Your first paragraph is a very good point and a valid distinction. I'll have to give that one more thought. Thank you. But my gut instinct still says that we shouldn't refrain from removing extremist groups out of fear that something even worse might spawn in its place. This was exactly the kind of thinking that led Chamberlain to appease Hitler. Totally agree with the last paragraph. One of the key obstacles to the peace process for decades has been the 'all or nothing' approach that tbh Bill Clinton takes most of the blame for but Arafat and the Arab League were also too eager to embrace. This ridiculous idea is to attempt to solve final borders, security, Jerusalem, right of return and reparations in one fell swoop. Naive beyond words as each of those bullet points is a world in and of itself, cf. the collapse of Camp David into the Second Intifada on the Palestinian side and an Ariel Sharon government on the Israeli side for further reference of how damaging it is to think a centuries-long conflict can be resolved over some tea and biscuits at one conference.
I think extremist groups should be removed too, but I guess if you're Hamas, you see the Israeli Govt as an extremist group, so it needs a different approach via diplomacy, international pressure and collective negotiation to make the decision to use force a non viable option. It's a long road from where we are today and there needs to be a recognition that there won't be an overnight resolution, nor will everybody get what they want. But that it will be an evolving process with scope to amend and adapt along the way. But the starting point has to be an end to the killing and that has to happen now, because women, children and innocent people are dying right at this moment as we speak.
What I find annoying over the past few days is this nonsense about protestors supposedly going to cause problems at the cenotaph or war memorials. A lot of it being spouted on twitter by right wing goups with an agenda - I've not seen anything that suggests that will happen, if you can look pass all the bolloxs, yeah you will always get a minority that you can be sure the media will immediately focus on, but from what I've seen the leaders of the protest groups have said they will keep away from the cenotaph and I've no reason to disbelieve them. Also any attempts by cops to try and stop the march would be more based on them not having enough coppers to police two big events at the same time, rather than any actual threat. When you look around football stadiums everyone has been respecting the formalities before kick-off and I've no reason to believe why that would not be so on the street- afterall anything that causes disruption to the annual respects, would not bode well on any protests group involved, who rely on public opinion to support them.
Alright mate, I hope you're well. Firstly, with the greatest respect to Pinkie, I'm not arguing with you because of any discussions you're having with him. I've been grounded in this conflict for a long time. I'm not looking for utopia and even though the foundation of my arguments is based fundamentally on the fact international law is on the Palestinian's side I appreciate uncomfortable compromises will need to be made to achieve lasting peace. To answer your point and break it down as best I can. I know you keep asking the same thing but I've always been consistent with my answer - I don't believe what you're arguing is the salient point and hasn't been for a long while (at least it wasn't before Oct 7th). Simply saying that I don't understand democracy doesn't mean anything. You only have to look at Israeli politics and public opinion over the past 20 years to see that's not really the issue. I'd argue it's the opposite and I'll tell you why. 20+ yrs ago Israelis were largely left-leaning, with centrist/leftist parties who were about engaging in a peace plan with a two-state solution. THIS was at a time when there was LESS security for Israel and greater access and ease for terrorist attacks and suicide bombings in towns and cities including Tel Aviv which were a regular occurrence and almost a part of daily life much like Northern Ireland. Why wasn't that feeling of safety a factor then?? After the second intifada, it was understandable public opinion lurched to the right. But what's happened since then? Operation Defensive Shield, Operation Determined Path, the permanent presence of Israeli forces around the West Bank, the so-called Barrier around the West Bank (basically a fck off big wall), and the blockade by land, sea and air of Gaza, all of which have vastly improved security within Israel, to a point where attacks before Oct 7th were a fraction of where they were at any point prior. So what impact has that had politically and how do you measure that in terms of public opinion re safety? Netanyahu no longer saw Palestinians as a threat, but instead, as a problem to be managed whilst gradually enabling the Israeli land grab, expansion of illegal settlements, and displacing Palestinians. Successive Israeli governments have tried to make the Palestinians invisible to Israeli voters and keep the focus very much on other issues such as the economy and things like bus schedules ffs. Keeping the public safe hasn't been the pressing issue mate. To the point where he's enabled (and done deals through intermediaries with) Hamas for them to thrive whilst ignoring the PA in the West Bank, precisely to prevent ANY realisation of a Palestinian state. All the while telling the Israelis, "I'm keeping you safe" which they've believed. So where's the issue? Except it was a wholly flawed approach from start to finish which came crashing in on 7th October. THAT is the issue. As for waiting for another Rabin, you'll be waiting a long time. And that was evident even before 7th October. In the past 20 years we've seen a muddying of political positions in Israel. There's no clear divide between left or right when it comes to a Palestinian resolution. Even centrist, left-leaning Israeli parties have what would traditionally be considered right-leaning positions on what a Palestinian State would look like. You only have to look at the position of Yesh Latid or Blue & White. Meanwhile Meretz and Labour are out in political obscurity. And let's not focus just on Netanyahu btw. The Knesset is a fcking mess. Over the past decade you've had groups of minority right wing extremists becoming king makers for him. Parties with leaders who have equally open and vile views about eliminating Palestinians as Hamas has towards Israelis, who are directly influencing and imposing what can only be described as systematic ethnic cleansing in the West Bank. It got to a point that prior to 7th October you had the most extreme right wing government ever - factions of which even Netanyahu cringed at and couldn't control. You had players like Ben Gvir which even the right wing newspaper the Times of Israel described as a pyromaniac. This is the real issue as far as Israel's internal politics and its chaotic batshit crazy democracy is concerned. I don't believe that instilling public confidence in safety was an obstacle to peace negotiations and if it ever was, right wing political parties and successive governments have been complicit in making sure it was. It served their purpose and their aims. It doesn't have to be that for a future Israeli government but tbh I have no faith waiting for it to arrive (just as much as I don't with the Palestinian Authority or Hamas btw). And despite everything I've posted and however much the situation seems fcked, past and present, I do believe there is no obstacle which cannot be overcome to at least begin talks. And the single biggest factor as I've previously said to you is a strong, honest and fair external player who has the power to make it happen and put pressure and incentives on all parties to make it happen- namely the U.S. And this is not some idealistic view I have, it's real if the U.S. wants it to be. They can take steps now if they want to at least start to bring Israel, PA and Hamas into line. £3bn, £75m, and £360m a year to each respectively! is a great amount of leverage. And I'd even go as far as to propose having Iran and Saudis involved. Of course everything I'm talking about is outside of the current ****storm that's going on, but you asked the the question and that's all I'm responding to. As for the Oslo Accords, unless I've missed any sarcasm, it's funny you have a tendency to see things only from an Israeli perspective. The PLO/Fatah recognised Israel's right to exist. You mention that all Israel got was security and recognition. In thirty years what have the Palestinians got in return? Every single thing on the ground is stacked in Israel's favour as far as any past or future settlement is concerned. Meanwhile peaceful Palestinian approaches have left them with fck all except a begging bowl. So I say NO pre-conditions to talks. I've seen Israel's position with regards to a two state solution. I know how much the Palestinians will have to give up, while Israel gives up nowt. So no, you can't have it all in advance - the recognition of Israel by players like Hamas can be part of the negotiations - and yes that means it SHOULD form part of any final settlement.
Just watching the Grandfather Paradox, where a guy goes back in time and tops his grandfather, only to time travel back to the future and find he dosen't exist lol - unless you created an ultimate timeline or a parallel universe. And the Hitler Paradox, where you go back in time to take him out, but then you erase history, then have no reason to travel back in time and many other complications.
I stopped thinking about time travel when I heard about parallel universes. My whole understanding is limited to Back to the Future, and that's as far I can get my head round the whole thing. Nice and simple. There's stuff you post on the science thread that I start to watch and then think, hold on what?
I love it, just have to remember not to take them too seriously, it's all theoretical stuff without any real substance. It helps create a dimension that there is more to life, than well nothing. Just see it all as fantasies really, it's great they put a funny ending to each paradox, makes science interesting if nothing else.
It is good but I have to be able to follow it. The last one I saw was The Russell Paradox. I just about made it but there was a point that if he hadn't got to the paradox I would've been lost. Now the blooming Grandfather Paradox!
All this time travel stuff has become super popular again because Marvel is releasing its massive multiverse series of Superhero movies soon.
This ^^^ The issue is horribly divided and there are those with vested interests to try and make each other look bad. It wouldn't be the first time, but I suspect you'll get some agent provocateurs at these events, with the sole purpose of kicking off to try and discredit the cause.
Told ye they'd annex Gaza What else can Security responsibility mean? Might install the flacid Palestinian Authority as the local government and just come and go as they please when they please.
