Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran … War

[jfman]

I’d imagine right now the Israelis are safer than they’ve ever been in Israel. Nothing will be crossing the border for quite some time and the Iron Dome does what it does

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’d imagine right now the Israelis are safer than they’ve ever been in Israel. Nothing will be crossing the border for quite some time and the Iron Dome does what it does

Christian, Jew or Muslim...it is safer living in Israel than Gaza.

[tweetiepooh]

Groups like Hamas aren't simple fixed targets. It isn't like this building is Hamas and is a viable target and the others aren't. They will move around, attack from one place, then skulk away and repeat. Israel can't simply do nothing but what can they do? Sending in troops won't work, it's not a friendly situation with locals welcoming liberating armies come to rid them of the terror groups.


The problem is not helped by extreme Israeli groups who want to claim more land for Israel and are not really sympathetic to the Palestinians.



---


As a Christian I know that the real solution is the "Prince of Peace" changing hearts not politics or military might, though a change in politics would be required. I also know that there is an Enemy who seeks to increase the hatred and violence.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Christian, Jew or Muslim...it is safer living in Israel than Gaza.

Don't think you'll find many, if any, Jews or Christians (maybe the odd Coptic) living in Gaza or any Arab/Muslim state nearby.

I don't know why, it's a very free and tolerant region.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Don't think you'll find many, if any, Jews or Christians (maybe the odd Coptic) living in Gaza or any Arab/Muslim state nearby.

I don't know why, it's a very free and tolerant region.

There’s certainly enough for Anglican and Orthodox churches. Only discovered this recently when Israel bombed them.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by Mr K

Cutting off the water supply is really hitting those terrorists isn't it?
Or is just trying to kill off the majority innocent civilian population?
If it was any other country doing this we'd be calling it out for what it is, and taking some action, not just words.

To you and others who focus on Gaza:

Following the atrocities committed by Hamas in Israel, what should Israel have done? How should Israel have reacted.

You lot avoid that opinion.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Don't think you'll find many, if any, Jews or Christians (maybe the odd Coptic) living in Gaza or any Arab/Muslim state nearby.

I don't know why, it's a very free and tolerant region.

There's Christians and churches. And it's not like you can just get on a plane out of the country!

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

To you and others who focus on Gaza:

Following the atrocities committed by Hamas in Israel, what should Israel have done? How should Israel have reacted.

You lot avoid that opinion.

I made a very clear post on just this in my discussion with Pierre around the word “proportionate”.

There’s a massive scale at which Israel could have placed itself on in terms of punitive actions towards Hamas that could have minimised civilian casualties.

It’s not immediately clear that the current course of action, including a ground offensive, would actually make Israel any safer in the longer term.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

To you and others who focus on Gaza:

Following the atrocities committed by Hamas in Israel, what should Israel have done? How should Israel have reacted.

You lot avoid that opinion.

I'd suggest doing something that would actually change the status quo rather than prolonging it but then I don't believe the government there actually want peace and would go further and say a certain amount of atrocities are acceptable to them to maintain the current situation as make no mistake it's not Hamas Netanyahu fears, it's a two state solution he's scared of most

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

make no mistake it's not Hamas Netanyahu fears, it's a two state solution he's scared of most

and rightly so.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

and rightly so.

The one-state solution clearly hasn't worked so why not try something different?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

The one-state solution clearly hasn't worked so why not try something different?

Well for a start Hamas doesn’t want a two-state solution. That slogan its cheerleaders and fellow travellers like chanting in nice safe places like London, you know, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” - that isn’t a clarion call for a two-state solution. It’s a call for Israel to be, as the Iranians less delicately put it, “wiped from the map”.

The Arabs in 1948 didn’t want a two-state solution either. They rejected the UN proposal even as Israel accepted it (though I caveat that observation by noting their reasons for doing so were not entirely unreasonable). Israel’s Arab neighbours didn’t want one in 1967 or 1973 either. And both of those conflicts have demonstrated to Israelis of all political persuasions that their territory is vulnerable, perhaps indefensible, on its pre 1967 borders. For all it is inflammatory and illegal by international law, their occupation and settlement of the West Bank has a clear internal logic.

Neither side wants a two-state solution is the fact nobody wants to admit out loud. Hamas and others believe that sooner or later their paymasters will be powerful enough to help them destroy Israel. Israel believes time is on its side, even if it takes another 100 years they will demographically neutralise and effectively absorb the West Bank. Gaza, which they have no particular interest in, actually has a lucrative potential future as a city state; they hope that sooner or later its inhabitants will see that and start building for it. Israel believes, as Golda Meir put it, that this can happen, when the day come that they “love their children more than they hate us.”

[jfman]

“Demographically neutralise” is a magnificent euphemism for long term genocide.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Chris

Well for a start Hamas doesn’t want a two-state solution. That slogan its cheerleaders and fellow travellers like chanting in nice safe places like London, you know, “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” - that isn’t a clarion call for a two-state solution. It’s a call for Israel to be, as the Iranians less delicately put it, “wiped from the map”.

The Arabs in 1948 didn’t want a two-state solution either. They rejected the UN proposal even as Israel accepted it (though I caveat that observation by noting their reasons for doing so were not entirely unreasonable). Israel’s Arab neighbours didn’t want one in 1967 or 1973 either. And both of those conflicts have demonstrated to Israelis of all political persuasions that their territory is vulnerable, perhaps indefensible, on its pre 1967 borders. For all it is inflammatory and illegal by international law, their occupation and settlement of the West Bank has a clear internal logic.

Neither side wants a two-state solution is the fact nobody wants to admit out loud. Hamas and others believe that sooner or later their paymasters will be powerful enough to help them destroy Israel. Israel believes time is on its side, even if it takes another 100 years they will demographically neutralise and effectively absorb the West Bank. Gaza, which they have no particular interest in, actually has a lucrative potential future as a city state; they hope that sooner or later its inhabitants will see that and start building for it. Israel believes, as Golda Meir put it, that this can happen, when the day come that they “love their children more than they hate us.”

The problem with their plan is there is no viable alternative to Abbas, who must be close to 90, by allowing Fatah to decay with no succession plan in place they risk hamas filling the west bank void too and I doubt Aloul is the man to stop it

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

The problem with their plan is there is no viable alternative to Abbas, who must be close to 90, by allowing Fatah to decay with no succession plan in place they risk hamas filling the west bank void too and I doubt Aloul is the man to stop it

There is a risk there but Israel isn’t shut out of the West Bank in the same way as it is in Gaza. I suspect they think they can ramp up their security presence there incrementally as required in order to keep a lid on it.

---------- Post added at 14:29 ---------- Previous post was at 14:25 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

“Demographically neutralise” is a magnificent euphemism for long term genocide.

A bit like calling people who behead babies and rape dead women ‘militants’ isn’t it.