O/T:- Palestine / Israel

[Newish Pie]

So many "well meaning" people want to see a ceasefire. No normal human being can watch the pain and suffering without wishing for a peaceful solution.

But there is not enough news coverage on who the IDF are fighting. Again I will refer to the documentary I cited, made in 2017, when standing near the Gaza border the Israelis were fearful of what was below their feet, and as they observered a Hamas look-out post shots were fired. Are the IDF going into Hospitals fighting nurses and doctors? Who is fighting back, surely someone is fighting back? Why are they there in the first place. Why are the brave freedom fighters lurking in well constructed tunnels within civilian infrastructure? In 2015 even Egypt flooded, with sea water, the Hamas tunnels near their border.

A ceasefire simply gives Hamas time and space to regroup to cause more havoc. Their stated aim is the destruction of Israel. That is the freedom they are fighting for however many Palestinian lives it costs.

I'd agree with most of that. That's the thing - there's a lot more agreement than disagreement on this issue, especially in the UK.

Everyone wants a peaceful solution, pretty much everyone thinks that the way forward is a two-state solution. The only difference is one of emphasis... some people will start with how awful Hamas are, some people will start with how awful the IDF are, but will also acknowledge that the other lot are awful too. It's just that they'll do that second, probably say that they're less awful, and will probably say that the media doesn't focus enough on the side they think are the most awful.

It's easy to focus on the disagreement, but actually, at root, there's agreement that (a) two state solution; (b) much better leadership on both sides for everyone's sake; and (c) for the love of all that's holy can you stop killing and maiming each other.

I guess there's a few people who think that either (a) Israel has no right to exist at all in any form and needs to be destroyed, regardless of the consequences for the people who live there; or (b) Israel is justified in doing whatever it likes, regardless of international law and international norms, that self-defence has no limits or proportion, and regardless of the consequences for ordinary people. I disagree with both.

[Old_pie]

I'd agree with most of that. That's the thing - there's a lot more agreement than disagreement on this issue, especially in the UK.

Everyone wants a peaceful solution, pretty much everyone thinks that the way forward is a two-state solution. The only difference is one of emphasis... some people will start with how awful Hamas are, some people will start with how awful the IDF are, but will also acknowledge that the other lot are awful too. It's just that they'll do that second, probably say that they're less awful, and will probably say that the media doesn't focus enough on the side they think are the most awful.

It's easy to focus on the disagreement, but actually, at root, there's agreement that (a) two state solution; (b) much better leadership on both sides for everyone's sake; and (c) for the love of all that's holy can you stop killing and maiming each other.

I guess there's a few people who think that either (a) Israel has no right to exist at all in any form and needs to be destroyed, regardless of the consequences for the people who live there; or (b) Israel is justified in doing whatever it likes, regardless of international law and international norms, that self-defence has no limits or proportion, and regardless of the consequences for ordinary people. I disagree with both.

I'm not sure where the "agreement" for a two state solution you mention is coming from. And like the "Irish" question (UK/EU and/or/both) there are so many nuances to resolve, especially Jerusalem. Of course we all know the Jews/Hebrews had lived there (when allowed) for ~2,500yrs, and Christians and Philistines (who I think were nomadic not resident). Islam's claim to it arose from interpretations (or even mis-interpretations) of a dream that Muhammed is said to have had. He never actually went there.

Ideally Palestinians and Jews could co-exist in a single state if you took away religion. But their whole outlook seems so alien to each other that it likely would be uncomfortable. And anyway the Jews would just take over because they are more industrious.

[Magpies1959]

I think in the main, they are easily lead by Hamas propaganda on various social media platforms, and the rest are just ignorant, and happy to follow the crowd.
I find it stunning how little is reported on the msm, about the maze of tunnels below Gaza that Hamas operate from.

[BigFatPie]

I think in the main, they are easily lead by Hamas propaganda on various social media platforms, and the rest are just ignorant, and happy to follow the crowd.
I find it stunning how little is reported on the msm, about the maze of tunnels below Gaza that Hamas operate from.

You criticising others for being easily led by propaganda is hilarious.

[Magpies1959]

Terribly sorry for having a differing and obviously wrong view to yours BFP, you are the font of all knowledge and I must learn to bow down to you.
It is a wee bit sad though, that so many of these 'peaceful' Palestinian protestors, do not know what 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free', actually means.

[Newish Pie]

Terribly sorry for having a differing and obviously wrong view to yours BFP, you are the font of all knowledge and I must learn to bow down to you.
It is a wee bit sad though, that so many of these 'peaceful' Palestinian protestors, do not know what 'From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free', actually means.

Well... I agree that I'd rather they didn't sing that, it's ambiguous... it's open to misinterpretation, and that it doesn't help their cause and is a gift to people who want to smear and misrepresent their actual views.

But I don't believe that a lot of people singing that mean it literally in the sense of wanting to see the destruction of Israel. The thing about chants and songs (as we as football fans know perfectly well), is that they're not always meant to be taken literally, that they sometimes take on a life of their own, and other people don't get to decide what they mean. There's also nothing in that song that indicates support for Hamas.

Think it's poor reasoning (at best) and a disingenuous smear (at worst) to take one song or chant and then decide that it means something other than what those singing it mean by it.

[Kent Magpie]

Well... I agree that I'd rather they didn't sing that, it's ambiguous... it's open to misinterpretation, and that it doesn't help their cause and is a gift to people who want to smear and misrepresent their actual views.

But I don't believe that a lot of people singing that mean it literally in the sense of wanting to see the destruction of Israel. The thing about chants and songs (as we as football fans know perfectly well), is that they're not always meant to be taken literally, that they sometimes take on a life of their own, and other people don't get to decide what they mean. There's also nothing in that song that indicates support for Hamas.

Think it's poor reasoning (at best) and a disingenuous smear (at worst) to take one song or chant and then decide that it means something other than what those singing it mean by it.

If we all meant literally what we were singing then the red side of the Trent would be a very messy place.... but people should educate themselves at least a bit to understand what is and isn't appropriate.

[Magpies1959]

It was my thinking also, that the PLO did not become HAMAS

[Magpies1959]

Newish Pie, the chant and any placards, displaying it should have been banned by the police from the ongoing marches to avoid misinterpretation, and arrests made accordingly.

[Newish Pie]

Newish Pie, the chant and any placards, displaying it should have been banned by the police from the ongoing marches to avoid misinterpretation, and arrests made accordingly.

On what grounds?