Alph

40 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I’m afraid I don’t know the answer to that. I would like to see some meaningful discussions right now about what the end game is. Calls for a ceasefire are pointless without that. 

This is the point which it can easily dissolve back into tit for tat because I don't think there is any chance of peace without assurances from Israel. And I know you think that might be my bias but please hear me out and tell me where you disagree. 

You can't ask Hamas or Palestinians to stop fighting. Well, you can. But they will always say that until the Occupier returns what they have taken then they will stand against Israel, no? They will, whether we agree or not, point to the settlements and Gaza. 

This is where I think I'll get grief again because I'm putting the ball in Israel's court. Being the military power, being the occupier or whatever less offensive term is I think they have to offer the Palestinians something. Not Hamas. But work towards a Palestinian State and work with Palestinian Authority. 

All the while they'll come under attack. But I don't see another solution. Fatah and Israel have to be brought to the table and Israel will have to give the Palestinians more than they would like to. And the Palestinians would have to take less than they'd like. 

And then it's vital that whatever provocations, Israel deal with settler violence. They can't control Hamas but they can control that. 

Then, as I've maintained and nobody has put an argument against it, Hamas can't be destroyed by Israel. It's an ideology and will always return in one form of another. Because of angry Palestinians. Because of Iran etc. So the only way to remove Hamas is to get Palestinians to reject them. To reduce Hamas influence over Palestinians until they're such a pathetic force maybe Israel will be able to strike at. And Palestinians will feel less like Hamas is there only guard against illegal and aggressive occupation (that's how they see it)

This has been my view from the start and I've been guilty of going in hard at Israel. But genuinely just trying to get the point that they are the power here and it has to be them that make the first move. I know that's not always been the case. I know Arab nations around them, particularly one, if they were in Israel's position then Gaza would be flat packed. I know nations like America and Iran etc have their own agenda.

I hope this time I haven't come across as ranting. I'm all ears for what other avenues we could go down. I know it will take years to get through a process. I've just never heard much of an alternative. 

It breaks into "well you did this" and "you did that" and "well we offered this before" and "you've never offered anything that you didn't steal" 

4 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

I actually think that Israel’s attacks are less reckless than say the Allies on Dresden. But it’s different times now we have computers to help teach targets. 
I don’t regard either as murder but probably Dresden was a reckless error by Churchill. 

in answer to another question what is proportionate can only be decided in context of the end game. Hiroshima and Nagasaki unimaginably horrific though they were ended World war 2 which had cost 55 million lives. If the ultimate aim is ever lasting peace in the Middle East who knows what is proportionate. 

Then my next question would be do you think Israel's recent actions are ultimately going to save lives or extend and intensify the conflict? 

I know Hamas actions on October 7th certainly extended and intensified the conflict. I don't want you to think I'm suggesting Israel shouldn't react at all. 

8 minutes ago, PistoldPete said:

So were the Allied forces all murderers? Lots of civilians killed in the World Wars, millions I think. Pretty offensive to bandy around words like that plenty of us have relatives who fought in the wars. 

I think this is why there's an argument that the terms 'terrorism' and 'terrorist' have lost their value and are used more often to kind of support a narrative. This isn't about to be some defence of Hamas by the way. 

There are many cases of attacks on military targets we label terrorism and then attacks on civilian infrastructure that are considered collateral damage. I'm not sure how you measure it. 

I'm genuinely asking, if you take into account some of the comments from Israeli government and look at the pattern of attacks on Gaza could that be considered terrorism (an unlawful use of violence in pursuit of political aims)? Because we have to consider that Hamas are hidden in a densely populated area. 

And then we have the actions in West Bank which imo are more controversial

I would call Hamas terrorists all day long by the way. All day every day. 

Expand this and as mentioned... Hiroshima? The Napalm Strikes and Agent Green in Vietnam? Dresden? The drone strikes in Afghanistan/Iraq? The Russian bombardment of Ukrainian Cities? Where's the line and who decides? In your opinion what would you say?

1 minute ago, Leeds Ram said:

Me rubbing you the wrong doesn't mean you get to lie about what I think or what I say. It's absolutely no defence, and I don't know why you'd think it is. Anyway, that is the last I'll say on the matter, and I won't respond further. 

I said you dismissed Ilan Pappe? You gave him a score of 6/10. You posted supportive angles for the Iraq and Afghan wars including in the Ukraine thread ref drone strikes? Were cynical about Iranian chances of a democracy and implied that people think a Palestinian State would be an easy objective. You've not spoken up for Palestinians until today and so today I think I've tried to meet you on common ground? You refused the idea that Hamas might have predicted the Israeli response and played on it accordingly. 

I don't have access to your podcasts and articles. I have no idea who you are? All I have to go on is what I see here? So if you've spoken on behalf of Palestinians before then how would I know? On here you've not been impartial? 

And now, again as I try to bring it back to a reasonable debate you do a little diva strop? Which is fine by the way. But if you're refusing to engage with me then please extend that to not speaking about my views. 

I'm not interested in keep doing this tit for tat stuff. If people want to meet on common ground and hold Israel, IDF and Palestinians and Hamas to the same standards then I will take on board their views and discuss in a calm manner. But if they're going to just "add context" on behalf of Israel then of course, being pro Palestinian, I'll argue my case. 

Again, a reasonable response. Stop being a diva. 

20 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

You've frequently distorted and lied about my political beliefs, my arguments on this thread and how I address the question of Israel and Palestine and Middle Eastern politics. You've said I believe in the 'western way or the highway' and that I don't give a damn about ME politics despite the fact I've spent 1/3rd of my life studying it. You've said I cherry pick experts, even experts who strongly believe in a Palestinian state simply because you disagree with what they have to say. You've lied about what I've said about Ilan Pappe, you've lied about my beliefs about how we should treat Arab states and claimed that I see hamas and other groups as nothing more than Islamists living in caves 'shooting ak47's in the air shouting death to the west'. You've lied about how I believe Palestinians should just sit there and allowed to be killed. You've lied about how I supposedly believe most Palestinians are terrorists.I could go on and on but what's the point.  

This is all just since Saturday btw Alpha, I couldn't be bothered to go back before then.  Simply put you distort, obfuscate, and lie about other people's opinions and the facts when they don't suit your argument. That's not serious discussion, it's not right and it's something you should be called out on. It also renders you utterly pointless to have a genuine discussion with. 

I don't believe I was being condescending but merely explanatory. Then again on an online forum it can be difficult to discern between the two and I'll try to take that into account next time I post. 

Does this mean we won't be friends?

On a serious note though. I explained that I was annoyed with how dismissive you are. That's it. Comments like "Land Grab" and "won't be the land of milk and honey" rubbed me the wrong way. 

I try to bring it back to reasonable debate and you won't engage. I don't mind but let it go or engage. Don't keep mentioning me unless you will engage with the reasonable posts to you and Crewton

11 hours ago, Alpha said:

Thank you for taking the time to reply one last time. I'm truly humbled. 

There's a fair amount I agree with. However there's some offensive stuff. 

Palestine would not be the land of milk and honey that some imagine. - Who imagines? I'm pretty sure people are aware of the challenges involved? I mean supporting a Palestinians State doesn't equate to being stupid. Israel is not the land of milk and honey for Palestinians either. Because it's an Apartheid state. It has separate laws for parts of its society. 

The closing comment. "How likely is this to occur".... What? A Palestinian State? Extremely unlikely. What we have is Israel with it's foot on Palestine's throat asking them to stop struggling. What happens if they stop? What happens if Israel take their foot off? Neither can be trusted but nobody is interested in finding a solution. There's a $500b prize pot for America and Netenyahu's oil/peace corridor. For Palestinians will always be pushed by the likes of Iran. I've said this dozens of times. 

Then you say America should not focus on a vain attempt to destroy a terrorist organisation. They're not. They absolutely are not. Nobody thinks this is how you destroy Hamas. Hamas is an ideology. Hamas could be reborn 10 times over. So let's not pretend that Israel and America don't know this. So let's cut those lies out and stop pretending America or Israel are stupid. You said Hamas aren't smart? Well neither are Israel or America if they truly believe what they're saying. 

Which is why I point to the consistent genocidal language used by Israeli politicians and right wing officials. Because that tells you in their own words that they're not there for Hamas. 

Let them disease spread it will make help the victory? We must remember Amalek? I'm proud to be a fascist. There are no innocent people in Gaza? The Friendship 2023 song? Send them to Egypt or Scotland? Burn Gaza to the ground? Human Animals? 

They have to exaggerate and lie about Hamas actions (which I don't really have a problem with) to justify their actions. My problem comes when the IDF/settler behaviour in the West Bank is referred to as "land grab" over "disputed land". 

I don't know why I bothered replying. I forgot you said that was the last time.

@Leeds Ramwhat is it about this post that's distorted or dishonest?

Those are actual things said by Israeli politicians etc. 

The terms "land grab" and "disputed land".... Come on. You know what goes on in West Bank amounts to more than a land grab and you know that Netenyahu and Co name those lands with ancient names. You know how many people are killed and displaced and exactly what the UN, ICJ, Amnesty, HRW, Save The Children say. 

Like I said, there's a fair amount in here I agree with. But there's some I don't. And I've not been unreasonable explaining them. If you want a little door slamming moment as you reach for the moral high ground then that's fine. But as I said, don't cry that I can't have a conversation where here I've said nothing unreasonable. Except perhaps mocking your dismissive condescending attitude towards me. I just found it a bit funny. 

45 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

Yeah this is what I've found. If you write something he doesn't like he simply either lies about or ridiculously distorts what you say and interprets what you think in the worst possible light in response. It makes the conversation utterly pointless. Using a term like 'triggered' in that manner also triggers the f*** out of me tbh.

So you can't reply to my reasonable response but you can talk about me? 

Talk to me or if not then don't speak about me. What I did was try to bring the debate back to  reasonable with Crewton. Now you have a problem with that too? 

Get on with it or get over it. 

5 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I'm not sure how much of what you accuse me of saying I actually said and I haven't got the time or the patience to check. I feel I've added some balance and context to what has largely been a one-sided thread with regard to those two important facets of any discussion. What I've certainly NEVER said is that innocent Palestinians deserve what Israel is currently doing to them. I said right at the outset that I thought Israel's response would be counter-productive in the long term and I stick to that view. I also still hold the view that Iran are the biggest barrier to peace in the region because in Israel there's always the possibility of change, but next to zero chance of that in Iran.

Sometimes you come across as more balanced in your outlook, but many of your posts have, in my view, come across as rambling hate-filled rants, often disrespectful of other knowledgeable posters who hold different views to your own. I don't think that's done you any favours and your reaction to a plea for a less antagonistic thread has regrettably gone the same way.

To paraphrase Mickey Flanagan, I was out, but now I'm out out.

"What I've certainly NEVER said is that innocent Palestinians deserve what Israel are doing to them" 

- I didn't say you did? I said you are always speaking up for Israel and not for Palestinians in the context of the entire conflict. If I was to add too much "context" to violence against Israel then you would feel equally angry?

"Sometimes you come across as more balanced in your outlook, but many of your posts have, in my view, come across as rambling hate-filled rants" 

- I don't mean to sound that way. I did say this earlier. So I can only apologise. I get triggered by some specific comments here about crisis actors, disputed land, implications of being antisemetic, the playing down of Israel's role. 

"To paraphrase Mickey Flanagan, I was out, but now I'm out out."

- I mean I tried to explain my position and emotions. I'm not claiming that everything I say in the heat of the moment is helpful. I do take things on board. But this is a passionate topic. I'm asking for balance and in return trying to be more balanced. This is the second time you've said this and the second time I've tried to find common ground and show that I'm not blinded by my bias and believe both sides have so much work to do. But you didn't attempt to meet me there before and won't now. 

I understand walking away from someone who has an extreme entrenched view. I don't believe I'm so blind to Iran, Hamas, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Houthi etc etc that I can't accept fault in the Palestinians.

3 hours ago, Crewton said:

We could do with a humanitarian pause on this thread too.

Why? 

You're another that criticises my bias and says I'm not worthy of replying to because of my beliefs (which I laid out for you and you ignored)

But in the defence of Palestinians I've only seen you say something about Netenyahu being bad for peace? 

You've added context for Jews. You've added context for Israel's right to be fearful and skeptical of their neighbours. But what have you said on behalf of the suffering and struggling of Palestinians? 

You've rightly exposed Iran, Syria etc for supporting groups to attack Israel. But you've not really condemned America or The West for encouraging Israel. 

You've said Israel is the most democratic liberal state in the region. But again, this is only half the story. 

I've seen the videos from October 7th. They are very very nasty. Things that aren't human. Truly vile and if there is a heaven/hell then all those who took part in that slaughter should burn forever. But there are some crimes that Israel claimed that have no evidence. Some omissions about what else happened that day. You chose to post an 'independent' (it wasn't) reliable (it isn't) link to proof. Now on light of many of the lies exposed do you understand why that would appear to be spreading propaganda. Or as I've been accused of "fueling the fire". What Hamas did was evil. 

See in this thread, despite my bias I'm not afraid of talking about the suffering of Jews. I'm not afraid of admitting the threats Israel have faced, still face and will continue to face. Hamas are bad for peace. I hate Hamas. 

My problem comes that to find common ground Israel has to be called out. It's not a democracy for all its people. There are terrorist attacks on Palestinians. There's Islamophobia. There's war crimes. There's breaches of International Law. It's not just naughty Netenyahu. Why do we not speak of what ulterior motives America may have?

I understand @PistoldPetefear that hatred of Israel could spread. That saying things like they hide behind antisemetism could encourage more of the Jewish suffering we've seen. I get it. 

But, there's no balance if we can't speak against Israel. If we can't use the same language for the crimes of both. If people can't say Palestinians have a right to defend themselves. 

I fully expect some flippant comment about this thread being a cesspit, full of nonsense or somebody say they're not replying etc etc. 

You said I'm not capable of having a conversation? I am. But first, just like you, I have to feel like I'm talking to someone who can begin to understand my position. If somebody is just going to tell me this is liberal, democratic state Vs Terrorists in disputed land then I'm going to rant. I don't want to defend Hamas. I want them gone. But are we going to understand why they're able to recruit so many Palestinians? Are we going to talk about how to remove them? No. We're just going to present them as villains and continue this tit for tat. Good Vs Evil. 

I'm not as blinded by bias as I'm accused of. I'm really not. But for years and years this conflict has been presented a specific way to the West. After enduring all the American propaganda and destabilising policy I just want Palestinian voices to be heard. 

56 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

I do get that it grates, especially so since the Arab Spring. On genocide it is a high bar to prove it but so it should be. Genocide is the most serious crime of all. It requires policy directed at the highest levels of government/group. I am not an expert in all areas of world politics or anything but when we look at Rwanda and Serbia there are clear examples of genocide that are well known. You can add in China's treatment of the uighurs and tibet, Islamic State, Syria and Iraq and you have a few legitimate claims there as well as well as in Myanmar. There have been a couple of convictions on different incidents I believe, I know there has definitely been 1. 

 

I will respond one last time. Your claim that I argue a free Palestine would give terrorists more freedom wipes away the context in which it is situated. You've basically written a calumny against me at this point, and you should apologise for it. I distinctly argue that a free Palestine without adjustment for its social, economic, and political problems would not be a free and stable state. This is not controversial or new to anyone. Indeed, new political entities that come without those adjustments become internally and externally unstable. This does not mean I inherently believe a Palestinian state would be a terrorist state, as you have suggested but the challenges are immense. 

"a free Palestine is not going to be the land of milk and honey that some imagine. It will continue to suffer from poverty and political instability; the rights that its Western supporters demand for citizens will likely not be met. The suffering—and all that comes with it—shall merely continue with a new label, leaving plenty of room for terrorist actors to operate and even grow. This is not to suggest that we should not support a Palestinian state, or recognize how it creates the political space and rights that we in the West would demand of ourselves. Still, how likely is it to really occur?"

"The two-state solution seems further away than ever before but it still remains closer than the tolerable alternatives. To build back the goodwill Israel once enjoyed, it would be prudent—in time—for Israel not only to cease the terror bombing but also to begin a genuine dialogue to create a two-state solution. " 

"The failure to address the Palestinian question in an equitable manner has and continues to drain their moral legitimacy. The United States and others should focus their efforts not on a vain and ultimately futile attempt to destroy a terrorist organisation, but rather on a genuine attempt to build peace." 

I'm also a big fan of Shadi Hamid's work who argues for Arab democracy in the region whether it contains liberalism or not. He's a democratic minimalist and I've had him on my podcast and written two articles for his website. I generally agree with his argument around democratic minimalism and have written and argued for greater support for democracy in the region, even if it comes with policies we do not agree with or like. You basically just label and distort positions you dislike. 

Thank you for taking the time to reply one last time. I'm truly humbled. 

There's a fair amount I agree with. However there's some offensive stuff. 

Palestine would not be the land of milk and honey that some imagine. - Who imagines? I'm pretty sure people are aware of the challenges involved? I mean supporting a Palestinians State doesn't equate to being stupid. Israel is not the land of milk and honey for Palestinians either. Because it's an Apartheid state. It has separate laws for parts of its society. 

The closing comment. "How likely is this to occur".... What? A Palestinian State? Extremely unlikely. What we have is Israel with it's foot on Palestine's throat asking them to stop struggling. What happens if they stop? What happens if Israel take their foot off? Neither can be trusted but nobody is interested in finding a solution. There's a $500b prize pot for America and Netenyahu's oil/peace corridor. For Palestinians will always be pushed by the likes of Iran. I've said this dozens of times. 

Then you say America should not focus on a vain attempt to destroy a terrorist organisation. They're not. They absolutely are not. Nobody thinks this is how you destroy Hamas. Hamas is an ideology. Hamas could be reborn 10 times over. So let's not pretend that Israel and America don't know this. So let's cut those lies out and stop pretending America or Israel are stupid. You said Hamas aren't smart? Well neither are Israel or America if they truly believe what they're saying. 

Which is why I point to the consistent genocidal language used by Israeli politicians and right wing officials. Because that tells you in their own words that they're not there for Hamas. 

Let them disease spread it will make help the victory? We must remember Amalek? I'm proud to be a fascist. There are no innocent people in Gaza? The Friendship 2023 song? Send them to Egypt or Scotland? Burn Gaza to the ground? Human Animals? 

They have to exaggerate and lie about Hamas actions (which I don't really have a problem with) to justify their actions. My problem comes when the IDF/settler behaviour in the West Bank is referred to as "land grab" over "disputed land". 

I don't know why I bothered replying. I forgot you said that was the last time.

8 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

You may well be right but I live in hope... I've had some good discussions but maybe Alpha cares a bit too much to have a nuanced discussion about this with someone who see's things through a slightly different lens. 

You got me. I'll try to care less. 🤣

There's is no nuanced discussion until Palestinians are considered equal to Israelis. Until Islamophobia is as criminal as Antisemitism. Until the IDF are held to the same standards as Hamas. Until we stop claiming "democracy" has some moral high ground when Israel isn't a democracy for all its population. Until we examine the things said by the Israeli government that definitely have genocidal tones. Until we can hear what all experts are actually saying instead of discrediting the ones we don't want to hear. Even if their point is valid. Whether it be Pappe or Gideon Levy. Historian or journalist. 

Your condescending tone annoyed me. Your support of American foreign policy. The most destabilising nation in my opinion. From WMD lies, Gulf Of Tonkin, Hiroshima, Nagasaki... Their world policing has an ulterior motive. There's plenty of experts who will say worse about them. 

I'm totally comfortable with you ignoring me or whatever you said. So add not mentioning me to that if you want 

Oh and your article. "The state of Palestine wouldn't be the utopia... Would give terrorists more freedom. " that was offensive. Palestinians have a right to national security. 

You're dismissive of all ME politics. It's The West way for you. And you'll justify it however it's enforced

20 minutes ago, cstand said:

 

Hammas in the West Bank executing their own people 2022. They do it on a regular basis
https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2022/9/4/hamas-says-executed-5-palestinians-in-gaza

I mean what am I supposed to do with this? Talk about the Hannibal Directive? Post videos from witnesses that say IDF open fire on their own people? Post videos of IDF shooting unarmed people?

It's not productive. It's not relevant. 

I'm not here defending Hamas. I just said that Israel won't get rid of them and that it's more likely they'll gain more support. That's just the truth. 

2 hours ago, cstand said:

Timeline about who has ruled Jerusalem over the years explains perfectly why it’s disputed land and not occupied land.

Islam 1283 years

Judaism 1197 years

Christianity 410 years

 Get over this hurdle then a solution is possible but too many people want to continue with the blame game for their own agenda so very much doubt it will happen in my lifetime.

 

 

Stop. This logic applied all over the world would break down all borders and national security. It's nonsense. It really is nonsense. You're going down a route in which nations can reclaim colonies? 

You know you're talking about people who have no part in fighting? People living in these areas, raising families, working... Just normal people? Like you, your son, daughter, Mum, Dad, Aunties, Uncles... Nothing to do with any dispute. Who lose their homes and loved ones. Are displaced. And your saying well technically 2,000 years ago.... 

Get real. Get out with that Zionist nonsense. Talking about that Amalek next with Netenyahu. 

I don't give a feck who "owns" Jerusalem. My agenda is peace and equality for Palestinians. 

You think I'm suggesting Jews don't have a right to exist there? No. But you seem to be saying that all the Palestinians (not Hamas, not militant, not combatant) that get their homes taken from them is fine because it's disputed land. So feck what the UN, ICJ, Human Rights, Amnesty Int all say. You've got the bible and a Map from 2,000 years ago. 

You know not even a great many Israelis think like this don't you? You do know that? Like there's a left wing in Israel politics that argues against this exact sort of mentality? 

You talk about wanting peace but it's this exact sort of thing that creates more death. 

It's this Zionist s**** and Arabs who say every single part of Israel was given to Jews by the British when it wasn't there's to give. 

If you look at Hamas actual goals it's the destruction of Israel. But not the expulsion of all Jews. They say Jews of that land can stay but all others must go. Now this is a ridiculous goal and would lead to Genocide. 

Finding peace is about rejecting the extremes of both sides and respecting the borders and treaties we have. We need a state where Arab Muslims and Jews have equal rights (no, that's not the current Israel) or we draw a line and tell Israel to feck off with their claims. If the ICJ say 80% of your wall or whatever is illegal. It's illegal. If the UN draw up resolutions then you respect them. Show up to hearings. Don't veto peace. And we work towards a 2 state solution. 

Have you seen the Hamas flags flying in West Bank over the weekend? That's what Israel have achieved since October 7th. They. Can't. Wipe. Hamas. Out. Like. This. 

Only just saw the Taylor fight. 

Jesus, I'm not against women's boxing but there's something about brutal scraps like that where I feel a bit squeamish. Weird.  

But whatever they got paid it should be more. What a brawl

Taylor is great. Really likable, hard as nails and just great for boxing. 

Anyone here buying the Israel friendship song 2023?

It's in this video if you'd like the music video 

"In a year we will annihilate everyone " la la la la. Sing along guys. 

22 minutes ago, ramit said:

Not a two state solution, a final solution.  All perfectly legal, I am sure.

 

 

That's the "peace corridor" speech. Where he said Iran needs to face a nuclear threat, Palestine doesn't exist and they share a border with the good Muslims. 

21 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

You're someone who clearly can't engage in good faith so I won't bother responding further. 

Gutted. 

5 hours ago, Crewton said:

Perhaps, but I think we have to recognise how their actions have been influenced by the attitudes and behaviour of those same neighbours. Had they always done things by the book, they almost certainly wouldn't exist now.

True. Which is a starting point of a us finding common ground. There always needs to be balance. But there never is. Israel is always playing the victim. Always protected. 

Nobody here is completely blind to Israeli/Jew suffering. 

14 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

I actually believe in intervention as a method of helping citizens of those countries free themselves from oppressive tyrannical regimes. I don't believe the US's support for authoritarians is good and I've criticised Obama's policy of backing Sisi's coup over the Muslim Brotherhood and letting Assad gas his own citizens. I believe people in those nations deserve the same freedoms we demand for ourselves, that doesn't mean aligning myself with regimes or groups who are reprehensible. Giving the Palestinians a state with a Hamas led regime, or a regime where Hamas is a significant player is playing with geopolitical dynamite. Anyone who has read or knows anything about the region and the situation knows that. 

I didn't discredit Pappe, I said some historians, even in the 'new historians' field critique him which they do. I linked an article as such. However, I also highlighted that a lot of scholars, including some of my old lecturers, regularly use his materials and rate him. I gave a fair analysis of what I think. I don't buy what Finkelstein says and I've yet to know anyone who I respect on these questions who gives him any serious thought. 

It's not Hitler level for me. Again, your failure to distinguish between genocide with camps all over Europe, adapted killing techniques, dedicated murder squadrons, mass roundups for shooting and gassing and mass enslavement with a conflict in an urban environment of which many of the citizens are very young highlights your inability to separate out and distinguish between different types of actions. You can say what Israel has done is bad (I've written published articles where I've said this) and even illegal in the conduct of war but that doesn't mean it automatically constitutes genocide. I've yet to see a reasonable case be made that what has happened is a genocide according to the legal definitions of the term. 

I do believe Palestinians, like any people, have a right to defend themselves. I don't believe now that a Palestinian state is a viable political option and I do believe we're entering a new stage of the conflict where options will be limited because of the way both sides perceive one another. Of course I want Israel to give ground to Palestinians and I want Palestinains to recognise they won't get everything they want (like custody of Jerusalem) and settle for a bit less in return for an actual state and build from there. But that won't happen any time soon. 
 

Bore off with strawman arguments. Hamas lead state...  

Oh, if it's not experts your respected circles or the language used by Israeli officials when they talk about there being "NO innocent Palestinians" is not genocidal or Hitler level for you then that's enough. End of. Feck the experts that argue differently in Haaretz columns. Until they get the respect of you or your peers then they have no validity. 

These Arabs just won't accept our values. We've bombed them, invaded them, stolen from them... but they just won't accept our democracy. All they have to do is look at Israel and see the black Jews, the Arab citizens etc. They'll see the equal rights. But no. They live in their caves plotting ways to destroy the west when all we ever do is help them export their natural resources. If only they'd look at how we helped Africa. Bloody crying about "land grab". It's only land. Disputed land. And we'll remove that gas for them too. All part of our democracy service. 

Fed up of Amnesty, Human Rights, ICJ, UN etc keep criticising. Antisemitic organisations. They have no LeedsRam verified experts, that's their problem

3 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

I mean the whole mossadegh thing is quite complicated if you read around it in a bit of depth. Potentially would have been a democratic Iran but there is an argument to say it would have turned into another form of arab nationalist dictatorship in the end anyway. 

See, you can see from your post history in this thread and in the Ukraine thread referencing Trump/Afghanistan to get a good idea of what you think is an acceptable treatment of those Arab Muslim nations. Never once have I seen you speak on behalf of them. You'll justify drone strikes in Afghanistan, war in Iraq, you said (ref Israel) "the land grab is a problem"..... 

You discredit Finklestein, Pappe... I'm guessing Haaretz journalists are clueless, Raz Segal and any other expert or opinion you don't like. You say Palestine would probably be a terrorist breeding ground and Iran would probably be... 

Israel is not equal to all its citizens but it's a democracy so therefore it's much better than Jordan and whatever it does you can't possibly condemn. 

Hamas aren't smart at all. 

See, despite my bias I've never wavered from my position on Hamas. I've called them out exactly for what they are. But you managed "land grab".... It's terrorism. It's terrorism on Palestinians. 

We're looking at up to 15,000 dead. Babies dying because theres no power. Lack of evidence and terrible fake propaganda attempts to cover their tracks. Have you been oblivious to the things they actually say in that government? Really? It's Hitler level

I can say Israel has a right to defend itself. When it's actually defending. You could never say that about Palestinians. You could never imagine an Israel so aggressive that a group like Hamas should grow in numbers because Palestinians would rather die on the spot than be displaced. 

You've been outed. Go sit with Genocide Joe and tell him there's $500b pot of gold for the winner. Let's pretend he doesn't know and America aren't the most destabilising country on the globe. 

1 hour ago, uttoxram75 said:

Wow. If that's your take then our conversation is done mate.

This is the guy that said something along the lines of a free state of Palestine wouldn't be the utopia many imagine and would give terrorists more room to operate. 

That's what he thinks of Palestinians. 

And it's beautifully ironic that the democratic state of Israel (which isn't so democratic if your not the right type of citizen) is a state that breaches international law, murders Palestinians taking their homes, refuses to sign off on human rights laws/Rome Statute, ignores the International Criminal Court demands, doesn't show up to UN hearings on their military operations, holds Palestinians prisoners without charge....

The Arabs should just stop moaning and accept it's for the best. They're so uncivilised. 

1 hour ago, Leeds Ram said:

That's my take and an expert's take on warfare and its legal limitations yeah. But fair play if you don't want to continue. 

You pick and choose the experts I've noticed. 

2 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

Most of this isn't really addressing what I said. I don't even think they're that smart, more desperate and bad. I didn't say it gives them a free pass, I merely said in the region they are by a long way the most democratic country.

And I posted a link which explains clearly why their democracy has several flaws in what makes a democracy. 

You don't think Hamas are smart? You think they live in caves shooting AK's at the ceiling shouting "death to the west"

Israel are smart though? Hence some of the most hilariously bad propaganda and blatant genocidal talk to go along with their decision to give up so much military advantage to go into urban combat. 

You said @Comrade 86was confusing a wartime response with whether a state is democratic or not. Is it possible October 7th was a response To the 150 dead Palestinians up to July? Did you know about those? How many children died in Palestine before October 7th? Do you know? 

Stop watching Hollywood films if you actually believe terrorists are just mindless murderers.(unless sponsored by America obvs) Hamas share a lot in common with the very smart and presentable Netenyahu. Amalekite? Sorry I meant, am I right?