Israel, Palestine and Iran

[Awol]

11 hours ago, VILLAMARV said:

I appreciate you're talking about this week with OBE there, and taking us down the route of bombs and collateral damage, but they have though haven't they, Israel, targetted innocent Palestinians. And the UN and (talking of charity) Amnesty (amongst others) have called them out on it too. Doesn't your accusation of minimisation ring true with your own post?

To save space, the post below yours by @Panto_Villan nails it from my POV, and I’d never even considered that people would interpret the word ‘targeted’ differently. 

In my view a target is something you are specifically intending to hit, and as I think everyone recognises, Hamas infrastructure is entirely integrated into and under the civilian built environment. 

Hamas has sought to keep civilians in place in northern Gaza for two reasons: first to complicate the targeting process for the IDF by effectively hiding behind the civilian population, and second to ensure as many Palestinian civilian casualties as possible to reinforce their strategic communication narrative - that Israel is attacking Palestinian civilians indiscriminately.

If the latter point were true, why did the IDF specifically ask Palestinian civilians to evacuate the area of northern Gaza so that they wouldn’t be hurt? 

The Israelis are not going back to the status quo ante with Hamas controlling the strip and its population, reconstituting its military capability, and resuming attacks on Israel. For them, October 7th has changed the paradigm and Hamas presents a strategic risk that they will no longer tolerate.

The practical issue then becomes how to reduce civilian casualties in Gaza as much as possible, while Israel conducts a declared war against the de facto government of Gaza - which also happens to be proscribed terrorist organisation.  

As an aside, I used to donate to Amnesty International but they’ve utterly disgraced and compromised themselves (imo) in Ukraine by parroting Kremlin narratives. The ICRC has performed similarly.

 

Edited October 22, 2023 by Awol

[sne]

Seems the IDF is back to stormtrooper (the Star Wars kind) level accuracy again since they have apparently shelled an Egyptian border station by mistake.

[Awol]

It’s unfortunate that the Israelis have deemed this necessary, but once the mainstream media has received this briefing it should definitively end the speculation over what Hamas did or didn’t do to Israeli civilians.

From the Hamas point of view, it’s quite remarkable they thought recording and/or live-streaming their crimes was a good idea. 

 

[OutByEaster?]

That's really interestingly phrased - there hasn't been some sort of holocaust denial level of somehow failing to appreciate that Hamas committed horrendous crimes on October 7th - and no matter how much footage of it Israel decides to show us, we're not going not agree that it gives them full rights, justifications and permissions to kill hundreds of thousands of people.The world knows what happened - they haven't ignored or forgiven it - they'd just rather not see more.

That tweet is like an eight year old standing in front of a seven year old holding a knife and plaintively shouting "but mom, he hit me first!".

Israel thinks that the international community is preaching restraint because we don't 'get it', that we haven't understood what happened - where the international community is actually pledging restraint because it doesn't want a genocidal event committed by one of its allies.

 

 

[Tumblerseven]

It is insane what is happening the rhetoric the denial and demonization of Israel and jewish people. 

I remember i think it was 2014 when Israel went and just killed 2000 Palestinians absolutely uneven response i felt. And i went to the forums and talked to people and i was against Israel. I was always against Israel in that conflict until 6th. 

Now i have to argue for Israel and i hate that i feel like im some conservative because people completely lost their damn minds.

Edited October 22, 2023 by Tumblerseven

[Chindie]

An atrocity exhibition isn't helping anyone, other than Israel.

Just fans the fire that Palestinians and Hamas are one and the same thing though and thus justifies doing whatever you want to a few million people, though.

[magnkarl]

Washington Journal has a good video up on the car park rocket, if anyone’s interested. Not that it matters much as both sides are on to other things, but it is pretty conclusive that it is mlrs misfire.

[OutByEaster?]

23 minutes ago, Tumblerseven said:

It is insane what is happening the rhetoric the denial and demonization of Israel and jewish people. 

I don't doubt that there's some of this out there, but where are you seeing it?

I've not seen it here to any real extent and I've not really seen it anywhere else in the mainstream media, there will always be idiots on twitter, but for the most part elsewhere, there's some support and some justified criticism, in general I'm seeing a reasonably balanced response to events on the ground, other than if I go looking for them in the weirdest corners of social media.

From your perspective I'd expect to be seeing the BBC and the Us networks and the national papers printing scathing anti-semitic hate pieces and there's absolutely none of that anywhere - the larger media organisations are almost universally supporting Israel.

What would you say is a legitimate criticism of Israel at this time?

 

 

[desensitized43]

1 hour ago, Awol said:

It’s unfortunate that the Israelis have deemed this necessary, but once the mainstream media has received this briefing it should definitively end the speculation over what Hamas did or didn’t do to Israeli civilians.

From the Hamas point of view, it’s quite remarkable they thought recording and/or live-streaming their crimes was a good idea. 

 

I await the inevitable responses of “it’s propaganda and can’t be trusted and must be a mossad fakery” from the truly deranged and the “well what about what Israel have been doing for years” from those that are misguided terrorist apologists.

[LondonLax]

3 hours ago, chrisp65 said:

It’s difficult to do nuance at a time like this, although some are more capable than others LL and you’re not shouting at me, so cheers for that.

I’m sure that if I absolutely had a binary choice of living in Gaza or Israel, I’d choose Israel. Though, I’d prefer not to be a Palestinian in Israel with a nice home in an area some Israeli settlers want, because then I would find myself driven out by thieves protected by a well equipped army. 

We don’t know what a genuinely free Palestine would develop in to, you look at places like Lebanon which has been at times a little liberal oasis with a famous Mediterranean nightlife and cafe culture. But Gaza has been brutalised for 70 years and when somewhere is basically hopeless it tends not to flourish in to a liberal democracy. You could argue that the Israeli’s have been a massive contributor to the way Gaza has gone, they’ve pushed them in to the hands of the likes of Iran. The result is what we see now and that would be why I’d suggest they are as bad as each other. They’ve fed off each other for a very long time.

Then I guess it comes down to whether we prefer babies blown apart by high calibre bullets, dehydrated to death in an incubator with no electric, crushed under concrete in a refugee camp, stabbed, or shot with precision by a sniper 500 metres away. I’ll be honest, I struggle to choose.  

This bit might be a bit idealistic perhaps?

The Islamic world has undergone a lot of cultural conservatism over the last century and there are not many synagogues (or even churches anymore for that matter) to be found in the Middle East outside of Israel.

Our liberal ideals in Western Europe of a democratic multicultural society with freedom to worship (or be an atheist) freedom to be gay or have equal rights as a woman is fairly unusual in the world unfortunately. Israel is the only place that comes close in the Middle East.

Israel is not the reason why the Middle East is intolerant of gay people and there are fewer and fewer Christians in that region than there used to be (on a personal level a close work colleague came to Sweden as Syrian refugee 10 years ago but he says he’ll never be able to visit Syria again as he is a Christian and expects to be killed if he returned). Maybe there will be a cultural revolution and the theocracies will be overthrown? We can hope of course but my (perhaps naive?) optimism that the world tends to become more liberal and liberated the more exposure it gets to liberal ideas seems not to be panning out in a number of places. 

None of this excuses Israel’s forceful removal of West Bank Palestinians or their devastating response to last weekend but I think Hamas has severe ideological issues that go beyond merely being an equal and opposite response to Israel.  

[Tumblerseven]

1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said:

I don't doubt that there's some of this out there, but where are you seeing it?

I've not seen it here to any real extent and I've not really seen it anywhere else in the mainstream media, there will always be idiots on twitter, but for the most part elsewhere, there's some support and some justified criticism, in general I'm seeing a reasonably balanced response to events on the ground, other than if I go looking for them in the weirdest corners of social media.

From your perspective I'd expect to be seeing the BBC and the Us networks and the national papers printing scathing anti-semitic hate pieces and there's absolutely none of that anywhere - the larger media organisations are almost universally supporting Israel.

What would you say is a legitimate criticism of Israel at this time?

 

 

First of all I dont believe you that you dont see any of this. But i will do this so you dont get to claim that again.
So you have not seen or heard and know nothing about:

1. Multiple prestigious school students with official letters tried justified Hamas attacks

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/no-longer-welcome-harvard-columbia-students-lose-job-offers-over-palestine-support-letter-101697697631518.html

Quote

After several Wall Street CEOs and founders announced their intent to deny jobs to Harvard and Columbia students who had openly supported Palestine and blamed Israel after the October 7 Hamas attacks, three of them are now facing repercussions.
 

2. Violent protest rhetoric in Sydney gas all jews chants.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/sydney-government-apologizes-for-pro-palestine-protest-that-had-gas-the-jews-chants/

Quote

Police are investigating a separate incident in Melbourne in which a group of men allegedly said they were ‘on the hunt to kill Jews’

3. New York Democratic Socialists of America praising terrorists.

https://nypost.com/2023/10/17/black-clergy-blast-dsa-urge-queens-pol-to-sever-ties-following-hamas-attack/

Quote

A group representing New York’s black clergy is rallying around Israel and demanding a Queens pol disavow the Democratic Socialists of America for its support of Hamas.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/rep-shri-thanedar-cuts-ties-democratic-socialists-america-rcna120029

Quote

Rep. Shri Thanedar of Michigan renounced his membership in the Democratic Socialists of America over rhetoric at a rally the group promoted a day after the Hamas attack

4.Denial that Hamas is using human shields. twitter

5.The conspiracy that Netanyahu ignored the warning so he could have pretext to invade Gaza and do a genocide. twitter

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/speech_23_5127

Quote

Opening remarks by Vice-President Jourová at EP Plenary session: Fighting disinformation and dissemination of illegal content in the context of the Digital Services Act
Finally, we have to pay attention the rise of anti-Semitism, both offline and online. Primary, this is about security of our Jewish communities. But also, this protection has to be extended to online world. Preliminary analyses by experts point to the dramatic rise of anti-Semitic content on online platforms. X, former Twitter, seems to be particularly bad at tackling this challenge, but other platforms also must step up their work. 
 

8.BBC REUTERS AL JAZEERA just blindly repeating terrorists lies with 0 checks they edited and edited and edited it was funny and sad to watch.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/bbc-news-bbc-gaza-grant-shapps-palestinian-b2432797.html

Quote

BBC News deputy CEO admits ‘mistake’ in live coverage of Gaza hospital bombing
A senior member of staff at BBC News has admitted the corporation made a “mistake” while covering the immediate aftermath of the bombing of a hospital in Gaza City.
 

https://nypost.com/2023/10/18/several-bbc-reporters-taken-off-air-for-alleged-pro-hamas-posts/

Quote

The BBC has removed several Middle East reporters from the air amid allegations that they posted support for Hamas in its terrorist attacks on Israel.
BBC News Arabic reporters — including those reporting out of Egypt and Lebanon — appeared to back Palestinians or criticize the Jewish state in posts they either tweeted or liked, the Financial Times reported.
 

9.Huge online content creators like Hasan Piker raised 1 milion for palestine but his coverage is absolutely one sided with conspiratorial elements.

10. AI baby picture conspiracy theories.

11. Multiple pro Palestine rallies where people just refuse to condemn Hamas and talks like those attacks were justified. Common trend. Videos on youtube i remember one channel 5 with Andrew Callaghan 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/20/us/politics/progressive-jews-united-states.html

Quote

On Israel, Progressive Jews Feel Abandoned by Their Left-Wing Allies
Jewish leaders and voters said they were taken aback to discover that many of their ideological allies saw them as oppressors who deserved blame following the Israel attacks.
 

https://www.gbnews.com/news/uk-marches-palestine-israel-london-birmingham-glasgow-britain

Quote

Chants included “Judaism yes, Zionism no, the state of Israel must go”, and “5, 6, 7, 8, Israel is a terrorist state”.
Protesters also chanted “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free”, despite controversy around the slogan’s meaning.
 

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/10/a-left-that-refuses-to-condemn-mass-murder-is-doomed.html

Quote

And no small number of supposed leftists found in all this cause for celebration. Others, meanwhile, loudly refused to condemn Hamas’s atrocities, insisting it was not their place to decry the “military strategy” or “violent resistance” of oppressed Palestinians.

 

[chrisp65]

2 hours ago, LondonLax said:

This bit might be a bit idealistic perhaps?

The Islamic world has undergone a lot of cultural conservatism over the last century and there are not many synagogues (or even churches anymore for that matter) to be found in the Middle East outside of Israel.

Our liberal ideals in Western Europe of a democratic multicultural society with freedom to worship (or be an atheist) freedom to be gay or have equal rights as a woman is fairly unusual in the world unfortunately. Israel is the only place that comes close in the Middle East.

Israel is not the reason why the Middle East is intolerant of gay people and there are fewer and fewer Christians in that region than there used to be (on a personal level a close work colleague came to Sweden as Syrian refugee 10 years ago but he says he’ll never be able to visit Syria again as he is a Christian and expects to be killed if he returned). Maybe there will be a cultural revolution and the theocracies will be overthrown? We can hope of course but my (perhaps naive?) optimism that the world tends to become more liberal and liberated the more exposure it gets to liberal ideas seems not to be panning out in a number of places. 

None of this excuses Israel’s forceful removal of West Bank Palestinians or their devastating response to last weekend but I think Hamas has severe ideological issues that go beyond merely being an equal and opposite response to Israel.  

Yeah I guess if I was designing a free Palestine ideally I wouldn’t start from here. But we’re drifting way off, unless we’re suggesting that we have to support oppression to prevent different oppression. I’m not sure there’s much of a record of that working as a long term strategy.

I’m not sure there’s a good positive outcome coming any time soon. Perhaps freed of Hamas’ grip, Iran on warning, the racist right wing within Israel out of office and Netanyahu out of power could allow some dialogue and could be the start.

Eventually, you have to talk and you have to listen. Or accept this will happen again.

[OutByEaster?]

52 minutes ago, Tumblerseven said:

First of all I dont believe you that you dont see any of this. But i will do this so you dont get to claim that again.
So you have not seen or heard and know nothing about:

I had seen a couple of those but there are lots I hadn't thank you.

I'd maybe argue that a couple of them are justifiable or misrepresented, but I think it's fair to say that there are incidents out there. I haven't seen it here to any great degree and I think the prevailing mood in the media is broadly supportive of Israel - don't misunderstand me, I wasn't suggesting that there's no criticism of Israel out there, there is, there always is - but when you post short posts telling us that the whole world has lost it's mind, it's hard I think to process or understand - all we get from this is that you are very angry.

This was much more useful and hopefully will help get people into a debate with you on these things.

[Keyblade]

Most if not all of the G7 nations put out a joint statement today supporting Israel's right to defend itself. Support for Israel is the prevailing sentiment in the corridors of power as well as in the media.

[VILLAMARV]

22 hours ago, Panto_Villan said:

The word “targeted” means different things to different people. We all know Hamas deliberately place military targets in and among civilian targets, and use Palestinians as human shields.

If Hamas has based themselves in a building full of civilians, and Israel drops a bomb on it, Israel would say they’re not targeting the civilians - Hamas are the targets and they’d be dropping the bomb whether or not the civilians are present.

Their opponents would say Israel deliberately aimed the bomb at a building known to contain civilians - therefore civilians were targeted.

As I’ve mentioned before I’m broadly anti-Israel but I tend to subscribe to the first viewpoint. I think it’s a more accurate use of the word.

Ultimately the acceptability of a given action comes down to the proportionality, but it’s important to acknowledge that the way Hamas fight makes it impossible to fight them without causing civilian casualties and it’s not only Israel that bears the blame for that.

You're completely missing the point again PV

12 hours ago, Awol said:

To save space, the post below yours by @Panto_Villan nails it from my POV, and I’d never even considered that people would interpret the word ‘targeted’ differently. 

In my view a target is something you are specifically intending to hit, and as I think everyone recognises, Hamas infrastructure is entirely integrated into and under the civilian built environment. 

Hamas has sought to keep civilians in place in northern Gaza for two reasons: first to complicate the targeting process for the IDF by effectively hiding behind the civilian population, and second to ensure as many Palestinian civilian casualties as possible to reinforce their strategic communication narrative - that Israel is attacking Palestinian civilians indiscriminately.

If the latter point were true, why did the IDF specifically ask Palestinian civilians to evacuate the area of northern Gaza so that they wouldn’t be hurt?

I don't agree that a semantic argument about the word targetted is what is required in response to my question if I'm honest guys.

I'm not sure what other adjective applies to children being in the crosshairs of a rifle sight and the trigger being pulled as per UN reports. I agree with your definition Awol, I just don't agree with your assertion that Israel doesn't target innocent civilians.

And it's a point I'm attempting to make without reference to sanctions or illegal blockades or bombs or collateral damage. I think the recorded, reported war crimes do it on their own.

I'm not trying to do arguing, or upsetting people, just trying to keep some of the rhetoric honest.

[magnkarl]

1 hour ago, VILLAMARV said:

You're completely missing the point again PV

I don't agree that a semantic argument about the word targetted is what is required in response to my question if I'm honest guys.

I'm not sure what other adjective applies to children being in the crosshairs of a rifle sight and the trigger being pulled as per UN reports. I agree with your definition Awol, I just don't agree with your assertion that Israel doesn't target innocent civilians.

And it's a point I'm attempting to make without reference to sanctions or illegal blockades or bombs or collateral damage. I think the recorded, reported war crimes do it on their own.

I'm not trying to do arguing, or upsetting people, just trying to keep some of the rhetoric honest.

I think what the others are trying to say is that Hamas is willfully building bunkers/tunnels/ammo storage below universities, hospitals and high rise buildings as they know that the Western community will caution Israel from striking these.

It didn't stop the coalition fighting ISIS in bombing the same facilities, and frankly a lot of people were deathly silent then. I just think a lot of people have issues separating their support for a free Palestine or Israel, with the actual facts of warfare. Without sounding like a whataboutism it's not like the traditional allied countries haven't carpet bombed cities, boiled people alive in Dresden, hit schools in Tripoli and out-done Israel in what people are now calling a genocide.

Lines often get blurred when one tries hard to keep the moral high ground on these things, and for the most part I think we're seeing a quite restrained Israel here as they could quite easily flatten the whole Gaza strip instead of warning people, hitting active rocket sites and frankly letting both sides of the spectrum in Israel argue their points.

Israel still haven't entered Gaza with their tanks and troops, by now we'd be neck deep in any country that performed the kind of terrorism Hamas committed in Israel against us.

[Panto_Villan]

1 hour ago, VILLAMARV said:

You're completely missing the point again PV

I don't agree that a semantic argument about the word targetted is what is required in response to my question if I'm honest guys.

I'm not sure what other adjective applies to children being in the crosshairs of a rifle sight and the trigger being pulled as per UN reports. I agree with your definition Awol, I just don't agree with your assertion that Israel doesn't target innocent civilians.

And it's a point I'm attempting to make without reference to sanctions or illegal blockades or bombs or collateral damage. I think the recorded, reported war crimes do it on their own.

I'm not trying to do arguing, or upsetting people, just trying to keep some of the rhetoric honest.

I wasn’t trying to engage with your post so it’s quite difficult for me to have missed the point. I’d have quoted you directly if I was talking to you.

It was a general comment triggered by Awol using the word “targeted” using the traditional military definition, which not everyone here (or indeed outside these boards) does.

Some people literally think Israel is going out of its way to kill civilians, and some people just use the word “targeted” to mean something different. The distinction is important given the way Hamas deliberately uses civilians as human shields.

Edited October 23, 2023 by Panto_Villan

[VILLAMARV]

2 minutes ago, magnkarl said:

I think what the others are trying to say is that Hamas is willfully building bunkers/tunnels/ammo storage below universities, hospitals and high rise buildings as they know that the Western community will caution Israel from striking these.

It didn't stop the coalition fighting ISIS in bombing the same facilities, and frankly a lot of people were deathly silent then. I just think a lot of people have issues separating their support for a free Palestine or Israel, with the actual facts of warfare. Without sounding like a whataboutism it's not like the traditional allied countries haven't carpet bombed cities, boiled people alive in Dresden, hit schools in Tripoli and out-done Israel in what people are now calling a genocide.

Lines often get blurred when one tries hard to keep the moral high ground on these things, and for the most part I think we're seeing a quite restrained Israel here as they could quite easily flatten the whole Gaza strip instead of warning people, hitting active rocket sites and frankly letting both sides of the spectrum in Israel argue their points.

Israel still haven't entered Gaza with their tanks and troops, by now we'd be neck deep in any country that performed the kind of terrorism Hamas committed in Israel against us.

With respect, there was an accusation of a poster minimising the actions of hamas, accompanied by the statement that Israel is not attacking innocent people and that to suggest so, was a, and I quote, "sleight of hand". I appreciate the wider points you and other posters have made about war. But if it is true and on the record that Israeli soldiers have targetted and killed innocent children - not accidentally or because tunnels or because the horrors of war, or bombs, or collateral damage - but because they intentionally pointed their weapons at those children and pulled the trigger, is it a sleight of hand to say so? If it is true that Israeli soldiers did this - is it truthful to say Israel doesn't target innocent civilians? Isn't that actually a real example of minimisation?

[Panto_Villan]

1 minute ago, VILLAMARV said:

With respect, there was an accusation of a poster minimising the actions of hamas, accompanied by the statement that Israel is not attacking innocent people and that to suggest so, was a, and I quote, "sleight of hand". I appreciate the wider points you and other posters have made about war. But if it is true and on the record that Israeli soldiers have targetted and killed innocent children - not accidentally or because tunnels or because the horrors of war, or bombs, or collateral damage - but because they intentionally pointed their weapons at those children and pulled the trigger, is it a sleight of hand to say so? If it is true that Israeli soldiers did this - is it truthful to say Israel doesn't target innocent civilians? Isn't that actually a real example of minimisation?

They were talking about the current bombing campaign though. Most of the discussion at the moment is about that.

As the recent court cases are showing, certain members of UK special forces deliberately targeted unarmed children in Afghanistan.

It would be misleading (or “sleight of hand”) to then claim that the UK bombing and drone strikes in the Afghanistan campaign were targeted at civilians as a result of that.

[ender4]

13 hours ago, magnkarl said:

Washington Journal has a good video up on the car park rocket, if anyone’s interested. Not that it matters much as both sides are on to other things, but it is pretty conclusive that it is mlrs misfire.

Do you have a link please?   I can't find it.