 -

https://english.wafa.ps/page.aspx?id=3cTfB8a110851623663a3cTfB8

Edited by sadoldgit
Added text
  • Haha 2
Posted
  On 28/05/2024 at 15:27, egg said:

Can their really be any complaints about Hamas firing off rockets given the attack they're under? It's apparently a war, but their rockets cannot be used on the same breath of what happened on Rafah. That was unforgivable, and I don't buy the "mishap" line. 

Re the rape tactics, I hadn't appreciated until the other day that it was an Israeli tactic in 1948. There's videos out there of old Israeli men laughing about how their mates took Palestinian girls aside and raped them to the point that they were rag dolls. 7/10 was hideous, and has hallmarks of what happened in 1948. Possibly delayed revenge. Hideous regardless.

Expand  

Imagine being so thick that you're confused by this. Bless. 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Posted
  On 28/05/2024 at 15:27, egg said:

Can their really be any complaints about Hamas firing off rockets given the attack they're under?

Expand  

Yes. Yes you can. That’s a deliberate attempt to fire munitions into populated civilian areas and kill as many people as possible, as they have been doing for many years. If I were an Israeli I’d probably be complaining about people trying to murder me.

Posted
  On 28/05/2024 at 18:29, Lighthouse said:

Yes. Yes you can. That’s a deliberate attempt to fire munitions into populated civilian areas and kill as many people as possible, as they have been doing for many years. If I were an Israeli I’d probably be complaining about people trying to murder me.

Expand  

The Israeli's have been a wee but more effective in their mission to do exactly that. Nonsense to suggest that Hamas should not fight back. 

  • Haha 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...