WAR! What is it good for?

[PINKIE]

Who said anything about building up their forces? All I mentioned was reconstruction of the region e.g. all the homes, businesses, buildings etc that have been utterly demolished get rebuilt, that those who have been forcibly displaced are allowed back, that basic humanitarian aid is allowed and that hostages and prisoners are given back. I haven't said anything about 'Hamas forces'. There are also other factions that exist outside of Hamas, by the way.

There's nothing unreasonable about any of this and the only reason why it won't happen is because Israel doesn't want it to. If these terms are seen as 'unacceptable to Israel', then that tells you all it needs to about them.

Israel's resources vastly exceeds anything Hamas could ever do, too. So even if Hamas were to 'build up their forces', Israel have more than enough artillery and tech to keep them at bay. So I don't see this as a valid reason.

Mentioned it ages ago on this thread, but you'll see lucrative deals for friends of Israel and the US to 'rebuild' Gaza.

None of it will be of benefit for Palestinians though.

 

[FosseFilberto]

or

Hezbollah aimed badly and hit a football pitch.

Prompting an emergency 'appropriate response' from Israel ... in marked contrast to their usual reaction to arab child deaths elsewhere in the region ...

Kung-Po Panda strikes again ...

 

[Welshie]

Prompting an emergency 'appropriate response' from Israel ... in marked contrast to their usual reaction to arab child deaths elsewhere in the region ...

Kung-Po Panda strikes again ...

Just type "I don't care, I hate Israel" and save everyone time

****in imbecile

 

[Solid Air]

Who said anything about building up their forces? All I mentioned was reconstruction of the region e.g. all the homes, businesses, buildings etc that have been utterly demolished get rebuilt, that those who have been forcibly displaced are allowed back, that basic humanitarian aid is allowed and that hostages and prisoners are given back. I haven't said anything about 'Hamas forces'. There are also other factions that exist outside of Hamas, by the way.

There's nothing unreasonable about any of this and the only reason why it won't happen is because Israel doesn't want it to. If these terms are seen as 'unacceptable to Israel', then that tells you all it needs to about them.

Israel's resources vastly exceeds anything Hamas could ever do, too. So even if Hamas were to 'build up their forces', Israel have more than enough artillery and tech to keep them at bay. So I don't see this as a valid reason.

What's unacceptable about Hamas' terms?

They want Israeli forces to permanently withdraw from the Gaza Strip, displaced Palestinians to go back home, releasing of hostages (on BOTH sides), ending of military operations and reconstruction of Gaza.

Please explain what's unreasonable about any of that?

That was the bit i said would be unacceptable to Israel which had zero to do with rebuilding Gaza

 

[PINKIE]

That was the bit i said would be unacceptable to Israel which had zero to do with rebuilding Gaza

It shouldn't be down to Israel to decide whether it's acceptable to leave forces in a territory that they illegally occupy.

I think the fundamentals of this issue get lost in amongst the noise that Israel makes about it's own 'needs'

 

[FosseFilberto]

It shouldn't be down to Israel to decide whether it's acceptable to leave forces in a territory that they illegally occupy.

I think the fundamentals of this issue get lost in amongst the noise that Israel makes about it's own 'needs'

^^^^^

Agree -

Israel has for decades acted with a degree of impunity under the banner of having the right to 'defend' itself - which of course it does - but, apart from the US, most of the rest of the world is now beginning to question what constitutes 'defence' versus what are flagrant breaches of International Law and also the agreed principles of modern warfare ...

The world can only hope that this catastrophe - because it has been one for innocent human life on all sides- can lead to a lasting peace and constitutions enshrined in International Law that include sovereign safe homelands for both Israelis and Palestinians ...

 

[PINKIE]

^^^^^

Agree -

Israel has for decades acted with a degree of impunity under the banner of having the right to 'defend' itself - which of course it does - but, apart from the US, most of the rest of the world is now beginning to question what constitutes 'defence' versus what are flagrant breaches of International Law and also the agreed principles of modern warfare ...

The world can only hope that this catastrophe - because it has been one for innocent human life on all sides- can lead to a lasting peace and constitutions enshrined in International Law that include sovereign safe homelands for both Israelis and Palestinians ...

And enshrined in International law is the right for an occupied people to armed resistance against their occupiers.

 

[Solid Air]

It shouldn't be down to Israel to decide whether it's acceptable to leave forces in a territory that they illegally occupy.

I think the fundamentals of this issue get lost in amongst the noise that Israel makes about it's own 'needs'

see the problem on here is the goalposts keep moving i replied specifically to Brunels claim that the terms of the Hamas ceasefire offer should be acceptable to Israel and i pointed out why it wouldn't be .
A dose of reality is required here as it doesn't matter if Israel is illegally occupying Gaza they are there and will not be leaving in anything like the near future if ever .

 

[PINKIE]

see the problem on here is the goalposts keep moving i replied specifically to Brunels claim that the terms of the Hamas ceasefire offer should be acceptable to Israel and i pointed out why it wouldn't be .
A dose of reality is required here as it doesn't matter if Israel is illegally occupying Gaza they are there and will not be leaving in anything like the near future if ever .

The dose of reality required is that the ICJ and UN resolutions on the illegal occupation should be addressed.

I understand that Israel and the west have no intention of honouring that right now, and it needs to be a step by step process. But people should not lose sight of this fundamental fact.

 

[Solid Air]

The dose of reality required is that the ICJ and UN resolutions on the illegal occupation should be addressed.

I understand that Israel and the west have no intention of honouring that right now, and it needs to be a step by step process. But people should not lose sight of this fundamental fact.

this is what i mean just words.
btw the Palestinian cause has little support from any govt in the region due to yoking themselves to Iran and the Oct massacre means any political settlement has flown for the forseeable future

 

[PINKIE]

this is what i mean just words.
btw the Palestinian cause has little support from any govt in the region due to yoking themselves to Iran and the Oct massacre means any political settlement has flown for the forseeable future

The sooner the US and the West work towards brokering a two state solution in the region, the quicker Palestine won't need to rely on the likes of Iran or Hezbollah for support.

But the fundamentals remain. Israel is illegally occupying Gaza and parts of the West Bank, and Palestinians have a right to armed resistance.

 

[Citizen Kane.]

The sooner the US and the West work towards brokering a two state solution in the region, the quicker Palestine won't need to rely on the likes of Iran or Hezbollah for support.

But the fundamentals remain. Israel is illegally occupying Gaza and parts of the West Bank, and Palestinians have a right to armed resistance.

"Palestine" doesn't rely on Iran. Hamas does. The West Bank is controlled (nominally) by Fatah, which is aligned with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. The fact that the Palestinians aren't politically or geographically contiguous gives you a clue as to why the two-state solution is bloody hard to implement.

The right to armed resistance is only enshrined if all other solutions have been exhausted.

I don't recall Hamas offering peace talks at any point in its 18-year reign over Gaza. Because the one thing it has that Israel wants, it will never offer: The unconditional recognition of the State of Israel.

Hamas defaults to armed resistance because it is openly genocidal, not because it sees that resistance as "enshrined by international law". Let's not forget that at precisely the time when the other regional actors were strongly exploring non-violent solutions (Oslo), Hamas was busy bombing buses in Israel to derail the talks.

 

[Star of David Bardsley]

this is what i mean just words.
btw the Palestinian cause has little support from any govt in the region due to yoking themselves to Iran and the Oct massacre means any political settlement has flown for the forseeable future

Israel is on pretty good terms with the serious Arab countries except Qatar.

 

[Star of David Bardsley]

^^^^^

Agree -

Israel has for decades acted with a degree of impunity under the banner of having the right to 'defend' itself - which of course it does - but, apart from the US, most of the rest of the world is now beginning to question what constitutes 'defence' versus what are flagrant breaches of International Law and also the agreed principles of modern warfare ...

The world can only hope that this catastrophe - because it has been one for innocent human life on all sides- can lead to a lasting peace and constitutions enshrined in International Law that include sovereign safe homelands for both Israelis and Palestinians ...

We’ll just come back to the point that they really are only interested in killing Jews. That and aid, much of which is used to try and kill Jews.

 

[PINKIE]

"Palestine" doesn't rely on Iran. Hamas does. The West Bank is controlled (nominally) by Fatah, which is aligned with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. The fact that the Palestinians aren't politically or geographically contiguous gives you a clue as to why the two-state solution is bloody hard to implement.

The right to armed resistance is only enshrined if all other solutions have been exhausted.

I don't recall Hamas offering peace talks at any point in its 18-year reign over Gaza. Because the one thing it has that Israel wants, it will never offer: The unconditional recognition of the State of Israel.

Hamas defaults to armed resistance because it is openly genocidal, not because it sees that resistance as "enshrined by international law". Let's not forget that at precisely the time when the other regional actors were strongly exploring non-violent solutions (Oslo), Hamas was busy bombing buses in Israel to derail the talks.

It was in response to Solid's reference of the 'Palestinian cause' but yes I agree, there's a schizm between Hamas and Fatah. That though doesn't or shouldn't occlude the notion and roadmap to a Palestinian state though. Hamas' actions also do not negate the Palestinians rights to armed resistance, no matter how much we disagree with their tactics.

 

[Solid Air]

Israel is on pretty good terms with the serious Arab countries except Qatar.

my enemy is your enemy therefore we're friends

 

[Citizen Kane.]

CK, I've been quietly reading the last 7/8 pages of this thread and vowed to remain silent...until I saw this.

And whilst I broadly agree with most of your views on Syria (I am very anti-Assad and think he needs to be fired into the ****ing sun), and am also anti-Iran (not a fan of Khomeinism, Ayatollahs or the puritanical version of Shi'ism enforced within the country - if you want to go further back, I have a deep dislike of the Safavids too), your sympathy towards Israel still remains a total mystery to me.

Let me make my stance clear to you: Israel has not, is not, and will never be a force for good. Ever.

I know you've lived there before. I know you've worked there before. Maybe that's why you have a deep desire to defend its corner. Maybe you're Jewish yourself and were taught Israel was your ancestral homeland growing up. Honestly, I don't know what your reasons are, and truth to be told, it doesn't really matter.

The bottom line is: Israel changing leadership won't fix anything. For as long as it exists as a political entity (an illegitimate one in my eyes), there will never be justice in that region. I don't believe in peace. I believe in justice. Until the Palestinians get their land back, and it becomes free from occupation, I will always view Israel as the enemy.

I'd be interested in exploring your viewpoint further, Brunel. I doubt we'll ever agree on this particular issue, but we've enjoyed plenty of good natured banter over the years and I see you as a solid bloke, even though you support an awful team.

For what reason or on what basis do you see Israel in its entirety as illegitimate?

 

[BrunelGunner]

I'd be interested in exploring your viewpoint further, Brunel. I doubt we'll ever agree on this particular issue, but we've enjoyed plenty of good natured banter over the years and I see you as a solid bloke, even though you support an awful team.

For what reason or on what basis do you see Israel in its entirety as illegitimate?

CK, I'm a bit reluctant to delve too deep with you on this - precisely for the reasons you've stated - that we won't ever agree. Ultimately, regardless of what my reasons are, or my justifications for why I will never view The 'State of Israel' as 'legitimate', you will always be looking for flaws in my reasoning and perspectives. I don't mind giving you some very basic points/reasons why I don't acknowledge Israel as a legitimate state, but I don't want to engage in a to-ing and fro-ing on each point. Also, fundamentally, I think a large part of it will come down to different readings of history or who we trust as our sources of information.

For example, you listed Peres and Rabin as good ambassadors for Israel. I see them as sustainers and maintainers of a system of oppression and control over Palestinians. OK, when you compare those two to devils like Ben-Gvir or Netanyahu, they're not 'as bad', but they're still deeply troublesome individuals and their role(s) in the Oslo Accords didn't do much to improve the situation for the Palestinians, despite some claims to the contrary.

But if you want to know my brief views on why I view Israel as 'illegitimate', for one, I am anti-Zionist. Two, the Nakba in 1948. Three, the concept of an external population establishing themselves in Arab land and uprooting the indigenous population is an extension of colonial practices and that is something I can't abide. Four, Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip and West Bank contravenes international law and human rights. Finally, the continued and increased support from the USA has allowed Israel to act with impunity and suffer no major tangible consequences.

I have no doubt you will take issue with some of these points, but that's by the by. In a nutshell, these are the reasons why I will never acknowledge Israel as a legitimate state. Its core foundations are based on colonialism and violence.

 

[Citizen Kane.]

CK, I'm a bit reluctant to delve too deep with you on this - precisely for the reasons you've stated - that we won't ever agree. Ultimately, regardless of what my reasons are, or my justifications for why I will never view The 'State of Israel' as 'legitimate', you will always be looking for flaws in my reasoning and perspectives. I don't mind giving you some very basic points/reasons why I don't acknowledge Israel as a legitimate state, but I don't want to engage in a to-ing and fro-ing on each point. Also, fundamentally, I think a large part of it will come down to different readings of history or who we trust as our sources of information.

For example, you listed Peres and Rabin as good ambassadors for Israel. I see them as sustainers and maintainers of a system of oppression and control over Palestinians. OK, when you compare those two to devils like Ben-Gvir or Netanyahu, they're not 'as bad', but they're still deeply troublesome individuals and their role(s) in the Oslo Accords didn't do much to improve the situation for the Palestinians, despite some claims to the contrary.

But if you want to know my brief views on why I view Israel as 'illegitimate', for one, I am anti-Zionist. Two, the Nakba in 1948. Three, the concept of an external population establishing themselves in Arab land and uprooting the indigenous population is an extension of colonial practices and that is something I can't abide. Four, Israel's actions in the Gaza Strip and West Bank contravenes international law and human rights. Finally, the continued and increased support from the USA has allowed Israel to act with impunity and suffer no major tangible consequences.

I have no doubt you will take issue with some of these points, but that's by the by. In a nutshell, these are the reasons why I will never acknowledge Israel as a legitimate state. Its core foundations are based on colonialism and violence.

Thanks. I appreciate the response. I don't feel the same weight from the knowledge that 'we'll never agree'. On the contrary, I've learned a huge amount from (some) posters on this thread over the years even though I know I will never fully agree with them, and have hopefully contributed some helpful perspectives/opinions of my own to the conversation.

I'll respond properly when I've give your points some proper thought

 

[BrunelGunner]

Thanks. I appreciate the response. I don't feel the same weight from the knowledge that 'we'll never agree'. On the contrary, I've learned a huge amount from (some) posters on this thread over the years even though I know I will never fully agree with them, and have hopefully contributed some helpful perspectives/opinions of my own to the conversation.

I'll respond properly when I've give your points some proper thought

Absolutely, and in many contexts, I'd agree. But when it comes to matters of humanity, right vs wrong and good vs evil, although I appreciate it's not always binary in a lot of instances, there's certain fundamental positions that are non-negotiable and I know I will never shift on. Particularly when I am sure what the outcome needs to be and have felt this way for many a year. This issue is one of them.