Politics in General

[Gavin Chipper]

Israel committing war crimes becomes far easier for them to do when they think they have the support of the "international community". So when the Tories and Keir Starmer endorse what they are doing, it's not just harmless words coming out of their mouths. It's a disgrace.

It's worth watching some of Owen Jones's videos on the subject.

[Marc Meakin]

Israel committing war crimes becomes far easier for them to do when they think they have the support of the "international community". So when the Tories and Keir Starmer endorse what they are doing, it's not just harmless words coming out of their mouths. It's a disgrace.

It's worth watching some of Owen Jones's videos on the subject.

Are you Owen Jones publicist?

This I worth a read though

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/10/1 ... -to-a-jew/

[Gavin Chipper]

Are you Owen Jones publicist?

No, but I think he's said some sensible stuff on the matter. But the leader of the SNP, Humza Yousaf, has condemned Israel is this too, and Novara media have made some videos on it.

This I worth a read though

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/10/1 ... -to-a-jew/

It isn't worth a read. It doesn't convey what happened in the discussion at all, and it's just gutter journalism.

[Marc Meakin]

I've seen some propaganda media adverts on Youtube alongside ads for insurance and Sainsburys advocating killing what is the world coming to.
Note I've avoided saying who

[Marc Meakin]

Are you Owen Jones publicist?

No, but I think he's said some sensible stuff on the matter. But the leader of the SNP, Humza Yousaf, has condemned Israel is this too, and Novara media have made some videos on it.
Im not surprised Hamza Yousaf has come out in support.
Maybe Corbin too

This I worth a read though

https://www.spiked-online.com/2023/10/1 ... -to-a-jew/

It isn't worth a read. It doesn't convey what happened in the discussion at all, and it's just gutter journalism.

I'm sure Rachel Riley has had plenty to say but I don't do twatter

[Mark James]

I've seen some propaganda media adverts on Youtube alongside ads for insurance and Sainsburys advocating killing what is the world coming to.
Note I've avoided saying who

It was Israel wasn't it.

[Marc Meakin]

This is disappointing
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-67110193

[Marc Meakin]

I've seen some propaganda media adverts on Youtube alongside ads for insurance and Sainsburys advocating killing what is the world coming to.
Note I've avoided saying who

It was Israel wasn't it.

Ironically it was a Rachel Riley video I was watching when it came up

[Gavin Chipper]

Marc (and anyone else), I just want to make it clear why I have posted what I have posted on this subject. The point is that Hamas's attack on Israel has been pretty much universally condemned as an appalling terrorist attack (except by a few fringe lunatics), so merely repeating this is not what I would consider an interesting topic that I would use this thread for. Israel's attacks are more controversial, with some people seemingly turning a blind eye to, or even endorsing, war crimes. What happens next is important, and what happens next is most likely to come from Israel and the Netanyahu regime. This is why it becomes a discussion topic.

[Marc Meakin]

If we are talking about political intrigue on the timing of the Hamas Terrorism (note I haven't used the BBCs "America considers a terrorist organisation" stance) it was suggested that Saudi Arabia and Israel were having "secret" talks.

https://news.un.org/en/story/2023/09/1141302

Israel has a right to defend it's territory and should retaliate but of course innocents will suffer.
You can't wage a war with Terrorists as Britain only knows too well.
Hamas wants a global conflict and I can see this escalating into Armageddon in a few years

As for the reprehensible Owen Jones words fail me.

[Gavin Chipper]

What in particular about Owen Jones?

[Marc Meakin]

What in particular about Owen Jones?

I dont like the cut of his jib.
Like Piers Morgan whose politics are probably diametrically opposite of his, he strikes me as an arrogant, self serving, prick.
About the only thing I agree with him on is that Kier Stamer will win the next election.

The biggest surprise is that a member of the gay community is defending Hamas who are not exactly sympathetic to homosexuality

[Gavin Chipper]

He's not defending Hamas.

[Elliott Mellor]

What in particular about Owen Jones?

I dont like the cut of his jib.
Like Piers Morgan whose politics are probably diametrically opposite of his, he strikes me as an arrogant, self serving, prick.
About the only thing I agree with him on is that Kier Stamer will win the next election.

The biggest surprise is that a member of the gay community is defending Hamas who are not exactly sympathetic to homosexuality

He's not defending Hamas in any way at all, as far as I can see. He's trying to make the point that collective punishment of innocent civilians is against international law, and it's sickening how both Israelis and Palestinians are being murdered en masse. It shouldn't be controversial to be opposed to innocent civilian massacre.

The ongoing conflict is likely to generate an awful lot of hate and negativity directed at mainly innocent people. This is only made worse by gutter press articles like the one you linked above.

To say things like "even ISIS had standards" is not just completely wrong, it's hugely disrespectful to all those who suffered at their hands.

[Marc Meakin]

I was only responding to accusations of Israel being considered as terrorists.
Hamas are extreme anti zionists do you can't negotiate with them as they are not asking for a peaceful settlement they are not representing Palestinians.
The innocent children killed yesterday could easily have been killed by Hamas rockets.
The BBC fact checked the validity of the attack being real but could not ascertain where the missiles came from..
Of course I don't want any innocent casualties
My Beef with Owen Jones is he was having a discussion with an MP who was visibly upset as she had only recently visit the Kibbutz that was ritually slaughtered with unspeakable terror.
Jones was giving counter opinions far too soon after the event.
It was too soon and not really the platform to have this discussion at that time.

Also Jones is a mate of Jeremy Corbin and is a left wing supporter and left wing labour remains unelectable

[Mark James]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years ... our-faces/

The current state of Israel is a terrorist organisation as much as Hamas is.

They are committing war crimes. It is not antisemitic to point this out.

Left wing labour would have been elected if it had not been sabotaged by further right elements in its own party.

[Marc Meakin]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years ... our-faces/

The current state of Israel is a terrorist organisation as much as Hamas is.

They are committing war crimes. It is not antisemitic to point this out.

Left wing labour would have been elected if it had not been sabotaged by further right elements in its own party.

Committing War crimes and being terrorists is not the same thing
After the blitz great Britain flattened several cities in retaliation, that wasn't terrorism that was retaliation.
Luckily Great Britain has been much more tolerant in recent years after all they didn't flatten Dublin after the Terrorism committed by the IRA on British soil..

I do feel sorry for Palestinians they were displaced because the State of Israel was created by the Western governments not only after the Holocaust but because having a western sympathetic nation in the middle East was favourable politically.

[Fiona T]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years ... our-faces/

The current state of Israel is a terrorist organisation as much as Hamas is.

They are committing war crimes. It is not antisemitic to point this out.

Left wing labour would have been elected if it had not been sabotaged by further right elements in its own party.

Committing War crimes and being terrorists is not the same thing
After the blitz great Britain flattened several cities in retaliation, that wasn't terrorism that was retaliation.
Luckily Great Britain has been much more tolerant in recent years after all they didn't flatten Dublin after the Terrorism committed by the IRA on British soil..

I do feel sorry for Palestinians they were displaced because the State of Israel was created by the Western governments not only after the Holocaust but because having a western sympathetic nation in the middle East was favourable politically.

The whole situation is horrific. The Hamas attacks were brutally violent and truly horrific and completely unjustifiable, but the after effect on the people of Gaza is likely to be far wider reaching. Hamas don't care about them and are happy to use them in whatever way they can to further their aims. There was a young woman on the news https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-mid ... t-67101434 - her story is harrowing, but the contrast between the care she has in a well-equipped hospital, and the position that injured Gazaens are in is stark. Blockading Gaza to deprive the population of the basic essentials for life is inhumane - these are human lives who largely have no say or control over where they live. I'm pretty ignorant about the history of it all, but it does seem like there has been a massive imbalance of power for a long time - those are exactly the conditions that foster an explosion in extremist ideologies.

[Gavin Chipper]

My Beef with Owen Jones is he was having a discussion with an MP who was visibly upset as she had only recently visit the Kibbutz that was ritually slaughtered with unspeakable terror.
Jones was giving counter opinions far too soon after the event.
It was too soon and not really the platform to have this discussion at that time.

I think you're missing the point here. It's not just that historically more Palestinians have died than Israelis. It's that right now, Israel's actions matter and it is a very pressing concern that should be discussed by politicians and on political programmes.

[Marc Meakin]

Yes it should be debated but neccessarily by someone with no skin in the game.
I think, for example news night with the foreign secretary, the shadow ( incumbant) foreign secretary
A prominant Jew (Miriam Margoles has attacked Israel before for atrocities) and a pro Palestinian, preferably a historian.

[Mark James]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years ... our-faces/

The current state of Israel is a terrorist organisation as much as Hamas is.

They are committing war crimes. It is not antisemitic to point this out.

Left wing labour would have been elected if it had not been sabotaged by further right elements in its own party.

Committing War crimes and being terrorists is not the same thing
After the blitz great Britain flattened several cities in retaliation, that wasn't terrorism that was retaliation.
Luckily Great Britain has been much more tolerant in recent years after all they didn't flatten Dublin after the Terrorism committed by the IRA on British soil..

What the British Empire did to Ireland and most of the world was terrorism. If that's the road you want to go down then the IRA were just retaliating against an invading force of colonialist scumbags.

[Marc Meakin]

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years ... our-faces/

The current state of Israel is a terrorist organisation as much as Hamas is.

They are committing war crimes. It is not antisemitic to point this out.

Left wing labour would have been elected if it had not been sabotaged by further right elements in its own party.

Committing War crimes and being terrorists is not the same thing
After the blitz great Britain flattened several cities in retaliation, that wasn't terrorism that was retaliation.
Luckily Great Britain has been much more tolerant in recent years after all they didn't flatten Dublin after the Terrorism committed by the IRA on British soil..

What the British Empire did to Ireland and most of the world was terrorism. If that's the road you want to go down then the IRA were just retaliating against an invading force of colonialist scumbags.

Yeah targeting innocent women children and horses.
The one occasion they went for legitimate target (Thatcher) they fucked that up.
I would prefer you said the British Empire raped and pillaged the nations they 'conquered' much like the Vikings did in England and The Americans did to the Indigenous people.
Have never been a fan of empires generally.
Its all about bullying smaller nations into submission.
Its not the common man that benefits from it neither.
The Middle East conflict is not about empires it's a complicated situation at best.
I read the Looming Tower recently which gives a good basis of the duplicity of the Americans and Saudi Arabia and it's relationship with Israel but Hamas and Hizballah are not going to sit around any negotiating table like the political arm of Terrorist groups in Northern Ireland could.
I mean Hamas have all these hostages and don't seem interested in using these hostages as a means to help the Palestinians they supposedly represent.

[Marc Meakin]

What in particular about Owen Jones?

I dont like the cut of his jib.
Like Piers Morgan whose politics are probably diametrically opposite of his, he strikes me as an arrogant, self serving, prick.
About the only thing I agree with him on is that Kier Stamer will win the next election.

The biggest surprise is that a member of the gay community is defending Hamas who are not exactly sympathetic to homosexuality

I see Owen Jones has addressed the dichotomy of defending a nation that has banned homosexuality

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics ... ore-target

[Gavin Chipper]

Rishi Sunak has visited Israel and is cosying up to the war criminal.

[Marc Meakin]

Rishi Sunak has visited Israel and is cosying up to the war criminal.

I didnt know Tony Blair was there

[Marc Meakin]

If you want a largely unbiased insight into the middle East crisis from an historical position then this is worth watching
https://youtu.be/xAs5EOBUDcs?si=iIgNrPdmAkf-mAG4

[Gavin Chipper]

Yeah so basically Israel have taken this terrorist attack as a green light to indiscriminately bomb Palestinian civilians, and the Tories, Starmer etc. are just saying "Israel has an absolute right to defend itself". What they are doing has nothing to do with defence. It's outrageous.

Plus if the Netanyahu regime can use the excuse of everything Hamas has done to justify killing civilians, Hamas could justify their terrorist attack on the basis of the Netanyahu regime and everything it has done. But, to be clear, neither are justified.

[Marc Meakin]

Yeah so basically Israel have taken this terrorist attack as a green light to indiscriminately bomb Palestinian civilians, and the Tories, Starmer etc. are just saying "Israel has an absolute right to defend itself". What they are doing has nothing to do with defence. It's outrageous.

Plus if the Netanyahu regime can use the excuse of everything Hamas has done to justify killing civilians, Hamas could justify their terrorist attack on the basis of the Netanyahu regime and everything it has done. But, to be clear, neither are justified.

Israel have always used defending it's borders as justification for there actions.
In 1967 when Egypt attacked Israel it retaliated and took Gaza and The Golan Heights in order to protect the state of Israel.
The Palestinians were the pawns in this and have remained so, but Hamas are not working for Palestine but against Israel.
I actually watched Question Time yesterday (recorded) and the chap from Bradford in the audience made the most sense about Iran funding Hamas to destabilise the middle East.
Iran are not even Arabs and they have been instrumental in conflicts in Syria, The Lebanon and other Middle East conflicts.
He also mentioned the timing, 50 years after the Yom Kippur War. There was going to be a historic peace accord with Saudi Arabia and I think Iran and Hamas didn't want that.

[Gavin Chipper]

With James Cleverly replacing Suella Braverman as home secretary, it's more evidence that the Tories avoid white home secretaries to avoid accusations of racism when they spout the bile that they spout.

[Marc Meakin]

With James Cleverly replacing Suella Braverman as home secretary, it's more evidence that the Tories avoid white home secretaries to avoid accusations of racism when they spout the bile that they spout.

No mention of the slimeball David Cameron returning to front line politics.
Mind you being the 4th worst Tory Prime minister of the last 10 years is some accolade

[Gavin Chipper]

With James Cleverly replacing Suella Braverman as home secretary, it's more evidence that the Tories avoid white home secretaries to avoid accusations of racism when they spout the bile that they spout.

No mention of the slimeball David Cameron returning to front line politics.
Mind you being the 4th worst Tory Prime minister of the last 10 years is some accolade

I was kind of speechless on the David Cameron thing. But I hear they've ordered in a supply of dead pigs.

[Gavin Chipper]

OK, so back to David Cameron. Rishi Sunak has literally just taken some guy off the street to be his foreign secretary. He is not an MP and was not in the House of Lords. It could have been you. It could have been me. It could have been Brian Cox (either of them). But it just happened to be David Cameron who won the tie-break of most dead pigs he's put his penis in.

[Fiona T]

OK, so back to David Cameron. Rishi Sunak has literally just taken some guy off the street to be his foreign secretary. He is not an MP and was not in the House of Lords. It could have been you. It could have been me. It could have been Brian Cox (either of them). But it just happened to be David Cameron who won the tie-break of most dead pigs he's put his penis in.

I mean I'm no fan of the guy but compared to some of the alternatives he seems relatively sane. And let's face it, who here can honestly say they haven't stuck their dick somewhere they shouldn't have?

[Elliott Mellor]

OK, so back to David Cameron. Rishi Sunak has literally just taken some guy off the street to be his foreign secretary. He is not an MP and was not in the House of Lords. It could have been you. It could have been me. It could have been Brian Cox (either of them). But it just happened to be David Cameron who won the tie-break of most dead pigs he's put his penis in.

I mean I'm no fan of the guy but compared to some of the alternatives he seems relatively sane. And let's face it, who here can honestly say they haven't stuck their dick somewhere they shouldn't have?

I think the difference is, even the Countdowners who are most starved of action generally don't turn to different species.

[Marc Meakin]

OK, so back to David Cameron. Rishi Sunak has literally just taken some guy off the street to be his foreign secretary. He is not an MP and was not in the House of Lords. It could have been you. It could have been me. It could have been Brian Cox (either of them). But it just happened to be David Cameron who won the tie-break of most dead pigs he's put his penis in.

I mean I'm no fan of the guy but compared to some of the alternatives he seems relatively sane. And let's face it, who here can honestly say they haven't stuck their dick somewhere they shouldn't have?

The pig I can forgive but getting into bed with with the fib dems no.

[Gavin Chipper]

I think it's more the Lib Dems getting into bed with the Tories isn't it? I don't blame the Tories for that.

[Marc Meakin]

True, Clegg really sold his soul and his principles.
He should have picked Gordon Brown

[Ian Volante]

True, Clegg really sold his soul and his principles.
He should have picked Gordon Brown

As far as I'm aware, Brown hadn't even considered the possibility of a coalition, and effectively dismissed the possibility without consideration. Utterly stupid. The Lib Dems I think got blinded by the lure of power, and paid dearly for it, as did we all.

[Gavin Chipper]

This is a good speech about the Palestine/Israel situation.

[Gavin Chipper]

Here is Krishnan Guru-Murthy interviewing the Israeli ambassador to the UK.

Here is Krishnan Guru-Murthy interviewing the Palestinian ambassador to the UK.

Compare, contrast, and draw your own conclusions.

[Tal Lessner]

Gavin, you seem to ignore a couple of important facts here.

The Hamas attack on 7th October was not just a terrorist operation, it was a coordinated attack, by thousands of infantry soldiers, and artillery, for the purpose of invading another country and executing as many (over a 1,000) civilians as possible. Not only executing, but torturing, burning, mutilating bodies, not discriminating between adults, children, babies or elders. And they filmed themselves doing it!
This was done by Hamas who governs Gaza. Not some small terrorist organization, but the government. With trained soldiers and specific goals.
That's an act that can only mean an outright declaration of war.
No country in the world will tolerate such an attack and not go to war to eliminate that said government who conducted such an attack.

The next thing you seem to ignore, is the fact that Hamas is the one putting civilians in the front. Its weapons are hidden in tunnels under buildings, it even prevented civilians evacuating the war zone after being warned of an imminent attack! The government that started the war, forces its own civilians to remain in the line of fire! The same government that's hiding weapons and tunnel entries inside its hospitals, schools and residential buildings!

So how is a country supposed to conduct a war against an army that uses its own civilians as human shields?

Now about the west bank, the occupation, the war crimes, settlements, apartheid - I'm probably a much bigger critic of that than you are. I even voted several time for Arab parties in the elections for that reason. But all that, doesn't change the fact that what Hamas did on 7th October is unprecedented, and Israel has all the justification to go on a full scale war against Hamas, until Hamas lays down its weapons and gets the fuck out of Gaza.

[Gavin Chipper]

First of all, Hamas likely exists in the form it does because of the oppression by Israel on the Palestinians for decades. It breeds terrorism. Also far more Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces over the decades than vice versa. Does it make such a difference that Hamas killed a lot of Israeli civilians in one go rather than far more but spread out over a longer period of time? The Israeli government is a terrorist organisation just as Hamas is. So if you're arguing that it's acceptable for Israel to kill over 10,000 Palestinians in response to what Hamas did, you could just as well argue that what Hamas did was acceptable as a response to decades of Israeli oppression. I would argue neither are acceptable of course.

It is also worth noting that some of the specific claims about the Hamas terrorist attack (including beheading babies) are unsubstantiated. While this doesn't make them in any way acceptable, it does cast doubt on this supposed massive difference between the two terrorist organisations involved here.

Israel's attacks have killed about 10 times as many people as Hamas's initial attack. Israel's response has been in no way proportionate or reasonable. As you say, this was a co-ordinated attack by Hamas, and it was probably the best they had. So there's no way more lives have been saved in the long run by killing 10 times as many Palestinians. Hamas don't have that capability. Sure, Israel want to destroy Hamas and its capabilities. But what if there was a terrorist group embedded within their own country? Would Israel kill 10,000 of their own citizens to wipe them out? No. Perhaps they don't value Palestinian lives particularly highly?

This thing about human shields - it does not explain or justify the widespread bombing of Gaza that we've seen. Unless you simply mean that by simply existing in Gaza at the same time as other people in Gaza, Hamas are using people as human shields.

[Marc Meakin]

First of all, Hamas likely exists in the form it does because of the oppression by Israel on the Palestinians for decades. It breeds terrorism. Also far more Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces over the decades than vice versa. Does it make such a difference that Hamas killed a lot of Israeli civilians in one go rather than far more but spread out over a longer period of time? The Israeli government is a terrorist organisation just as Hamas is. So if you're arguing that it's acceptable for Israel to kill over 10,000 Palestinians in response to what Hamas did, you could just as well argue that what Hamas did was acceptable as a response to decades of Israeli oppression. I would argue neither are acceptable of course.

It is also worth noting that some of the specific claims about the Hamas terrorist attack (including beheading babies) are unsubstantiated. While this doesn't make them in any way acceptable, it does cast doubt on this supposed massive difference between the two terrorist organisations involved here.

Israel's attacks have killed about 10 times as many people as Hamas's initial attack. Israel's response has been in no way proportionate or reasonable. As you say, this was a co-ordinated attack by Hamas, and it was probably the best they had. So there's no way more lives have been saved in the long run by killing 10 times as many Palestinians. Hamas don't have that capability. Sure, Israel want to destroy Hamas and its capabilities. But what if there was a terrorist group embedded within their own country? Would Israel kill 10,000 of their own citizens to wipe them out? No. Perhaps they don't value Palestinian lives particularly highly?

This thing about human shields - it does not explain or justify the widespread bombing of Gaza that we've seen. Unless you simply mean that by simply existing in Gaza at the same time as other people in Gaza, Hamas are using people as human shields.

Shouldn't this be in the unpopular opinion thread

[Gavin Chipper]

It's not that unpopular. I do recommend you watch those videos with the ambassadors by the way. They are quite long but I think worth the time. Or just start watching them and see how you find them. The differences between them are clear quite early on.

It's also generally accepted that the Israeli authorities are committing war crimes, and that they're serial liars.

[Gavin Chipper]

On a different subject, and a little bit late, I'm glad the COVID enquiry has shown that Boris Johnson is actually thick af.

[Marc Meakin]

It's not that unpopular. I do recommend you watch those videos with the ambassadors by the way. They are quite long but I think worth the time. Or just start watching them and see how you find them. The differences between them are clear quite early on.

It's also generally accepted that the Israeli authorities are committing war crimes, and that they're serial liars.

War Crimes is a broad area for discussion.
Tony B Liar, Both Bushes, Thatcher even ( remember The General Belgrano) Kissinger and others are guilty of this.

I am interested if the Palestinian people welcome Hamas representing them in the same way Yaser Arafat did.
There probably is a peaceful solution somewhere.
Unfortunately Hamas hate Jews so much that they would chooses the anihilation of every Jew as the only solution

[Tal Lessner]

It is also worth noting that some of the specific claims about the Hamas terrorist attack (including beheading babies) are unsubstantiated. While this doesn't make them in any way acceptable, it does cast doubt on this supposed massive difference between the two terrorist organisations involved here.

Which doubt does it cast? It was obvious from the beginning that the 40 beheaded babies story was fake, from a fake news far right American reporter. So what? There were children in the 1000+ executed civilians. There were many cases of rapes, with the more testimonies and evidence coming in the more is known as how widespread it was. There were hundreds of burnt and decapitated bodies. So that's what you've got? one fake article? What doubt is exactly cast here?
1000+ civilians executed - no doubt
widespread rape - no doubt
widespread torture - no doubt
mutilation of bodies - no doubt

But what if there was a terrorist group embedded within their own country? Would Israel kill 10,000 of their own citizens to wipe them out? No. Perhaps they don't value Palestinian lives particularly highly?

What the fuck did I just read here? Hamas is the government of Gaza. Not just a terrorist group embedded in. It was attack by the government and army of a foreign entity.

This thing about human shields - it does not explain or justify the widespread bombing of Gaza that we've seen. Unless you simply mean that by simply existing in Gaza at the same time as other people in Gaza, Hamas are using people as human shields.

They don't simply exist in Gaza at the same time as the people of Gaza. I meant that they use civilian structures as their military bases. How do you fight an army that hides its weaponry in hospitals and schools? Who physically prevents its civilians from evacuating an area after being warned that it'll be attacked the following day.
Hamas and the people of Gaza don't just exist at the same place at the same time. But the people of Gaza are used as human shields.

[Gavin Chipper]

It is also worth noting that some of the specific claims about the Hamas terrorist attack (including beheading babies) are unsubstantiated. While this doesn't make them in any way acceptable, it does cast doubt on this supposed massive difference between the two terrorist organisations involved here.

Which doubt does it cast? It was obvious from the beginning that the 40 beheaded babies story was fake, from a fake news far right American reporter. So what? There were children in the 1000+ executed civilians. There were many cases of rapes, with the more testimonies and evidence coming in the more is known as how widespread it was. There were hundreds of burnt and decapitated bodies. So that's what you've got? one fake article? What doubt is exactly cast here?
1000+ civilians executed - no doubt
widespread rape - no doubt
widespread torture - no doubt
mutilation of bodies - no doubt

The beheaded babies story was one of the headline things that people would keep bringing up, including Marc on this forum. The doubt is about the massive difference between Hamas and the Israeli authorities, and there have been multiple stories of Israel abusing, and even raping Palestinian prisoners, for example. This is not about defending Hamas.

But what if there was a terrorist group embedded within their own country? Would Israel kill 10,000 of their own citizens to wipe them out? No. Perhaps they don't value Palestinian lives particularly highly?

What the fuck did I just read here? Hamas is the government of Gaza. Not just a terrorist group embedded in. It was attack by the government and army of a foreign entity.

It was a hypothetical example - would Israel take such an approach to eliminate terrorists if they were embedded within their own population and try to justify it?

This thing about human shields - it does not explain or justify the widespread bombing of Gaza that we've seen. Unless you simply mean that by simply existing in Gaza at the same time as other people in Gaza, Hamas are using people as human shields.

They don't simply exist in Gaza at the same time as the people of Gaza. I meant that they use civilian structures as their military bases. How do you fight an army that hides its weaponry in hospitals and schools? Who physically prevents its civilians from evacuating an area after being warned that it'll be attacked the following day.
Hamas and the people of Gaza don't just exist at the same place at the same time. But the people of Gaza are used as human shields.

OK, but also Israel have made some claims about this that have turned out to be false, including the calendar they claimed was a list of Hamas terrorists. They have also been very selective about what journalists are allowed to see, so we have to take a lot of what they say on trust...

The bottom line is that regardless of these specifics, it is generally accepted that Israel is committing war crimes in responding in the way they are. Whether they are exactly as bad as Hamas is a side issue. Most people would regard Hamas as a terrorist organisation, and people do not on the whole defend them. The reason it is important to criticise what Israel are doing is that large numbers of people think they are behaving in a perfectly reasonable way. This forum is irrelevant obviously, but world leaders, journalists etc. need to speak out more.

[Tal Lessner]

Can't delete?

[Tal Lessner]

The beheaded babies story was one of the headline things that people would keep bringing up, including Marc on this forum. The doubt is about the massive difference between Hamas and the Israeli authorities, and there have been multiple stories of Israel abusing, and even raping Palestinian prisoners, for example. This is not about defending Hamas.

We're talking facts here. What difference between Hamas and the Israeli authorities is it? The number of executed people on 07.10? The fact there was widespread rape and torture? What difference exactly? Which of it is not considered 100% fact?

Also, what stories about raping Palestinian prisoners?

It was a hypothetical example - would Israel take such an approach to eliminate terrorists if they were embedded within their own population and try to justify it?

I get that it was hypothetical, but once again, you seem to ignore the fact that Hamas is not a terrorist organisation embedded within the population, but is, the government & army! So this is still a ridiculous comparison.

OK, but also Israel have made some claims about this that have turned out to be false, including the calendar they claimed was a list of Hamas terrorists. They have also been very selective about what journalists are allowed to see, so we have to take a lot of what they say on trust...

The bottom line is that regardless of these specifics, it is generally accepted that Israel is committing war crimes in responding in the way they are. Whether they are exactly as bad as Hamas is a side issue. Most people would regard Hamas as a terrorist organisation, and people do not on the whole defend them. The reason it is important to criticise what Israel are doing is that large numbers of people think they are behaving in a perfectly reasonable way. This forum is irrelevant obviously, but world leaders, journalists etc. need to speak out more.

Israeli occupation of the west bank is undoubtedly a war crime. From trigger happy soldiers to settler's violence (and in fact, the mere existence of settlements is a war crime) and apartheid regime.
But this is not the issue here, the issue here is the way the war in Gaza is conducted. And I would like to know what sort of war crimes Israel is committing there. Again, this is a war, and the army that started this war is hiding. How should Israel fight there?
Or should Israel just leave Hamas in peace and wait until its ready for the next round?

[Gavin Chipper]

We're talking facts here. What difference between Hamas and the Israeli authorities is it? The number of executed people on 07.10? The fact there was widespread rape and torture? What difference exactly? Which of it is not considered 100% fact?

Also, what stories about raping Palestinian prisoners?

The BBC reports Palestinian prisoners talking of abuse and threats of rape at least. I have read reports of rape, but it's possible the sources aren't reliable. In any case, my initial point about the beheading babies thing was that this was used (successfully on many people) to make out that Hamas were the only bad guys, and the poor innocent Israeli authorities are just defending themselves against these monsters. Both are the bad guys. The point is not really to find an exact equivalence.

It was a hypothetical example - would Israel take such an approach to eliminate terrorists if they were embedded within their own population and try to justify it?

I get that it was hypothetical, but once again, you seem to ignore the fact that Hamas is not a terrorist organisation embedded within the population, but is, the government & army! So this is still a ridiculous comparison.

I don't think the point I'm making is ridiculous, but OK, it's not going anywhere.

Israeli occupation of the west bank is undoubtedly a war crime. From trigger happy soldiers to settler's violence (and in fact, the mere existence of settlements is a war crime) and apartheid regime.
But this is not the issue here, the issue here is the way the war in Gaza is conducted. And I would like to know what sort of war crimes Israel is committing there. Again, this is a war, and the army that started this war is hiding. How should Israel fight there?
Or should Israel just leave Hamas in peace and wait until its ready for the next round?

The West Bank is not the only victim of Israel. Gaza has been described as an open air prison. But as for war crimes, the Wikipedia has a list of war crimes that both sides have been accused of.

As for what Israel should do, I don't have a specific answer. It's a complex situation and your random guy off the street is unlikely to have an answer. But pointing out things that are definitely wrong is not invalidated by not coming up with what to do instead. Israel has the responsibility not to commit war crimes regardless of my opinion.

[Tal Lessner]

No question that Israel is shite and criminals in relation to the West Bank or Gaza. Absolute villains. I know, and have always been vocal about it.

But the 07.10 attack changed everything. This is a war, a war that should not end until Hamas lays down its weapons and relinquishes all control in Gaza. It's a war Hamas 100% started. It's a war that no country in the world would stop had it been in Israel's place.

It's quite a shame that once you choose to identify with one side, you seem to ignore facts, or try to downplay or twist them to match your agenda. (Such as too many "doubts" about facts or comparing an imaginary local terrorist organisation to an attack conducted by a government and thousands of soldiers).

[Gavin Chipper]

It's quite a shame that once you choose to identify with one side, you seem to ignore facts, or try to downplay or twist them to match your agenda.

There's no discussion if you're resorting to this.

[Fiona T]

It's quite a shame that once you choose to identify with one side, you seem to ignore facts, or try to downplay or twist them to match your agenda.

There's no discussion if you're resorting to this.

I can't imagine what it must be like to be directly affected by this and my thoughts are with you Tal.

But it does seem like Israel's intent (and if not direct intent, then the result of their actions) is to render Gaza inhabitable. The residents cannot leave - there are no open borders. Most (more than half?) of the residents are children - they cannot have any responsibility for this - they are too young to have elected the government. Their government clearly has no regard for their lives or safety - does that mean that their lives are dispensable? I think that's what many of us can't condone. As to what the alternatives are - I've no idea. But eliminating Gaza and by association their civilian population is not an acceptable answer.

[Tal Lessner]

Fiona, I don't think it's Israel's intent to render Gaza inhabitable, had it been that case, they would have stuck with just aerial bombing instead of the casualties of sending infantry into Gaza.
I don't think any child in the history had any responsibility for a war breaking out. Same goes to many soldiers and other civilians.
As for the situation in Gaza, I think Israel is as responsible (and even holds greater responsibility as the obviously stronger power) for that clusterfuck. For years it has been Israel's extreme-right government's policy to strengthen Hamas and weaken the non-violent PA. Making sure there is a split between Gaza & the West Bank so no peaceful solution can be reached, what our great emperor-god Bibi would call "managing the conflict" rather than making any attempt to end it. There's even that speech he gave a few years back, stating that "anybody objecting a two states solution should support transferring funds to Hamas".
But then you have the other side, using so many resources in creating a terrorist infrastructure, from tunneling all of Gaza (it's quite insane, actually even impressive) and accruing as much firepower as possible instead of actually using those resources for their own people.

I do hope a solution can be found. Along the lines of Hamas officials and convicted terrorists taking a seat somewhere out of Gaza (Qatar seems to be a willing host to many of Hamas officials already, why not take a few more), even with a full release of all Hamas prisoners in Israel, in return for the remaining Israeli hostages. Then a big rebuild plan, involving as many countries in the region and parties with interest outside the region (Turkey? USA?), and allowing the PA to get their hold there.
I don't think any revenge for 07.10 will be useful.
But then, following the events of 07.10, I also don't think that anybody can accept a solution which doesn't include Hamas' being kicked out of power in Gaza.

Or just put Bibi & Sinwar in one room, lock the doors, and, hmm I don't know, they're both cowards so they won't fight each other, they both care more about small political gains than the well being of their people, so they won't negotiate any deal to end the war. Just stick them in a room and lose all keys. It won't end the war, but at least it'll give some happiness to both sides.

[Gavin Chipper]

OK, that's starting to sound a lot more reasonable now.

[Tal Lessner]

Cheers Gavin, note that none of what I wrote in reply to Fiona contradicts anything I wrote previously to you.
My issue with what you wrote was the downplaying of the magnitude of the 7/10 attack, and downplaying Hamas' involvement and objectives, both in the attack and as the government of Gaza.

[Gavin Chipper]

My aim wasn't to downplay. I was criticising primarily Israel from the start because of the underlying assumption that no-one would be defending Hamas, whereas views on Israel's actions had more disagreement about them.

[Tal Lessner]

OK, that's starting to sound more reasonable now.

[Rhys Benjamin]

First of all, Hamas likely exists in the form it does because of the oppression by Israel on the Palestinians for decades. It breeds terrorism. Also far more Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces over the decades than vice versa. Does it make such a difference that Hamas killed a lot of Israeli civilians in one go rather than far more but spread out over a longer period of time?

I've stayed out of this on here because I'm never going to change your mind, but this sounds dangerously close to making excuses for a proscribed terrorist organisation.