@Barnestormer It’s not whataboutism. It’s an illustration that the only resolution is deescalation. It illustrates that you can work with terrorists. It’s has parallels of religious hatred and many years of scares. It has parallels of boarders and heavy military presence. It was and is far from perfect but it demonstrates a path or model that can be taken. Peace. The are obvious differences. However. Let’s say I am wrong what is the end game here ? Honestly this is nothing new, we have seen it again and again and again. It would be madness to think that somehow this will lead to a better outcome.
The route to peace in Ireland was never building bigger walls, harsher retaliation, segregation. The route to peace can not be more retaliation. At some point someone has to be the bigger man.
As for the analogy regarding the dog. All analogies are typically points of comparison which are limited and contextual. You can make any analogy absurd. However will say this, if you abuse a dog the owner is usually prosecuted
@Tamir what I would say is Netanyahu repealing parts of the 2005 agreement earlier in the year and starting settlements again in west bank is not deescalation . Granted that’s the West Bank but issues not entirely seperate.
As for water for me it’s simple at a basic human level Israel has an obligation to supply water. By not doing so you are purposely targeting the population rather than terrorists. Air, land and sea blockade is now in place for all goods.
It is not an argument to say, well Egypt can supply the water. You can’t turn off the tap, and expect the infrastructure to be there to provide water for millions of people. It’s also need to be placed in the context that water/sanitation infrastructure has been a military target and actively destroyed in recent years.
@ISMF How can you speak to de-escalation when Hamas expressly want the destruction of Israel? Its big duplicity, compounded this week, by an immediate call for peace after a violent atrocity. As well, a candidate for the worlds worst atrocity. It has shattered all sensible reasoning. Under risk of catastrophe, we are going to have to wait to see if there can be peace at some point when the boiled blood cools - my own view is there will not be, and this is going to end very badly. I don’t think either side actually want peace and Hamas’ call for such is really about respite. If they get peace they will only resurge to attack again. This is a clear pattern. Realistically this situation is fckd. We have to let each side see the error in their ways.
In balance then, I saw a video today on Twitter, from a Lebanese Christian who moved to France in the 80s. She said she moved because before Islamism, Lebanon was a beautiful multi-cultural country where multi-faiths lived side by side, Catholic, Muslim, Druze, and Jew and was the banking capital of the Middle East. She claimed the country became infected with this outsider interpretation of Islam and it ruined Lebanon. Whilst I feel both sides are to blame in Israel/Palestine - the real agent provocateur is Islamism. This has to be destroyed and given they only understand war, it is what it is. Very disturbing. A worrying precursor to WW3.
Im amused by you calling in the RSPCA on this but any help is welcome
Its important to check authenticity we really have no clue other than some of the events she describes check out with history. How about this though, Hamas and a fake baby:
SPLC are a reliable organisation and David Noriega is a reliable journalist. His reporting and interviews support that she fabricated her backstory. It gave her access to Donald Trump when he was President and allowed her to push her bigotry to him.
There were cases of people blowing themselves up but they were either unintentional or involuntary (being forced to drive a car bomb to a barracks.)
I have been wondering about the Troubles because it is a similar conflict that did directly impact me at times. However whilst some elements have similarities there are others that are starkly different.
The only thing I would say is that in the early 90s I couldn’t see any way that they could ever find something resembling peace. They managed that a few years later. However, that involved some very painful choices.
So, at work yesterday a statement by the police officer in charge of Tower Hamlets was circulated.
It began by decrying the violence and loss of life on both sides, but by the end was a committment to arrest etc those found to be displaying banned flags, or to be perceived to be supporting banned organisations, and so on.
In short, the statement started very conciliatory but by the end was a warning to one side, and it was very clear which way the wind was blowing.
Because Gaza is an Israeli territory not an Egyptian one. Presumably you have supported the siege (which you originally denied existed when you came on this thread) for the last sixteen years and therefore now support the withdrawal of food , water and electricity to two million people.
No , it depends on how international law and the Security Council and the General Assembly deem it , the UN still regards Gaza to be a part of the Occupied Palestinian Territory , no matter how cute the Israelis thought they were being with their withdrawal plan.
You cannot vouch for that stfu and stop bullshitting. Anyone can go on the internet and find a pithy counter-source for anything. They’re a nonsense organisation committed to ending ‘white supremacy’ and ‘fairness’ and otherwise generating oxymorons.
As to your original statement Israel have no duty under international law to supply Gaza with energy, there is no such duty. There is a moral compulsion which will soon cut back on Israel if they continue with this.
Whereas you then might say depriving civilians of water and electricity is a war crime. If it was in Ukraine it is in Gaza. Nothing can ever be done of it though because of the structure international energy market - there is just an easy defence, source another supplier this is commercial.
The remarks about Security Council and UN GA are all wide of the mark. Neither get involved in Statehood. The law on Statehood is you must have a clear people and territory, but you then need mutual recognition from other States. This is where Palestine fail. They fail of their terrorism. It is very simple. Stop violence and try and engage the world administratively would be the best route to Statehood.
