
A place to post and discuss news related to the recent events in Israel, including the Hamas/Islamic Jihad incursion and repercussions.
Bfgp wrote:Top_Shelf, I think it's not going to be comparable anywhere.
Since when has the world calmly gazed upon creeping arpatheid and genocidal behaviour?
Back in the early 80s, most of the world was fine with SA apartheid.
Yeah but it didn't last that long and certainly not since 1948. That's what makes Israel-Palestine lack any direct comparables. One could also draw attention to Zimbabwe but again same thing it hasn't persisted.
Don't think saying it didn't last as long is a fair statement. SA literally created Apartheid. And it's not as if people of colour had all the rights prior to Apartheid coming into being.
Things that the Apartheid regime did to black people were horrible and the ANC did use terrorism to advance their cause, but the absolute barbarity of what Hamas perpetrated on the 7/10 was not something we saw here is SA.
There were probably isolated instances of barbarity, but orchestrated on such a grand scale as on that day? Never.
And as a leader of Hamas, I cannot see how you improve the lot of your people by doing that. I don't think Nelson Mandela would have OK'd it.
Forgive me for going slightly off-topic, but is there a reason why we don't call Jim Crow apartheid? I think we in the US might be able to draw clearer parallels if we were able to clearly say that the United States of America was, at least in my parents' generation, an apartheid state. Or, conversely, we call Israel a version of Jim Crow.
Quick callback to the question of U.S. support for Israel. It helps to recall the strong Christian evangelical lobby, and that the Jews in the Holy Land are "Jesus' li'l placeholders" in their messed-up eschatology.
f*cking A. Doctors can't even do their jobs without getting shot at.
Don't think saying it didn't last as long is a fair statement. SA literally created Apartheid. And it's not as if people of colour had all the rights prior to Apartheid coming into being.
Things that the Apartheid regime did to black people were horrible and the ANC did use terrorism to advance their cause, but the absolute barbarity of what Hamas perpetrated on the 7/10 was not something we saw here is SA.
There were probably isolated instances of barbarity, but orchestrated on such a grand scale as on that day? Never.
And as a leader of Hamas, I cannot see how you improve the lot of your people by doing that. I don't think Nelson Mandela would have OK'd it.
It never was designed to save the Palestinians but shore up Hamas. Hamas knew exactly what they were doing and unfortunately Isreal have walked right into the trap. Normailisation with the surrounding Arab countries is now on the back burner and international opinion, well, not be ideal for the Isreali government.
As you say, the violence never got that bad in South Africa but at the same time de Clerk saw the writing on the wall. His choice was pretty stark and thankfully (and he doesn't get the credit for it) he literally gave up power in order to avoid violence. Even Mandela wasn't precisely offering a non-violent solution either and I'd be a big fan of his. His interventions in facing down many of the extremes of the ANC was inspiring. I'm a big rugby fan/former player and the story of the Boks is incredible and Mandela has a huge part in that.
As it stands there isn't anyone near power in Isreal or Palestine with the guts of a de Clerk, Mandela, Hume or Trimble.
I would make this point however, I cannot see how this is all solved without a peace keeping force on the ground in the West Bank and Gaza similar to KFOR and less like UNIFIL. A force that has real moral as well as physical authortiy to keep both sides from escalating the violence and to allow space for moderate voices. Not going to get angels and most likely people with rough backgrounds but at least people prepared to live with something as opposed to die/kill for it. "Mowing the grass" is now utterly discredited tactic and it's obvious now from past parallel conflicts that there is one consistent solution.
Hamas has command node under Al-Shifa hospital, US official says
Umm, ok so how many babies and old people is it ok to kill to take out that command node? 1, 2, 50? An infinite amount? If it is an infinite amount then why not just nuke Gaza city? You will get the members of Hamas and it was decided any amount of innocent people was acceptable to kill.
I fully accept that what Hamas is doing is wrong but that saying "two wrongs don't make a right" is a saying for a reason. Killing hundreds of innocents to kill tens of evil doers is not moral Now Israel can just straight up say "yeah we are being immoral but we are doing it anyway" And judging by international responses so far most countries will be fine with that. But again that doesn't make it moral, it doesn't make Israel "right"
- A bit more -
So all people in the hospital are legitimate targets? Wouldn't that be like the us going on to a plane and gunning down all passengers because the 9/11 hijackers posed as normal passengers?
If Israel says Hamas is using the ambulances and hospitals for non-medical purposes and the hospital says they're not, the "correct" answer is probably to send in some neutral third party (the Red Cross, a UN force, etc.) to verify whether or not they actually are violating international law.
On the other hand, destroying a hospital (barring absolute proof that it is, in fact, a legitimate military target) is absolutely against international law (specifically, Articles 14 and 18 of the Fourth Geneva Convention).
And yes, I know that Hamas has already violated the Geneva Conventions in several ways, including but not limited to taking hostages. Their actions are inexcusable. But that does not make it okay for Israel to also violate the Conventions in response.
If Israel says Hamas is using the ambulances and hospitals for non-medical purposes and the hospital says they're not, the "correct" answer is probably to send in some neutral third party (the Red Cross, a UN force, etc.) to verify whether or not they actually are violating international law.
The Red Cross is already operating in the area and was involved in one of the ambulance convoys that was bombed. They’ve repeatedly spoken out against Isreal targeting medical infrastructure but no one with authority to stop it seems to care.
Keldar wrote:If Israel says Hamas is using the ambulances and hospitals for non-medical purposes and the hospital says they're not, the "correct" answer is probably to send in some neutral third party (the Red Cross, a UN force, etc.) to verify whether or not they actually are violating international law.
The Red Cross is already operating in the area and was involved in one of the ambulance convoys that was bombed. They’ve repeatedly spoken out against Isreal targeting medical infrastructure but no one with authority to stop it seems to care.
The UNRWA also operates in the area and the UN as a whole has also spoken out against Israel targeting hospitals...
The alternative is going down into the tunnels. Anyone who's faced Mexican Cartels, the Viet Cong, or Bugs Bunny can tell you how fraught it is.
I believe Israel's core principle is that every Israeli life is sacred.
OK, everyone listen. Terror Cell meeting please! I'm calling a terror cell meeting.
Look, we have the terrorism roster up where everyone can see it, so everyone knows when it is their turn to do the terror.
FFS.
The propaganda that has been spread around the world in the last couple of years has been eye-opening.
OK, everyone listen. Terror Cell meeting please! I'm calling a terror cell meeting.
Look, we have the terrorism roster up where everyone can see it, so everyone knows when it is their turn to do the terror.
"Now does everyone have their brand new copies of Mein Kampf to leave lying around, too?"
I'm looking at you, Abdul Monday. You better not forget to do your terror next week.
I believe Israel's core principle is that every Israeli life is sacred.
Agreed. Of course that can't be said without pointing out the fact that they also have a core principle that no other life is sacred. Palestinian lives? No, women, children, the elderly - no.
Some recent polling out of an Arab polling firm found that 75% of Palestinians (Gaza + West Bank) support the 10/7 attacks. And 75% support a single state solution, no Israel.
And 75% say they expect to win the current war.
Some recent polling out of an Arab polling firm found that 75% of Palestinians (Gaza + West Bank) support the 10/7 attacks. And 75% support a single state solution, no Israel.
And 75% say they expect to win the current war.
Forgive my skepticism, but who's the source? And what's your point with your presented statistics?
If I were born and raised in an open air prison with no hope of a stable, prosperous life for myself or my kids, I would support just about anything that brought international attention to the problem.
Top_Shelf wrote:Some recent polling out of an Arab polling firm found that 75% of Palestinians (Gaza + West Bank) support the 10/7 attacks. And 75% support a single state solution, no Israel.
And 75% say they expect to win the current war.
Forgive my skepticism, but who's the source? And what's your point with your presented statistics?
Arab World for Research and Development.
https://themessenger.com/news/palest...
Point is the intractability of the conflict. If 3/4ths of a population is sticking to maximalist positions, any (long-term) negotiated settlement is a long ways off.
It would be interesting to know what Israelis think about a two-state solution.
TheMostRad wrote:Top_Shelf wrote:Some recent polling out of an Arab polling firm found that 75% of Palestinians (Gaza + West Bank) support the 10/7 attacks. And 75% support a single state solution, no Israel.
And 75% say they expect to win the current war.
Forgive my skepticism, but who's the source? And what's your point with your presented statistics?
Arab World for Research and Development.
https://themessenger.com/news/palest...
Point is the intractability of the conflict. If 3/4ths of a population is sticking to maximalist positions, any (long-term) negotiated settlement is a long ways off.
It would be interesting to know what Israelis think about a two-state solution.
Interestingly enough, that same article states that it's difficult to poll Palestinians, as they fear reprisal from Hamas, almost half of Gazans have had their homes destroyed since 10/7, and roughly 1/8 have had an immediate family member killed.
Given that context, would you really expect more moderate results?
And how does one poll when outside communications are cut off?
So if we've only got between 1/4th and 1/3rd in favor of a 2-state solution across the two parties, that doesn't bode well for a negotiated settlement.
Maybe only a third party (or collection of parties) could force the two to negotiate. Since the US wouldn't be trusted by the Palestinians, and the Israelis won't trust the other Arab nations, maybe some conglomerate of the various nations + US could force the two to compromise.
It's very optimistic to assume any 2-state solution will be met while Netanyahu sits as PM.
I remember seeing other polls where the vast majority of Palestinians were in favor of a peaceful resolution of the conflict, i.e., 2 state solution. They most likely were done before this latest mess.
Before the ink was dry on a two-state solution another war would start with one or more neighbors and we'd be right back to this situation. There are too many powers with money, in and outside of Palestine, that want this status quo.
Before the ink was dry on a two-state solution another war would start with one or more neighbors and we'd be right back to this situation. There are too many powers with money, in and outside of Palestine, that want this status quo.
I think that largely depends on implementation. If the two states are along geographically unsustainable borders (like every Israeli proposal so far) it probably would.
Honestly, the only way I could see it going less badly is if a “piss everyone off” solution were to be imposed on them from outside of the country. And the time for doing that was in 1945.
Edit: at this point, I think the Israeli policy is that if the Palestinians won't die slowly, quietly, they will make sure to make them die quickly and violently.
And completely predictably, it looks like Israeli settler gangs are capitalizing on the opportunity to terrorize West Bank Palestinians out of their land.
Most Americans support Israel, new poll finds
The majority of Americans say they support Israel, according to a new survey from Harvard CAPS-Harris Poll shared with The Hill on Monday.
Eighty percent of voters said they supported Israel amid its ongoing war with Hamas, a Palestinian militant group that the US labels a terror organization. However, the polling showed the percentage of support for Israel increasing by age group.
Fifty-five percent of 18- to 24-year-olds said they supported Israel, while 65 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds said the same. Seventy-five percent of 35- to 44-year-olds said they supported Israel, and 95 percent of voters older than 65 years old said the same.
“When asked the clear question on whether voters support Israel or Hamas, Americans give a clear answer that they support Israel and proposed congressional aid,” said Mark Penn, the co-director of the Harvard CAPS/Harris Poll.
“They also support four-hour pauses and other help to those in Gaza but believe Israel has the right to continue its campaign unless hostages are released.”
Calls for a cease-fire have grown as the Palestinian death toll reaches over 11,000 in Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza. The war started last month after Hamas launched a terror attack on Israel, killing roughly 1,200 people.
President Biden and his administration have been largely supportive of Israel, despite the growing criticism against the country’s bombardment in Gaza and calls for a cease-fire.
According to the latest Harvard CAPS-Harris poll, 66 percent of voters said Biden should support Israel and not pull back. However, younger voters also were more likely to say Biden should pull back his support, the poll found. Sixty-one percent of 18- to 24-year-olds said Biden should pull back, while 84 percent of voters over 65 years old said he should support Israel.
The divide between younger and older voters on the matter continues when it comes to calls for a cease-fire. Sixty-four percent of 18- to 24-year-olds, 66 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds and 71 percent of 35- to 44-year-olds say a cease-fire is right.
Pages