Hamas Israel War

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

You can't though, what's happening isn't a solution, it's a recipe to continue the saga further

Why? It’s Hamas and Hezbollah, encouraged and supported by Iran, that are the cause of this problem and getting in the way of a peaceful resolution.

What would you do? Nothing? We have to root out the cause of this conflict, and that starts with Hamas.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Why? It’s Hamas and Hezbollah, encouraged and supported by Iran, that are the cause of this problem and getting in the way of a peaceful resolution.

What would you do? Nothing? We have to root out the cause of this conflict, and that starts with Hamas.

I realise you have form for not reading the thread but I've already said what I'd do but considering it doesn't involve continuing the status quo or killing lots of poor people I'm not that surprised you missed it

[OLD BOY]

The only alternative solutions I’ve seen on here involve the continued persecution of the Jewish people.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The only alternative solutions I’ve seen on here involve the continued persecution of the Jewish people.

Source?

Please link to at least one specific post. If you are going to make the veiled implication that forum members are anti-Semitic then I’d also invite you to name them.

I have called out and evidenced your blatant disregard for Palestinian civilians. If you feel anyone has the same for Jews then please evidence it.

[OLD BOY]

Being soft on Hamas is a recipe for a continuation of this harassment against Israel.

PS - do your own research, that’s a good chap.

https://wapo.st/3tIczaV

Listen to the Gazans who are seeking a path away from Hamas...

...As this war progresses, the political and economic reconstruction of Gaza can’t be an afterthought for Israel; it’s a strategic necessity. Hamas laid a trap, betting that Israeli retaliation would entrench extremism all the more. If Israel treats all Gazans as enemies, it will fall into that trap and guarantee the ultimate failure of its mission. Fighting Hamas is a just war, but it must be accompanied by a clear plan, framed by the United States and friendly Arab countries working with a new generation of Palestinian leaders, to rebuild Gaza and invest in the West Bank. Otherwise, the war will create nothing but more rage in a barren land...

...The biggest mistake Israel could make in this conflict is not thinking carefully about “the day after.” That starts with governance. If Israel means to break Hamas’s control, what power will fill the vacuum? Israel doesn’t want to run Gaza, and its proxies will be rejected as collaborators. The best hope — the only hope, really — is that moderate Arab nations will work to create a new, post-Hamas structure that will represent a new Palestinian Authority that could govern the West Bank, as well...

..."How this war is prosecuted — and what’s left behind when it’s over — will shape the future,” says Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute who has lived in Gaza. He says that Israel, the United States and its Arab allies have to help the Palestinians find an “alternative political path.”

The worst days of this war are ahead. Talking about reconstruction might seem delusional when Israeli bombs are falling and their tanks are rolling forward. But if Israel’s leaders aren’t careful, they could once again win the war but lose the peace.

---------- Post added at 14:27 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The only alternative solutions I’ve seen on here involve the continued persecution of the Jewish people.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Being soft on Hamas is a recipe for a continuation of this harassment against Israel.

PS - do your own research, that’s a good chap.

Don't make accusations you can't back up with links or quotes - there's a good chap...

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Being soft on Hamas is a recipe for a continuation of this harassment against Israel.

PS - do your own research, that’s a good chap.

I can’t do the impossible by evidencing false claims fabricated out of thin air.

If you have nothing useful to add other than slurring forum members with accusations of anti-semitism then I suggest you go for a lie down and sleep it off leaving other forum members to continue with a contentious but civil discussion.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://wapo.st/3tIczaV



---------- Post added at 14:27 ---------- Previous post was at 14:26 ----------




Don't make accusations you can't back up with links or quotes - there's a good chap...

That is not even a possibility while Hamas is still in charge in Gaza. It’s certainly a solution, but Hamas need to be destroyed first. So I stand by the point I made.

---------- Post added at 14:34 ---------- Previous post was at 14:31 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

I can’t do the impossible by evidencing false claims fabricated out of thin air.

If you have nothing useful to add other than slurring forum members with accusations of anti-semitism then I suggest you go for a lie down and sleep it off leaving other forum members to continue with a contentious but civil discussion.

I suggest you stop your own personal attacks and keep to the subject. The leaders of both main parties agree with my view on this, although I cannot say the same about Corbyn. His sympathy for terrorist groups is well documented.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

That is not even a possibility while Hamas is still in charge in Gaza. It’s certainly a solution, but Hamas need to be destroyed first. So I stand by the point I made.

Agreeing with an outcome is not the same thing as agreeing with a means. The means you have proposed involves wholesale, deliberate commission of war crimes and teeters dangerously close to genocide.

The phrase ‘suck it up’ will deservedly haunt you on this forum for quite some time.

I suggest you stop your own personal attacks and keep to the subject. The leaders of both main parties agree with my view on this, although I cannot say the same about Corbyn. His sympathy for terrorist groups is well documented.

Neither Starmer nor Sunak have articulated support for Israeli action in Gaza in anything like the terms you have used.

Israel is entitled to defend itself and defence legitimately involves military action on the territory from which it was attacked. That does not give Israel carte blanche to commit wholesale destruction without due regard for the civilian population.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

The only alternative solutions I’ve seen on here involve the continued persecution of the Jewish people.

A cop out to cover for your own ignorance is a reoccurring theme throughout the thread, I'd suggest looking harder than resorting to that

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

That is not even a possibility while Hamas is still in charge in Gaza. It’s certainly a solution, but Hamas need to be destroyed first. So I stand by the point I made.

---------- Post added at 14:34 ---------- Previous post was at 14:31 ----------



I suggest you stop your own personal attacks and keep to the subject. The leaders of both main parties agree with my view on this, although I cannot say the same about Corbyn. His sympathy for terrorist groups is well documented.

From your recent posts (within the last 24 hours)

Which begs the question. whose side are you on?

Why are you supporting the Hamas narrative? Do you really think that with a beer in a pub with these nice guys, you can win an argument over a few pints?

You really are delusional if you believe that we can ever come to an agreement with these monsters.

What pathetic responses you do make, jfman

John 8:7

---------- Post added at 15:41 ---------- Previous post was at 14:57 ----------

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1...51f322ab7ae698

At a peace summit in Cairo, James Cleverly said the international community must work together to “prevent the conflict from engulfing” the Middle East. He said: “We are all seeing on social media and in our communities how divisive and polarising the current situation has become.

“We have a duty to work together to prevent instability from engulfing the region and claiming yet more lives. We must work together to prevent the tragic situation in Gaza from becoming a regional conflict. That is exactly what Hamas want. We must ensure Hamas does not win. Rather, we must ensure that peaceful coexistence wins.”...

..."Despite the incredibly difficult circumstances I have called for discipline and professionalism and restraint from the Israeli military ... I still believe in the power of diplomacy and still believe we can work together to secure a future where Israelis and Palestinians live in peace.”

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by ianch99

Prove it

It’s clear what side you’ve picked, it’s evident in the tone of your posts.

Gaza is the worlds largest prison camp.

Only actions against Israel seem to have a mandate for condemnation.

you would clearly condemn the state terrorism that Israel is inflecting on the civilians in Gaza

The people who claim that children killed by Israeli bombs are not victims of terrorism in the same way that the Israeli's killed by the Hamas terrorists are the real problem here.

If Israel is held to account in the same way that Hamas, Iran, etc. are then this whole narrative would be radically different.

It looks more likely that a heavier missile was fired by Palestinian Islamic Jihad and either was intercepted over the hospital area or just failed in flight and landed on the hospital. I guess more details will come out in time. However, this does not absolve Israel of culpability: these 1000's of people would not have been in that hospital if the IDF was not bombing their homes.

You can clearly see from all of your posts, not just the ones highlighted, where your sympathies are. That’s 100% fine. But don’t come here complaining about blindly picking sides when it’s evident where your biases are.

---------- Post added at 16:26 ---------- Previous post was at 16:24 ----------

Originally Posted by Sephiroth

Those who pay lip service about Hamas' atrocities but then shift the blame onto Israel or enthusiastically criticise Israel for its behaviour.

It’s blatantly obvious

---------- Post added at 16:28 ---------- Previous post was at 16:26 ----------

Originally Posted by ianch99

No one is doing this and you know it.

---------- Post added at 16:29 ---------- Previous post was at 16:28 ----------

Originally Posted by jfman

International law is clear on the right of people in occupied territories to take up arms against their occupier.

Gaza wasn’t occupied.

[jfman]

It’s a disputed point just now but it won’t be when Israel have boots on the ground.

[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Pierre

It’s clear what side you’ve picked, it’s evident in the tone of your posts.

<yawn>

Of course, you cherry pick and ignore the posts where I unequivocally condemn Hamas as terrorists and that they should be eradicated. This is to be expected from one who is not open to debate and information illuminating both side of the conflict.

You stick with your "Israel good, Arabs bad" narrative if it comforts you.

Meanwhile, back in the real world ...

---------- Post added at 17:51 ---------- Previous post was at 17:32 ----------

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Why? It’s Hamas and Hezbollah, encouraged and supported by Iran, that are the cause of this problem and getting in the way of a peaceful resolution

This is such an uninformed post. Both sides are obstacles to a peaceful two state resolution:

- the Hamas death cult, together with it's Islamist peers (Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, etc.) all demand the end of the Jewish nation and it's citizens. I think that is pretty clear.

- what is not that well known, mainly due to the loud voices screaming "Anti-Semitism!" when Israel is criticised, is that the governing party Likud has, as part of its charter, a rejection of an Arab state in the area:

Israel’s policy on statehood merits the same scrutiny as Hamas gets

Likud’s 1977 founding document reveals its position that:

… between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

Of course, this was written in 1977 – but critics of Hamas don’t afford it this concession vis-a-vis its 1988 charter. While this Likud statement doesn’t possess the racist sentiments of the Hamas charter, the practical implications denying the possibility of two states co-existing are more or less the same.

Lest we think that the Likud’s 1977 position is anachronistic, its 1999 electoral platform reiterates that:

The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel.

Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel. The government will flatly reject Palestinian proposals to divide Jerusalem.

The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.

This platform has never been rescinded. Current Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu was also exposed in a 2001 video bragging that he “stopped the Oslo Accords” after receiving US guarantees that Israel would not be required to withdraw from “specified military locations” – chosen by himself, including the whole of the Jordan Valley/eastern border of the West Bank – in exchange for signing the 1997 Hebron Agreement.

And then wasn’t it the case that the Likud split over Sharon’s proposal to withdraw from the Gaza Strip in 2005? Didn’t Sharon form a new “centrist” party, Kadima, committed to “disengagement” (that is, the unilateral demarcation of permanent borders) with Palestinians? However, far from being a move towards a just peace, Dov Weiglass, then a senior aide to Sharon, candidly explained that:

The disengagement is actually formaldehyde. It supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians. And when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda.

- although this was 2014:

The Israeli public in light of a recent poll showing that 74% of Israelis are opposed to the creation of a Palestinian state.

The polling here is very muddy but it clearly shows the a sizeable minority of Israelis support Likud's hard line policies esp. the illegal colonisation of the West Bank.

[jfman]

Pierre doesn’t quite have an Israel good/Arabs bad position - his point mainly relates to non-state actors use of force and that it’s not justified. I’m sure he sincerely holds that position anywhere in the world.