Palestine

[Highgate]

2 hours ago, Archied said:

My views on the historic mess that is Israel / Palestine are not secret I just feel that to unpack and debate them on here and at this particular time in light of EVERYTHING that has gone on and is going on in that region would very much take away from what I believe the current and urgent priority is now,

fair enough you think my feeling regards waving flags in the street is inconsequential, I don’t , I think it very much weakens and cheapens what should and could be a very strong message from people on the streets and it attracts the wrong kind of people , is too easy to cause fear and divide , I would no more take to the streets with an Israeli flag after the 7 th than I would carry a Palestine one now when I believe that Israel should cease fire NOW, let alone not believing the course of action they have embarked on from the start was the wrong one ,

you say everyone is against the killing and it goes without saying ,,, sadly I don’t believe that and I’m sure there plenty turning up waving flags with bad intent and the vibe is not good , 

I didn't say that. I said it was inconsequential compared to the bombing of Gaza by Israel. 

By everyone I meant everyone that's going to read what you post.  Is there anyone here that believes that Israel should continue the bombing or that Hamas should murder more Israelis and take more hostages? I doubt it. That's what I mean by 'it goes without saying'.  

[Crewton]

37 minutes ago, Eddie said:

It's relevant to every war - there is always a precedent, and the irony of a people who historically suffered genocide now seemingly thinking that it's perhaps not such a bad idea is not lost on me.

I used to think the same, but I read allot about the impact of inter-generational trauma and its effects on the descendants of those who experienced that trauma directly. Sadly, it will most likely be precipitated in the future by current events also and there will always be people who exploit it for their own purposes.

[Highgate]

2 hours ago, Crewton said:

For the West and Gaza, read the non-West (including South Africa) and Ukraine. They're no more "moral" or "noble" than we are.

I guess the 'Global South' as it's called is about as interested in Europe as we are interested in wars in Africa for example. 

The Palestine/Israel war is somewhat different from the Ukraine/Russia conflict in that with the West's support Ukraine's army is able to defend itself against Russia and bring their invasion to a near halt. Whereas with Gaza we have a very well equipped Israeli army with the tacit approval of the world's most powerful country, mercilessly pounding a largely civilian population who have literally nowhere to run. Two very different conflicts.  Not that any of that makes Putin's invasion any less abhorrent than it was. 

I seem to remember votes in the UN where the General assembly overwhelmingly voted in favour of Russia withdrawing it's troops from Ukraine and ending the war, so I suspect there must be a lot of general support for Ukraine, even in non western countries.  Even so, it's probably correct to say that countries act in their own self interest.  South Africa recently bringing the case against Israel before the ICJ was a welcome outlier.  

[Crewton]

8 minutes ago, Highgate said:

I guess the 'Global South' as it's called is about as interested in Europe as we are interested in wars in Africa for example. 

The Palestine/Israel war is somewhat different from the Ukraine/Russia conflict in that with the West's support Ukraine's army is able to defend itself against Russia and bring their invasion to a near halt. Whereas with Gaza we have a very well equipped Israeli army with the tacit approval of the world's most powerful country, mercilessly pounding a largely civilian population who have literally nowhere to run. Two very different conflicts.  Not that any of that makes Putin's invasion any less abhorrent than it was. 

I seem to remember votes in the UN where the General assembly overwhelmingly voted in favour of Russia withdrawing it's troops from Ukraine and ending the war, so I suspect there must be a lot of general support for Ukraine, even in non western countries.  Even so, it's probably correct to say that countries act in their own self interest.  South Africa recently bringing the case against Israel before the ICJ was a welcome outlier.  

I was thinking mainly of the BRICS countries (including South Africa) who have refused to condemn Russia's actions in Ukraine and those African countries and other dictatorships like Belarus and North Korea who rely on Russian support to keep their populations supressed or for arms, infrastructure and so on. China, India and South Africa have all abstained on UN votes regarding the Ukraine War also, determined not to be seen to "side" with the West, regardless of what is the morally correct thing to do - that was my main point. 

I agree with you that the imbalance between the combatants is far greater in the case of Gaza and Israel but if Trump is reelected US president that imbalance will narrow. It seems churlish to me to play one-upmanship between two conflicts that have the potential to escalate into wider conflicts where in both cases thousands are dying unjustly and unnecessarily.

 

[uttoxram75]

Whatever your political positions are, there is no way you could call it a war. Palestine has no army, no navy and no air force. Israel has all these and military support from the UK, the EU and the US. We are flying regular sorties from our base in Cyprus to assist Israel in killing civilians in Palestine.

I have mates in the forces and they are not proud of what they are being asked to do.

[Archied]

8 hours ago, Alph said:

Not everyone that goes to football is there for the love of sport or to support their team. 

I'll tell you, the vast majority of people who have been on the protests have been about pressuring our country to pressure Israel into a ceasefire. 

There's many there that don't quite understand why. They just see peace as good cause. No problem with that, surely? 

There's many who go too far but are certainly not dangerous. They go too far in that they would have a Palestinian State with the jets and tanks that Israel have. They talk about the Nakba and are lean on the idea that Israel is illegitimate. But we are past that now. There is no realistic solution that returns lands to Palestinian people from the Nakba. They need to understand Israel has to have the strength to defend itself and Palestine can not just be given that military power over night 

Then there's a great many that understand the situation. And all they ask is for the things that are reasonable. A road to peace. International pressure and a fair solution. 

There are Jews (that are called Judenrat by Pro Israeli Jews). There's a huge mix of ordinary people. 

But the government would prefer you see them as you do. It's gaslighting. The real mob supports what you're seeing in Gaza. That's the mob that is violent and dangerous. They're the mob that would tell you that I'm on Pro Hamas marches and I'm antisemitic. That I oppose democracy. That I'm anti British? What? Because I want Britain to stop supporting Israel in plausible genocide and ethnic cleansing? 

You ignore the fact I’ve said that those who March every week calling for an end to the killing have my utmost respect , 

even the slightest knowledge of my general posting over the last few years ( since I got involved in the Jim smith area ) tells anyone I’m am not in the slightest someone who falls for what the gov ( extend that to media too ) would have you believe , I question everything that’s spouted , in fact scratch the surface and you will find I’ve been called a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist regularly for being fully aware that gov ,politicians, media  lie and deceive and posting as much ,

as I say , I have given an opinion on a part of the issue unfolding in the U.K. and in fact if you read properly it’s clear I respect and can support people on the streets calling for an end to the killing yet a few appear to want to cut loose on me / my point that certain things going on are not the right way to go about it in my view and only cause fear , intimidation and division 🤷🏻‍♂️
when the bullets and bombs are stopped ( that’s the priority ) I will be more than happy to debate my political/ ethical position on the issue

Edited March 5 by Archied

[bcnram]

9 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

Whatever your political positions are, there is no way you could call it a war. Palestine has no army, no navy and no air force. Israel has all these and military support from the UK, the EU and the US. We are flying regular sorties from our base in Cyprus to assist Israel in killing civilians in Palestine.

I have mates in the forces and they are not proud of what they are being asked to do.

In what way are you suggesting this is happening?

 

[uttoxram75]

14 minutes ago, bcnram said:

In what way are you suggesting this is happening?

 

U.K. is training Israeli military in Britain (declassifieduk.org)

The UK government has admitted that nine Israeli military aircraft have landed in Britain since the Hamas attacks of 7 October. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has refused to say what those planes are carrying or what they are doing.

The Royal Air Force has sent 48 military aircraft to Israel since it began bombing Gaza. Declassified has further found that Britain has conducted 65 spy missions over Gaza from its vast military and intelligence base on Cyprus.

Almost none of this extent of UK military support for Israel is being reported in the British national media.

[uttoxram75]

 

https://linktr.ee/DeclassifiedUK?utm_source=linktree_profile_share&ltsid=eeacbfd1-49f2-44a5-b62c-6e1c55c1e861

[bcnram]

4 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said:

 

https://linktr.ee/DeclassifiedUK?utm_source=linktree_profile_share&ltsid=eeacbfd1-49f2-44a5-b62c-6e1c55c1e861

I expected something better than 6 Israeli officers have received training in Britain (probably at Sandhurst). The British military train officers from all over the World; it is normal for allies and considered as some of the best training available. 
 

 

 

 

[uttoxram75]

41 minutes ago, bcnram said:

I expected something better than 6 Israeli officers have received training in Britain (probably at Sandhurst). The British military train officers from all over the World; it is normal for allies and considered as some of the best training available. 
 

 

 

 

My first reply above is copied and pasted from Declassified's website - you can choose to read a bit more about it, or not, i have no problem either way. 

I tend to not believe what i read much nowadays but sometimes you can make assumptions based on the balance of probabilities, a lot of stuff Declassified publish is directly from government quotes and FOI requests so i do find it interesting and even if half of their stuff is correct its still a lot more than you will find out through the mass media.

[bcnram]

32 minutes ago, uttoxram75 said:

My first reply above is copied and pasted from Declassified's website - you can choose to read a bit more about it, or not, i have no problem either way. 

I tend to not believe what i read much nowadays but sometimes you can make assumptions based on the balance of probabilities, a lot of stuff Declassified publish is directly from government quotes and FOI requests so i do find it interesting and even if half of their stuff is correct its still a lot more than you will find out through the mass media.

I don't disagree, the mass media are at one end, they have to sell their publications so sensationalise and stretch the truth to attract a paper purchase or online click. Then organisations such as declassified sensationalise and stretch the truth in the same way. With both of them they attract readers who are already leaning one way or the other. The truth usually lies somewhere between. The real truth is that most conflicts and particularly this one are as a result of religion.

[uttoxram75]

9 minutes ago, bcnram said:

I don't disagree, the mass media are at one end, they have to sell their publications so sensationalise and stretch the truth to attract a paper purchase or online click. Then organisations such as declassified sensationalise and stretch the truth in the same way. With both of them they attract readers who are already leaning one way or the other. The truth usually lies somewhere between. The real truth is that most conflicts and particularly this one are as a result of religion.

Good points bcn although i would say most conflicts are about money, control of trade routes, fossil fuels, precious metals etc. maybe its dressed up as religious struggles but history tells us its always about money and power.

[bcnram]

1 hour ago, uttoxram75 said:

The UK government has admitted that nine Israeli military aircraft have landed in Britain since the Hamas attacks of 7 October. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) has refused to say what those planes are carrying or what they are doing.

Personally don't see why they should if it is to do with military / security.

The Royal Air Force has sent 48 military aircraft to Israel since it began bombing Gaza. Declassified has further found that Britain has conducted 65 spy missions over Gaza from its vast military and intelligence base on Cyprus.

As above, why would they say? What sort of aircraft anyway? The spy missions if they actually happened are more likely to do with Yemen / Iran / Syria. 

Almost none of this extent of UK military support for Israel is being reported in the British national media.

I don't think it should be, it possibly never happened.

 

 

 

[Highgate]

13 hours ago, Crewton said:

I was thinking mainly of the BRICS countries (including South Africa) who have refused to condemn Russia's actions in Ukraine and those African countries and other dictatorships like Belarus and North Korea who rely on Russian support to keep their populations supressed or for arms, infrastructure and so on. China, India and South Africa have all abstained on UN votes regarding the Ukraine War also, determined not to be seen to "side" with the West, regardless of what is the morally correct thing to do - that was my main point. 

I agree with you that the imbalance between the combatants is far greater in the case of Gaza and Israel but if Trump is reelected US president that imbalance will narrow. It seems churlish to me to play one-upmanship between two conflicts that have the potential to escalate into wider conflicts where in both cases thousands are dying unjustly and unnecessarily.

Yeah, it's not surprising that those that are heavily influenced by Russia or indeed depend on them have been silent in their criticism of Putin's invasion I suppose.  That's not the case with China of course, and it is interesting to speculate how much of a difference it might have made if they had joined Western countries in supporting Ukraine in their defence of their country.  Good point about the US election, it's almost even a more crucial election for Ukraine than it is for the US, no doubt many in Ukraine are very worried about the potential result there. 

And for Israel/Palestine, what would things be like there now, if the US had been an independent impartial influence throughout the decades rather than always being in Israel's corner? It's hard to know, but surely things couldn't be any worse than they are now? 

[Crewton]

1 hour ago, Highgate said:

And for Israel/Palestine, what would things be like there now, if the US had been an independent impartial influence throughout the decades rather than always being in Israel's corner? It's hard to know, but surely things couldn't be any worse than they are now? 

I suppose the immediate question to your question would be "worse for who?" because the answer depends on whether others were also willing to be independent impartial influencers. In the lands of the Old Testament, an eye-for-an-eye still seems to have allot of weight and aggressive actions of even small groups have often resulted in retaliation and escalation. After the Camp David Accords, if both the US and Russia had taken such a position, perhaps something lasting may have resulted but, honestly, I wouldn't have bet on it. Had Yitzhak Rabin lived long enough to direct the peace process, would that have made a difference? So many ifs, buts and maybes.

[Highgate]

51 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I suppose the immediate question to your question would be "worse for who?" because the answer depends on whether others were also willing to be independent impartial influencers. In the lands of the Old Testament, an eye-for-an-eye still seems to have allot of weight and aggressive actions of even small groups have often resulted in retaliation and escalation. After the Camp David Accords, if both the US and Russia had taken such a position, perhaps something lasting may have resulted but, honestly, I wouldn't have bet on it. Had Yitzhak Rabin lived long enough to direct the peace process, would that have made a difference? So many ifs, buts and maybes.

Worse for both Israelis and Palestinians I suppose, although we have to acknowledge that since the 1940s things have always been worse for the Palestinians.  You are right, we have no way of knowing how things would have worked out.  But it would have been a good place to start, having the US being an impartial player rather than blatantly picking one side at the expense of the other.  

[Leeds Ram]

18 hours ago, Crewton said:

I used to think the same, but I read allot about the impact of inter-generational trauma and its effects on the descendants of those who experienced that trauma directly. Sadly, it will most likely be precipitated in the future by current events also and there will always be people who exploit it for their own purposes.

A lot of that literature on inter-generational trauma and epigenetics i think has come into question. I might be wrong and it used to be very popular though.

Edited March 5 by Leeds Ram

[Leeds Ram]

4 hours ago, uttoxram75 said:

Good points bcn although i would say most conflicts are about money, control of trade routes, fossil fuels, precious metals etc. maybe its dressed up as religious struggles but history tells us its always about money and power.

Tend to think that's equally simplistic overall. Conflicts can have roots in a variety of places- whether that is ideology, identity, revenge, wealth, or a desire for greater territory to name just a few. 

[cstand]

London today

No words

Edited March 5 by cstand