Israel, Hamas and now Hezbollah

My point is that in one’s sincere attempt at trying to portray just how shocking was the evil brought down onto Israeli inhabitants on 7th October, it does the cause absolutely no good whatsoever if one does not do so as accurately as possible.

I’m as guilty as anyone of getting things wrong, but I think that we should hold judgement on portraying such images which may subsequently prove not to be true.

Whitewavemark2

Did you see the footage?

The footage was shown to foreign journalists because it was deemed far too horrific to be put in the public domain.

I have room in my house for refugees.

Did you see the footage?

Whitewavemark2

I do think that emotions are very heightened, and as mature people we really should avoid using the sort of language or painting unverified images that can only make the matter more fraught.

Footage of the horrors of 7/10 was shown to international journalists today.

They have been verified

I do think that emotions are very heightened, and as mature people we really should avoid using the sort of language or painting unverified images that can only make the matter more fraught.

^Growstuff*

Oh really? Well seeing as you don’t respond to thread monitors you won’t have a problem with me doing the same.

"The way you talk about Hamas you come across as more than an interested observer."

Maybe you should explain exactly what you mean because it's potentially slanderous.

Glorianny
I've looked at the history of Hamas*. ^Then there was a massacre in a mosque by a Jewish fanatic, this lifted the restrictions and they began attacking civilian targets.

Oh I see, that explains their savagery. Silly me. Imagine if the UK and European armies behaved accordingly. How many Muslim fanatics have carried out attacks and massacres here and in Europe? One such Muslim carried out an attack less than 2 weeks ago here and stabbed an entirely innocent man to death. He did it for Palestine and he’s a newly arrived immigrant. Not much made of it - community relations etc.

The way you talk about Hamas you come across as more than an interested observer.

Glorianny

Shelmiss

Glorianny upthread: "But Hamas are seen as the bad guys.".

Wow. Just wow. Shame on you,

Can you tell me why?
Do you see the war crimes Israel is committing as of less significance than the war crimes Hamas is committing.
Is killing over 1000 children quite acceptable?

I will help you out here Glorianny

IDF firing missiles into Palestine to obliterate Hamas.

Then we have the following:-

Rape,
Beheading
Murdering a pregnant women, beheading her, cutting her unborn baby out of her womb and beheading the baby.
Burning children after tying them up.
Cutting off peoples feet (the pathologists are still trying to establish if this was done before or after death)
Taking hostages some just babies.
Using hostages as human shields
Using the citizens of Palestine as human shields.

All the above have now been verified and footage shown to foreign journalists earlier today, all committed by Hamas Terrorists.

I think you get the gist…

We are in so much trouble here.

Shelmiss

Glorianny upthread: "But Hamas are seen as the bad guys.".

Wow. Just wow. Shame on you,

Can you tell me why?
Do you see the war crimes Israel is committing as of less significance than the war crimes Hamas is committing.
Is killing over 1000 children quite acceptable?

Glorianny upthread: "But Hamas are seen as the bad guys.".

Wow. Just wow. Shame on you,

But foxie I didn’t say most, I said other. It’s different.

maddyone

As long as Hamas wish to wipe every Jew from Israel, and other Muslims wish to wipe every Jew from the face of the earth, this will never be sorted out. The best we can hope for is some sort of negotiated peace, which will probably continue to bubble.

This is not only incorrect it is potentially anti-Islamist, most Muslims do not want to wipe every Jew from the face of the earth, most Muslims want what we all want and that is to live in peace with our neighbours regardless of their religion or ethnicity. I think you should ask for your post to be deleted but that is entirely up to you.

One of the reasons for the rise of Jewish resistance movements was because a british white paper in 1939 put restrictions on Jewish immigration and land purchases, declaring that they intended giving independence to Palestine with an Arab majority within 10 years. During W.W2 obviously things calmed down, but after the war when Britain actually significantly reduced Jewish immigration, and was perceived to be dragging its heels over a Jewish state,that trouble boiled over. Between 1948 and 1967 , I think both Jordan and Egypt administered Gaza and the West Bank. After the 6 day war in 1967 in which Israel triumphed, the administration fell to Israel until 2005.

maddyone

Yes they do tickingbird. The land never belonged to the Arabs exclusively, it was always shared with the Jews. Many Jews were expelled many, many years ago, but some Jews always remained, and in any case, they should never have been expelled in the first place. And so the land was shared, but after WW2 many Jews realised that they needed a homeland again, and many survivors returned to what is now Israel.
The Jews have always lived there and have just as much right to live there as the Arabs do.

That isn’t quite right really. Palestine was identified as the area for a potential safe homeland free from continued persecution before the beginning of the 20th century. People began to move there gradually from that time and buying land from the Arab middle class. By 1947, Jewish people owned approximately 6% of the total land area. That doesn’t mean however, that the Arabs owned the rest, but they did own more than 6%

tickingbird

Glorianny

^An Israeli state was certainly proposed and agreed after. the genocide.
But can you explain to me why it required the assassination of an ambassador, the bombing of the King David Hotel, or any of the other Irgun ans Stern actions which took place in Europe and the Middle East? And what. were those actions if not acts of terrorism?^

I don’t deny they were acts of terrorism. The whole region has been a hotbed of terrorism. However, even before the Stern group Arabs were refusing to share what they consider their land with Jews. Jews have always been there.

You can argue until you’re blue in the face but the fact remains that Jews have as much right to be there as Arabs.

I've never said Jews don't have a right to be there. I simply pointed out that terrorism has never been solely the prerogative of one side.
I've looked at the history of Hamas. Their original actions were always attacks on military personnel and targets. It was seen as unacceptable to target or attack civilians. Then there was a massacre in a mosque by a Jewish fanatic, this lifted the restrictions and they began attacking civilian targets.
Some Arab want all Jews eliminated from the land and equally some Jews want all Arabs eliminated from the land. This has never been a one sided conflict.

Yes they do tickingbird. The land never belonged to the Arabs exclusively, it was always shared with the Jews. Many Jews were expelled many, many years ago, but some Jews always remained, and in any case, they should never have been expelled in the first place. And so the land was shared, but after WW2 many Jews realised that they needed a homeland again, and many survivors returned to what is now Israel.
The Jews have always lived there and have just as much right to live there as the Arabs do.

Glorianny

^An Israeli state was certainly proposed and agreed after. the genocide.
But can you explain to me why it required the assassination of an ambassador, the bombing of the King David Hotel, or any of the other Irgun ans Stern actions which took place in Europe and the Middle East? And what. were those actions if not acts of terrorism?^

I don’t deny they were acts of terrorism. The whole region has been a hotbed of terrorism. However, even before the Stern group Arabs were refusing to share what they consider their land with Jews. Jews have always been there.

You can argue until you’re blue in the face but the fact remains that Jews have as much right to be there as Arabs.

Whitewavemark2

There is pressure growing on Israel from world leaders, including the U.K. to negotiate the release of the hostages. To do so, I think personally that, that would required a ceasefire, which Israel almost certainly would not agree to.

The worry of a regional war is growing by the day.

According to Ali Baraka, Hamas need the hostages to trade for Hamas operatives held in the USA.

It’s a bit sickening that the USA vetoed a UN resolution for a humanitarian ceasefire and Britain abstained from voting.
With such outside involvement will there ever be any real chance of peace?

Well I think that the ones who should have most say are first the Israelis looking for a safe homeland free from the sort of pogroms you saw on 7th October and the Palestinians looking for justice over what they see as their legitimate claim to land.

The UN could oversee it but without the two protagonists compete in involvement and agreement the decision will as meaningless as the 1947 decision.

The two sides are no so far apart as perhaps Hamas and Netanyahu would have you believe. It has been agreed but never ratified, so it is more than possible.

As long as Hamas wish to wipe every Jew from Israel, and other Muslims wish to wipe every Jew from the face of the earth, this will never be sorted out. The best we can hope for is some sort of negotiated peace, which will probably continue to bubble.

As it was the UN which voted for partition, are they not the right organisation to sort this out, if rather belatedly?