Are there any verified sources of that or just propaganda?
1 Like
I have not seen any verified sources for the decapitated babies, but there are multiple verified sources of children burnt to death (or their bodies burned post-mortem) in both vehicles and at least two shelters.
Every news outlet Iâve seen have reported it.
Not a single one has verified apart from saying some soldier told them. Original UK source has backtracked
3 Likes
What specific conflict are you talking about?
I am familiar with Roman/Byzantine rule of the area being interrupted by Persians in the period shortly before the Arab conquest, but I donât understand the relevance of it.
just want to get my history correct here.
Palestine is a region within Israel including the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, which is bordered by Egypt on the South and Israel on the east. theres been disputes over who owns and governs over this land for over 1000 year and itâs a largely religious difference at the heart of it? Judaism and Muslim battling over some of the oldest active settlements in the world?
Its 638 AD actually, and lasted to well past 1000AD, in which time the Temple on the Mount was destroyed, and in its place set, the Dome of the Rock. It, as well, was certainly not a mere interruption.
Other than some periods with the Greeks and Romans where client rules were allowed to exist, Judaism has largely been absent in ruling over the area since the Syrians in the 7th century BC.
3 Likes
and if I remember correctly, once the Naziâs were done at the end of WW2 there was a somewhat general consensus amongst the Allied forces to give the Jews a homeland in Palestine and thus the creation of Israeli political state?
That is definitely not the Persians you are talking about.
That had already been put in place after WW1 by the Balfour Agreement. Which is very controversial, and if being honest, is the originator of this round of fighting. If only my honesty could spread. Basically the British ended up as protectorate of the Levant on the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. On the last day of that mandate they drew and executed an agreement to return the lands to the Israelis.
It was a Meccan, Umar who was the leader. It certainly was Islamic. The Persians had actually been in the Levant earlier and were driven out by the Romans.
It doesnât really change the point.
I think itâs pretty important to not confuse Arabs for Persians when offering authoritative opinions about the genesis of an ethnonationalist religious conflict.
But to take the point that was intended, that the Muslim conquest in the 7th C is where we can draw the starting point on this Arab vs Jewish conflict, I think itâs important to remember they were not âJewish landsâ being conquered and had not been so for nearly 1000 years. Under the Romans/Byzantines Jews had even been effectively banned from living in Jerusalem for 4-500 years prior to the conquest as punishment for the Bar Kokhba revolt. Under Islamic rule that ban was lifted and the resulting period is referred to as Golden era for Jews.
It was obviously a seismic event thagt has to be mentioned in the complexity of the issue but a clear demarcation of where the current conflict began it is not.
A laugh response?
Yes showboating and misunderstanding my position. Should I got and tell you now how important it is to read the thread?
@limiescouse, I think you were referring earlier to Obama and former Obama people now in Bidenâs camp feeling the need to appease Bibi?
Based on Bidenâs language today it doesnât look like thatâs happening. Heâs all in with Israel, perpetuating the idea that this is a religious attack. I do wonder how much the US elections are playing into this, showing a strong voice for Jews, but I thought American Jews aligned quite strongly to Democrat anyway?
Thatâs interesting, because I had felt exactly the opposite with his prior language. Admitedly I havent heard anything said today, but of his recent comments I was quite taken aback by how clear he had been about the need to balance the righteous anger at what had happened and support of the state of Israel against a need to respond in a way that reflects international law.
âYo bro, dont commit war crimes just cos ur madâ shouldnât be seen as a controversial statement, but I was taken aback by how even that was a direct shot across the bow. Especially in light of the stories of deleted tweets from the state department that would be seen as advocating for restraint.
That post was not made until well after the one I was questioning and is clearly related to a separate point. But Iâm not going to get into a pissing match in a thread like this so carry on as you are.