Israel, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran … War

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

In fairness it wasn't Hamas that bombed them into oblivion, which is probably their most immediate concern. If you asked them today support for armed struggle against Israel has probably gone up - it's a far easier choice if you have nothing left and will be collectively punished anyway.

Equally if Hamas - terrorists - were so all encompassing in terms if the administration of Gaza prior to this why would anyone civilian speak out to put themselves and their families at risk for the performative pleasure of people in the west indifferent to their destruction?

Equally if Hamas - terrorists - were so all encompassing in terms if the administration of Gaza prior to this why would anyone civilian speak out to put themselves and their families at risk for the performative pleasure of people in the west indifferent to their destruction?

You’ve packed a whole load of gollox into that paragraph. In the previous paragraph, you mentioned the Gazan’s ‘immediate concern’. However, apart from the first three words, your 2nd paragraph ignores the trigger to Israeli retaliation: namely October 7th invasion and massacre in Israel.

The ‘west’ isn’t threatened with obliteration by Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran. The west doesn’t have to make the hard choices facing Israel in dealing with these terrorists, who hide behind the civilian population. If the people of Gaza are so stupid (or scared?) as not to rise against Hamas, there is very little choice that Israel has in dealing with the existential threat facing them.

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m not really sure why Palestinians should oppose tunnels being built - presumably these provide shelter in the event of Israeli air raids, and support wider logistical clandestine activities more generally while under military occupation.

I have a hard time believing you really believe any of this.

For a public air raid shelter network these were remarkably well hidden, and very tunelly-connecty-placey rather than simply being deep shelters as you might hope, for civilian infrastructure.

And the ‘Gaza under occupation’ trope? Save it for the Buchanan Street soap dodgers my friend, literally nobody else buys that line.

[Sephiroth]

Who would need tunnels if they were not under bombing threat? No Hamas type regime, no bombing. Jfman is somewhat blunkered by the virtual keffiyah he might be wearing.

[Carth]

Originally Posted by Hugh

At Versailles, no less...


<cough, cough> don't mention any previous treaties signed at Versailles... <cough, cough>

ooooh you little historian you

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Chris

I have a hard time believing you really believe any of this.

For a public air raid shelter network these were remarkably well hidden, and very tunelly-connecty-placey rather than simply being deep shelters as you might hope, for civilian infrastructure.

And the ‘Gaza under occupation’ trope? Save it for the Buchanan Street soap dodgers my friend, literally nobody else buys that line.

It’s literally considered occupied by the UN and the ICJ. Far from a trope it’s a widely recognised status by the international community. You of course know this, as I’m sure you know the pretence of the “international rules based order” relies upon believing it.

---------- Post added at 12:44 ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Who would need tunnels if they were not under bombing threat? No Hamas type regime, no bombing. Jfman is somewhat blunkered by the virtual keffiyah he might be wearing.

There’s no actual evidence that the absence of Hamas would save Palestinians. I appreciate it’s a nice virtual comfort blanket for those who fundamentally don’t believe Palestinians should have human rights to scream “BUT THEY DON’T CONDEMN KHAMAS” but Israel have been blowing up Arabs since it’s very existence and have committed themselves to displacing people on their expansionist project for much the same timeframe.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s literally considered occupied by the UN and the ICJ. Far from a trope it’s a widely recognised status by the international community. You of course know this, as I’m sure you know the pretence of the “international rules based order” relies upon believing it.

---------- Post added at 12:44 ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 ----------



There’s no actual evidence that the absence of Hamas would save Palestinians. I appreciate it’s a nice virtual comfort blanket for those who fundamentally don’t believe Palestinians should have human rights to scream “BUT THEY DON’T CONDEMN KHAMAS” but Israel have been blowing up Arabs since it’s very existence and have committed themselves to displacing people on their expansionist project for much the same timeframe.

It’s literally considered occupied by the UN and the ICJ. Far from a trope it’s a widely recognised status by the international community. You of course know this, as I’m sure you know the pretence of the “international rules based order” relies upon believing it.

“The international community”: That would be the one that is loaded with anti-colonialists who are after “reparations”, having trousered and spent the foreign aid they’ve been given for decades.

Then your “widely recognised” point: On day 1 of Israel’s existence, voted into creation by the UN in 1947, the Arab neighbours declared war on Israel and the indigenous Arabs took up arms and formed a resistance. Since then, those same Arab neighbours have made war on Israel several times and Al Fatah terrorised Israel’s civilian population. What you see happening now, is a consequence of anti-Jewish fervour by the ARab neighbours, two of which (Egypt and Jordan) have since made peace with Israel.

So now, following the massacre of October 7th, Israel is doing what it has to do to destroy Hamas.

How would you destroy Hamas, Jfman?

There’s no actual evidence that the absence of Hamas would save Palestinians. I appreciate it’s a nice virtual comfort blanket for those who fundamentally don’t believe Palestinians should have human rights to scream “BUT THEY DON’T CONDEMN KHAMAS” but Israel have been blowing up Arabs since it’s very existence and have committed themselves to displacing people on their expansionist project for much the same timeframe.

Of course there’s “no actual evidence” in terms of your argument. There is “actual evidence” that Hamas and Hezbollah are hell bent on terrorising Israel.

But you’ve widened the argument to Palestinians in general and that means The West Bank. There, Israel is shooting itself in the foot by its appalling behaviour at the behest of the Ultras. This will eventually come back to bite Israel, imo. But it has little to do with Iran’s proxy terrorist agenda.

If you are blind to that then I can only ascribe your attitude to unfortunate prejudice.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

“The international community”: That would be the one that is loaded with anti-colonialists who are after “reparations”, having trousered and spent the foreign aid they’ve been given for decades.

Then your “widely recognised” point: On day 1 of Israel’s existence, voted into creation by the UN in 1947, the Arab neighbours declared war on Israel and the indigenous Arabs took up arms and formed a resistance. Since then, those same Arab neighbours have made war on Israel several times and Al Fatah terrorised Israel’s civilian population. What you see happening now, is a consequence of anti-Jewish fervour by the ARab neighbours, two of which (Egypt and Jordan) have since made peace with Israel.

So now, following the massacre of October 7th, Israel is doing what it has to do to destroy Hamas.

How would you destroy Hamas, Jfman?



Of course there’s “no actual evidence” in terms of your argument. There is “actual evidence” that Hamas and Hezbollah are hell bent on terrorising Israel.

But you’ve widened the argument to Palestinians in general and that means The West Bank. There, Israel is shooting itself in the foot by its appalling behaviour at the behest of the Ultras. This will eventually come back to bite Israel, imo. But it has little to do with Iran’s proxy terrorist agenda.

If you are blind to that then I can only ascribe your attitude to unfortunate prejudice.

Israel is shooting itself in the foot everywhere. Destroying Hamas as a byproduct of the systematic destruction of Gaza isn’t (in my view) acceptable. It opens up the hypocrisy of the West, it’s weakened our authority around the globe and ultimately led to a series of events where we’ve strengthened Iran’s standing in the region.

The only hope, and it’s slim, is for someone better than Netanyahu to win the elections and seek a constructive dialogue with its neighbours. As ever, nobody is questioning the right to make a proportionate response to terrorist actions. Radicalising more people has inevitable outcomes, as do the pourous borders in Europe and the UK.

Of course, nobody will question whether the victims of future terrorist attacks condemned Israel enough or who they voted for. Those are preposterous notions we simply would not apply to anyone else, anywhere in the world.

[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Israel is shooting itself in the foot everywhere. Destroying Hamas as a byproduct of the systematic destruction of Gaza isn’t (in my view) acceptable. It opens up the hypocrisy of the West, it’s weakened our authority around the globe and ultimately led to a series of events where we’ve strengthened Iran’s standing in the region.

The only hope, and it’s slim, is for someone better than Netanyahu to win the elections and seek a constructive dialogue with its neighbours. As ever, nobody is questioning the right to make a proportionate response to terrorist actions. Radicalising more people has inevitable outcomes, as do the pourous borders in Europe and the UK.

Of course, nobody will question whether the victims of future terrorist attacks condemned Israel enough or who they voted for. Those are preposterous notions we simply would not apply to anyone else, anywhere in the world.

Israel is shooting itself in the foot everywhere. Destroying Hamas as a byproduct of the systematic destruction of Gaza isn’t (in my view) acceptable. It opens up the hypocrisy of the West, it’s weakened our authority around the globe and ultimately led to a series of events where we’ve strengthened Iran’s standing in the region.

For a start, and perhaps you were trapping me into saying this, the destruction of Gaza is a by-product of attempting to destroy Hamas. Sure, the collateral damage doesn't like being destroyed but it has cheered Hamas on; so what do those people expect?

I'll ask again: How should Israel go about destroying Hamas?

As for "Iran's standing in the region": It is a pity that you make your argument so shallowly. Iran is widely disliked in "the region". Sunni/Shia stuff not to mention the destabilising proxy warfare promoted by Iran. However, we probably both agree that Trump's war, having left the despicable Iranian regime in place, has left Iran still being feared by reasonable people.

"Hypocrisy of the west" has always been part of your mantra and is irrelevant to this topic unless the "west" only means the USA.

The only hope, and it’s slim, is for someone better than Netanyahu to win the elections and seek a constructive dialogue with its neighbours. As ever, nobody is questioning the right to make a proportionate response to terrorist actions. Radicalising more people has inevitable outcomes, as do the pourous borders in Europe and the UK.

We sort of align here. Netanyahu's departure, if replaced by a moderate might well (I hope) give a better deal to the West Bank. But the fight against Hamas/Hezbollah will remain a necessity. You have not acknowledged this, and I suspect this is a sign of irrational prejudice.

Of course, nobody will question whether the victims of future terrorist attacks condemned Israel enough or who they voted for. Those are preposterous notions we simply would not apply to anyone else, anywhere in the world.

Talk about tuning things upside down: If I've understood you right the victims of future terrorism should be blaming Israel; at least that's how it reads. If it should read otherwise, then it makes little sense of meaning and in any case "preposterous notions".

[Carth]

Isn't this why the war will never end?

Two parties, both firmly convinced they're right, no middle ground.



. . I don't suppose either of you has access to nuclear armaments, which may be a good thing

Originally Posted by jfman

It’s literally considered occupied by the UN and the ICJ. Far from a trope it’s a widely recognised status by the international community. You of course know this, as I’m sure you know the pretence of the “international rules based order” relies upon believing it.

It’s literally considered occupied by UNSCIIP, a UN committee. But then, another UN committee, the C-24, frames the Falklands as ‘colonized’, despite their never having had a native population prior to European discovery, and cites Argentina, a country that didn’t exist when English explorers first arrived at the islands in 1690, as a party to the dispute. So shall we stop pretending that committees of the UN are in any way immune from poliiticking? The entire UN exists to try to stop the world blowing itself up, at which singular purpose it has made at least some useful contribution. All else is theatre, for the benefit of lesser powers who see it as their only chance to give the middle finger to the greater ones.

The ICJ has never made a binding ruling on Israel and Gaza. It has issued a couple of advisory opinions - a distinction that usefully frames its operation in this area in similar terms to the way UN committees are given free rein to blow hard on whatever issues they like, because it gives developing nations and middle powers a sand pit to play in.