
Originally Posted by
swaledale
Well it was connected, in that you seem to hold the opinion that any support for the Palestinian's and their right to a nation by displying a Palestinian flag is antisemetic.
I do not profess to be an expert on the Palestinian/Israeli conflict, other than history suggests it arises from the creation of Israel, by Eurpoean countries after WW2, with a lack of consderation for the people who already lived in those lands, which was so typical of how ex colonial powers carved up land into nations back then, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh being prime examples. It is a complex area and impossible to arrive at a simple solution IMO>
Your presumably referring to HAMAS, as the entity "whose prominent religion has an objective to destroy another state"? I'd argue that Muslims in general and Islam as a religon doesn't have that as a stated aim, but that as you well know, within all religions, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or indeed Hindu is used by men (its predominantly men) as a cover for violence to achieve aims that are generally both at odds with the philosophy of the religion? HAMAS is just one in a long line of human groups that do this.
There are ways and means by which Israel could destroy HAMAS or render it ineffective, the slaughter of 70,000 people, the majority of whom posed no threat not only doesn't achieve that, but is counter productive, further encouraging Palestinians into HAMAS influence. If Israel fails to disarm and remove HAMAS, then all its endeavours will have been for nothing.
But then there is a view that, there was a significant failure by the Israeli, Defence force and government that allowed the 7 October atrocity to occur. Border observers had warned senior officers for weeks about unusual activity in Gaza, these warnings were ignored. this comes from Israeli sources, as does the view that the Gaza action is largely "performative" to keep questions being asked about Netanyahu's failure.
I'd agree that Israel has the right to protect itself and go after the perpetrators, but that must surely be within the terms of international law? In any case IMO, rather than doing that it is "punishing" people who had nothing to do with the attack, other than they lived in a place governed or more accurately controlled by the organisation that did. One might hope that HAMAS's credibility is udnermined, given that they must have know that Israel would retaliate and that risked the lives of ordinary Plalestinians, but I'm not holding my breath.
Israel is annexing land in the West Bank, its just not calling it that, but the not so subtle encourgaement of settlers onto land occupied by Palestinians, backed up by state infrastructure, with accompanying violence and intimidation.
As I've said previously, I don't disagree, that amongst those demonstrating in support of Palestinians, there will be elements with an antisemetic intent, much in the same way I believe you countered that not all those who attended Yaxley-Lennons "Freedom March" were racists.
Given that a substantial proportion of Israeli citizens and other Jews support a just and peacefu solution to the issue, its inacurate surely to apply a broad brush antisemite label to those displaying the Palestinian flag?