Topic: When will it be enough ?

[Kenny's Jacket]

You highlighted the wrong bit.Besides, my subsequent post (which you have ignored) made clear to what I was referring:

Its upto you to make clear which part of the post you agree with, you could have removed (when quoting) the part where Great Ex complained that this thread is open.

If you leave a post whole it suggests you agree with all of it.

There are numerous threads open, why choose this one to make the complaint?

[Bobsackamano]

Okay, fair enough.  Is it, currently, a war, though?

Yes it is. War is hell.

[Snail]

Something odd is happening. A sort of glitch or malfunction. Liberal politicians who refuse to call for a ceasefire in Gaza or halt support for Israel’s assault are no longer making sense, and increasingly seem as though they are going through a crisis. Garbled language and contradictory statements are becoming common among establishment figures. When Keir Starmer was asked if cutting off water and supplies are actions that fall within international law, he said on live radio that Israel “does have that right”. Then, his party claimed he never said this at all. When Starmer said that Labour would not recognise Palestine unilaterally, his own shadow foreign secretary, David Lammy, told the Financial Times that Labour would consider it.

Nowhere are these contradictions clearer than when politicians express unequivocal support for Israel’s actions while also expressing concern for civilians in Gaza. In a post on X, Lisa Nandy, the shadow international development secretary, appeared to support the suspension of funds to UNRWA, the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, because “allegations this serious demand a serious response”, while also “seeking reassurances” from the prime minister that aid could still be provided. I had to read her statement several times to try to understand what she was getting at. Meanwhile, David Cameron said he was “worried” that Israel may have broken international law, but that this did not change the UK’s stance on exporting weapons to Israel. Riddle me that.

You might call this tendency Schrödinger’s policy. The US secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said that 7 October could not be taken as licence to “dehumanise” others, but his government chose twice to invoke the right to bypass Congress and provide more weapons to Israel.

This dissonance is a product of attempting to reconcile an irreconcilable position. The facts are simply too stark for anyone to confront them while plausibly continuing to support Israel’s actions in Gaza. So politicians instead resort to contradictory and sometimes wild explanations to avoid calling out these actions or demanding that anything should be done about them. The results border on derangement, such as when Nancy Pelosi told CNN that while some protesters are “spontaneous and organic and sincere”, calling for a ceasefire means giving voice to “Mr Putin’s message”. And if that wasn’t enough, last year, she told pro-Palestine protesters to go back to China, as that’s where “their headquarters is”.

Spokespeople are on the ropes. When asked what message Joe Biden had for Arab Americans who are concerned about Gaza, a White House spokesperson said the president was “heartbroken” and also believed “Israel has the right to defend themselves”. Heartbroken Biden appears to have given up altogether, cracking under the effort of pretending his country’s Middle East policy is fruitful or even coherent. He has admitted that strikes against the Houthis aren’t working. “Are they stopping the Houthis? No. Are they going to continue? Yes,” he told journalists.

It’s an honest summary at least, and it encompasses the position that Israel’s allies have shown towards Gaza. Is it working? No. But it will continue. And that’s that. Because the war passes no tests. It’s not consistent with liberal principles, and it’s not even logical in terms of security. The Middle East is the most unstable it has been in decades, and the conflict is making political life increasingly volatile at home, particularly in the US and the UK. Two parties of centrist “grownups” have positioned themselves as alternatives to chaotic and corrupt rightwing competitors in a crucial election year, and are now worried about losing support, and regularly have to fend off the heckles from pro-Palestine protesters.

This strange inability to respond appropriately to Israeli aggression is about more than Gaza. Events there have exposed the flaws in an entire model of politics and the assumptions that underpin it. If liberalism cannot offer a moral and stabilising form of governance, then what is it for? In the midst of such a historically bloody and disruptive conflict, if liberalism shows no ability or desire to protect civilian life, regional security and its own electoral prospects, then its mission-defining claims of principle and competence collapse.

When a less safe world becomes an acceptable price to pay for loyalty to allies, the west’s claim to authority as a political and military custodian of law and order looks increasingly tenuous.

Once that authority is gone, the system is rocked from within. The mainstream political consensus on Israel and Palestine long held that Israel’s actions ought to be staunchly supported, and that the plight of Palestinians is either paralysingly complex or – at worst – the fault of their own terrorists. That consensus is now being challenged, not only by faceless protesters, but from within the bastions of liberal media. In recent weeks, both CNN and the New York Times have been reportedly riven with internal discord after some employees deemed their coverage too credulous and sympathetic to Israel’s actions.

Gaza has become the expression of a legitimacy crisis for an Anglo-American political class who preside over already fragile systems that deliver less and less to their populations, and whose main offering is that the alternative is worse. Things may look stable, but underneath lurk managed discontents about costs of living, diminished social mobility and the ravages wreaked by rightwing governments to which centrists provide no real answer.

As the writer Richard Seymour once said: “If a crisis erupts in politics we can be sure that it’s overdetermined by the accumulation of contradictions elsewhere in the structure. Individual crises might be manageable, but what’s deadly is the way in which all of these contradictions feed back on each other.”

The political response to Gaza may seem obstinate and imperious, yet what lies behind it is not strength, but weakness.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/feb/12/israel-gaza-liberal-politicians-starmer-biden

[Red_Mist]

I can fully understand Israel’s desire to eradicate Hamas. But post-Hamas (assuming for a moment that’s even possible) I wonder how a moderate future Palestinian leadership can gain enough support from the general population?

My question (as I simply have no idea about the answer) is, does your “average Palestinian” (and by that I mean someone not a member of Hamas, someone who just wants to live their life in peace) think, ‘Fuck Hamas, they’ve brought this death and destruction upon us by attacking Israel’.

Or is he/she now actually more likely to support Hamas given the terrible atrocities committed in the Gaza Strip?

If it’s the former, then a more moderate future leadership can gain some support.

But if it’s the latter, then that moderate leadership has little or no chance of succeeding, does it?

If I was to guess, I’d say the latter might on balance be true. But maybe the horror, stress and fatigue of the past few months means the former is possible?

I just don’t know, as I’m not there, but it’s partly key to knowing if there’s any hope for the future where this whole tragedy is concerned.

I know I’ve simplified things there in a way that’s probably unrealistic. Just the mind whirring. And maybe there’s posters who might have insight.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

Yes it is. War is hell.

Quite. In 4 months c. 28k Palestinians (Hamas' figure) have been killed. When Dresden was bombed in WW2 almost that figure were killed in a single night. 37k were killed in Hamburg in a week. 100,000 people were killed in Tokyo in a single night of bombing. The vast majority of the dead were civilians and no more complicit in the crimes of the Axis powers than Palestinian civilians are complicit in the crimes of Hamas.

Hamas knew exactly what Israel's reaction would be when they launched their attacks on 7th October. They started a war and as is so often the case it is innocent civilians that are paying the price.

[Wool]

This isn't war. They're killing for sport.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Its upto you to make clear which part of the post you agree with, you could have removed (when quoting) the part where Great Ex complained that this thread is open.

If you leave a post whole it suggests you agree with all of it.

Again. My followup post made clear to what I was referring - and again, you have ignored this. You appear determined to interpret my post in your own peculiar way.

There are numerous threads open, why choose this one to make the complaint?

I was responding to posts in this thread (and even quoted them) - where else do you suggest that I respond to them!?

This is tedious.

[Kenny's Jacket]

This is tedious.

Too right

[Indomitable_Carp]

Quite. In 4 months c. 28k Palestinians (Hamas' figure) have been killed. When Dresden was bombed in WW2 almost that figure were killed in a single night. 37k were killed in Hamburg in a week. 100,000 people were killed in Tokyo in a single night of bombing. The vast majority of the dead were civilians and no more complicit in the crimes of the Axis powers than Palestinian civilians are complicit in the crimes of Hamas.

Hamas knew exactly what Israel's reaction would be when they launched their attacks on 7th October. They started a war and as is so often the case it is innocent civilians that are paying the price.

The United Nations was set up and the international rule of law established (including rules for conducting warfare) precisely to stop a repeat of this kind of bloodshed. Citing the carpet bombing of German cities in the Second World War is not quite the defence of the destruction of Gaza that you think it is.

How complicit or not the civilian population of Nazi Germany was is a different discussion. But I guess it bares mentioning (seeing as you have made the comparison...) that the crimes of the Nazi's were on a whole different scale to the events of October 7th. Churchill's promise of revenge for the Blitz was that Germany would be bombed ten-fold. In actual fact is was bombed more like twenty-fold, with a civilian death toll 10x that of Britain. Gaza's death toll is currently 30x that of October 7th.

[GreatEx]

Its upto you to make clear which part of the post you agree with, you could have removed (when quoting) the part where Great Ex complained that this thread is open.

If you leave a post whole it suggests you agree with all of it.

There are numerous threads open, why choose this one to make the complaint?

Let me clear on what I was saying, and that might help you and Jiminy reach an entente.

I am not complaining that this thread is open. I have wanted there to be a Gaza war thread all along. But the discussion is being moderated inconsistently. First it seemed that all discussion was banned and all posts were removed. Then it became a live discussion in the US thread over several hours or days. It became heated, as it always does, but it got back on course, and led to interesting discussion on protest (non-)voting, so I joined in. Then the entire discussion was wiped out with no explanation. Then this thread pops up and is even more heated and damning of Israel. So what are the rules here? Who's on VAR?

[Kenny's Jacket]

Let me clear on what I was saying, and that might help you and Jiminy reach an entente.

I am not complaining that this thread is open. I have wanted there to be a Gaza war thread all along. But the discussion is being moderated inconsistently. First it seemed that all discussion was banned and all posts were removed. Then it became a live discussion in the US thread over several hours or days. It became heated, as it always does, but it got back on course, and led to interesting discussion on protest (non-)voting, so I joined in. Then the entire discussion was wiped out with no explanation. Then this thread pops up and is even more heated and damning of Israel. So what are the rules here? Who's on VAR?

You are contradicting yourself, my last word on this will be to suggest the ask the mods a question thread

[The North Bank]

Do you think we should end genocidal regimes?

Yes, but not by committing a genocide.

[Red-Soldier]

You’re talking about a 6 year old child. You are an unbelievable c*nt (and if this gets me banned so be it) but that’s exactly what you are. Nasty c*nt.

You may feel very aggrieved, however, personal insults will likely get the thread locked.  It will also confirm what the mods have said all a long, that we cannot have a discussion on this topic, as it's too polarised and results in nasty, personal insults, all the time.

If you feel triggered, just walk away, don't post in anger, and/or report it (explain your grievances).

[The North Bank]

You’re talking about a 6 year old child. You are an unbelievable c*nt (and if this gets me banned so be it) but that’s exactly what you are. Nasty c*nt.

A lot of people have shown their true colours in the last couple of months. Not pretty.

[Kenny's Jacket]

Do you think we should end genocidal regimes?

Are you fishing for a response to back up your silly Sadaam/Blair/Neanyahu claim?

[GreatEx]

You are contradicting yourself, my last word on this will be to suggest the ask the mods a question thread

If you're going to accuse me of being contradictory then please have the courtesy to explain how (the highlighted text doesn't help). I took the trouble to expand on my post, after all.

[Wool]

You may feel very aggrieved, however, personal insults will likely get the thread locked.  It will also confirm what the mods have said all a long, that we cannot have a discussion on this topic, as it's too polarised and results in nasty, personal insults, all the time.

If you feel triggered, just walk away, don't post in anger, and/or report it (explain your grievances).

Any human being should feel angered by that post. There’s discourse on this subject and then there’s someone gleefully handwaving away the murder of an innocent child, of innocent civilians. That should never be acceptable.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

The United Nations was set up and the international rule of law established (including rules for conducting warfare) precisely to stop a repeat of this kind of bloodshed. Citing the carpet bombing of German cities in the Second World War is not quite the defence of the destruction of Gaza that you think it is.

How complicit or not the civilian population of Nazi Germany was is a different discussion. But I guess it bares mentioning (seeing as you have made the comparison...) that the crimes of the Nazi's were on a whole different scale to the events of October 7th. Churchill's promise of revenge for the Blitz was that Germany would be bombed ten-fold. In actual fact is was bombed more like twenty-fold, with a civilian death toll 10x that of Britain. Gaza's death toll is currently 30x that of October 7th.

I wasn't defending Israel's actions in Gaza, or stating that they are equivalent to those of the Allies in WW2. Just making the broad point that the vast majority of people would still regard the Allied conduct in WW2 as morally justified despite the huge numbers of civilian deaths.

I was agreeing with Bob's point that sadly high civilian death tolls are usually an inevitable consequence when war is waged.It seems to me that post 45 history suggests that the UN and Geneva Conventions sadly do not seem to have changed this, whoever the protagonists.

To come back to where the thread started, clearly the existence of a state of war does not justify laying direct fire on aid personnel and children.

[Red-Soldier]

Any human being should feel angered by that post. There’s discourse on this subject and then there’s someone gleefully handwaving away the murder of an innocent child, of innocent civilians. That should never be acceptable.

I know mate, but just don't give them a rise.  They've already shown theemselves up for the kind of person they are.  If they are happy with that, then fine. 

If you find the post in question offensive, then report it and explain why.  Don't respond to it (I'm speaking as someone who sometimes cannot help themselves, either).

[Wool]

I know mate, but just don't give them a rise.  They've already shown theemselves up for the kind of person they are.  If they are happy with that, then fine. 

If you find the post in question offensive, then report it and explain why.  Don't respond to it (I'm speaking as someone who sometimes cannot help themselves, either).

I suspect it’s probably the intention so threads like these get banned and the atrocities aren’t highlighted. Apologies for falling for it and thanks to all those in this thread ensuring these people aren’t forgotten or mere statistics.

[GreatEx]

I wasn't defending Israel's actions in Gaza, or stating that they are equivalent to those of the Allies in WW2. Just making the broad point that the vast majority of people would still regard the Allied conduct in WW2 as morally justified despite the huge numbers of civilian deaths.

Of course, the passage of time allows us to view those casualties more dispassionately, and the knowledge that WW2 ended with the defeat of a genocidal regime and lasting peace (until a few years ago) in Europe and Japan would massively influence our views. I expect if we were living through it today there would be some "lively" discussion on here!

[The North Bank]

I wasn't defending Israel's actions in Gaza, or stating that they are equivalent to those of the Allies in WW2. Just making the broad point that the vast majority of people would still regard the Allied conduct in WW2 as morally justified despite the huge numbers of civilian deaths.

I was agreeing with Bob's point that sadly high civilian death tolls are usually an inevitable consequence when war is waged.It seems to me that post 45 history suggests that the UN and Geneva Conventions sadly do not seem to have changed this, whoever the protagonists.

To come back to where the thread started, clearly the existence of a state of war does not justify laying direct fire on aid personnel and children.

This idea that this genocide can carry on because others happened in the past, is frankly disgraceful. Not saying you meant it that way, but if you put yourself and your family in the position of those innocent women and children who are getting slaughtered in Gaza, you wouldn’t want someone to be saying, tough shit you die, war innit.

[jambutty]

Or it could be: Don't allow surrogates to control your community when you know their exploits will bring you under attack.

There's a view that Hamas see Gazans, Palestinians, Lebanese, Jordanians, Syrians and Yemenis as sacrificial lambs.

Which the Saudis would love.

MBS must be laughing his cock off.

And cheering many of you lot on.

[Indomitable_Carp]

Or it could be: Don't allow surrogates to control your community when you know their exploits will bring you under attack.

There's a view that Hamas view Gazans, Palestinians, Lebanese, Jordanians, Syrians and Yemenis as sacrificial lambs.

Which the Saudis would love.

I think the extreme violent wings of Hamas most certainly view the civilian population as sacrificial lambs, whose deaths can be used for political means. Likewise, not "allowing" a violent armed faction to control your community is easier said than done.

But I am confused as to why you think any of that justifies what is currently happening?

[jambutty]

Mate, my ideas aren't going to convince anyone.

I just post expert opinions by professionals to broaden the scope here.

And try to keep things upbeat.

[jambutty]

I will say that while I despise Bibi and his policies, I recognise he's got the toughest job in the world.

Surrounded by crazies (and that's just in the Knesset) and trying to keep the peace.

I'll leave you guys to it for awhile.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

Let me clear on what I was saying, and that might help you and Jiminy reach an entente.

I am not complaining that this thread is open. I have wanted there to be a Gaza war thread all along. But the discussion is being moderated inconsistently. First it seemed that all discussion was banned and all posts were removed. Then it became a live discussion in the US thread over several hours or days. It became heated, as it always does, but it got back on course, and led to interesting discussion on protest (non-)voting, so I joined in. Then the entire discussion was wiped out with no explanation. Then this thread pops up and is even more heated and damning of Israel. So what are the rules here? Who's on VAR?

At work so will reply to some very good posts later.

I want to point out that I started this thread before you all got posts removed from the yank thread.

Carry on.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I will say that while I despise Bibi and his policies, I recognise he's got the toughest job in the world.

Surrounded by crazies (and that's just in the Knesset) and trying to keep the peace.

I'll leave you guys to it for awhile.

[WhereAngelsPlay]

You may feel very aggrieved, however, personal insults will likely get the thread locked.  It will also confirm what the mods have said all a long, that we cannot have a discussion on this topic, as it's too polarised and results in nasty, personal insults, all the time.

If you feel triggered, just walk away, don't post in anger, and/or report it (explain your grievances).

Or do what I do, close the tab before hitting post.

[RedDeadRejection]

Hamas are despicable c*nts. Netanyahu and the "IDF" are despicable c*nts.

Thats all that needs to be said really.

[Snail]

A lot of people have shown their true colours in the last couple of months. Not pretty.

More than the last couple of months, my friend.

[Snail]

I recognise he's got the toughest job in the world.

I reckon that'd be the lads and lasses scraping viscera off the pavements and buildings of Rafah.

[surfer. Fuck you generator.]

The questions you ask based on rationality are what countries where people brought up on observing, questioning, forming their own conclusions...should understand: don't apply as universal.  Allow for the irrational aspect.

You deal with a person, it's not about what's fair, what is good for their family - peace, education etc. You first need to assess what's in their own mind, what's been put in, conditioned and how much is independent thought, to know are they even looking at quality.

I haven't lived among Palestinians, but I have had to assess and know, over the years, the environment, mentality, how information travels, how thinking is shaped on a weekly basis by the religious set-up in places like Indonesia, Malaysia, the economically relevant Middle East nations, to then help decide on the company's footprint in these places.

The succinct answer is the numbers to sustainably manage and grow a country are nowhere near enough in these places. What you end up with are two sections, strongly correlated to education and economic situation: one which has bought wholesale into the environment to explain away their shitty circumstances, will fanatically obey and press others to conform; and the other that is as precise, rational as you and me, and will exploit the former.

It doesn't matter what Israel does, only what the group in charge narrates.

Again, it's an issue of numbers. You will have people from a educationally, economically disadvantaged background in a religion centric area that can break through, analyse accurately but that's great for a human interest story, you need numbers to uplift a country. Not enough.
The solution, for me, after you clear out Hamas, ban religion in Palestine, take control of education, provide the necessities fully, wait a full generation. This generation is a write-off mentally.
And then find a solution to the location / area.
The US needs to cut Israel's military funding and Palestinian aid, withdraw. Not it's problem, hasn't been for years, just getting exploited at this point.