40 Killed In Hamas Attacks In Israel

We all know it is illegal but most of Israeli dont.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie

I note that you have mentioned a couple of times about Palestinian children being brought to the UK but wouldn't they find Arabic countries less alien?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gofer Blue

Good question. It's a bit telling that we don't hear anything along these lines, although I may have missed it. Could it be that Palestinians are persona non grata in other Arabic speaking nations? E.g. Egypt seems to have kept their border with Gaza firmly shut apart from a few who need urgent medical care.

---

Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon have been resisting calls (from Israel and others) for them to take in large numbers of Gazans. Egypt has kept the border fairly tight - although they have still let almost 100,000 Gazans cross in the past 9 months - before that they didn't have a major Palestinian refugee population.

I think there are two main reasons:

Jordan already has 2.4m Palestinian refugees living in camps; Syria has 584k; Lebanon 491k; and even Saudi Arabia has 240k. They don't want to add to an already difficult situation for the refugees and host countries.

The other reason is that they don't want to collude in ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Palestine. They know that driving arabs out of the West Bank and Gaza so those territories can be fully occupied and annexed is an Israeli government aim - articulated by Netanyahu as much as Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. Their demand is for a ceasefire, release of hostages, aid, power, sanitation and water, followed by urgent rebuilding - so that people can live in their homeland and not be part of another Nakba.

A 'Kinder Transport' for orphaned Palestinian children might well have different motives and might in a limited way be a good thing - whether to neighbouring countries or to 'the West'. But it might still play in to a bigger Gazan ethnic cleansing project.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

I'm not wishing to cause an argument but that's 100% not possible. It's not logic. HAMAS 'triggered' a response but not the way Israel responded. One of the responses could have been to start treating Palestinians with respect, forgiveness, entered talks to negotiate the release of hostages, nuked them, used biological weapons, ignored them. You're not making sense. What would Jesus have done?

---

Your response discounts the evil agenda of Hamas. If they had not been put in charge of the region by those in palestine (for younger people in Palestine - by the previous generation), then yes. A reasonable dialogue could be had and the bloodshed may not have happened.
But that's like saying that Churchill could have negotiated with Germany and ignored the presence and influence of Hitler.
You remove the head of the snake, period. And if the snake has wrapped itself around the people, then the snake still has to go, as it will become stronger if left to grow.
Yes the bloodshed has been terrible, but Israel is more than aware that the threat to their nation is far bigger than this specific conflict, they are a nation the size of Wales trying to live in the midst of nations that want them driven into the sea.

To look at this conflict in isolation is to ignore the bigger picture. It will infuriate the jon1959's of this world, but Israel will do more than survive, they will prosper; and the sooner the 'god of this world' gets used to that promise, the better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

Your response discounts the evil agenda of Hamas. If they had not been put in charge of the region by those in palestine (for younger people in Palestine - by the previous generation), then yes. A reasonable dialogue could be had and the bloodshed may not have happened.
But that's like saying that Churchill could have negotiated with Germany and ignored the presence and influence of Hitler.
You remove the head of the snake, period. And if the snake has wrapped itself around the people, then the snake still has to go, as it will become stronger if left to grow.
Yes the bloodshed has been terrible, but Israel is more than aware that the threat to their nation is far bigger than this specific conflict, they are a nation the size of Wales trying to live in the midst of nations that want them driven into the sea.

To look at this conflict in isolation is to ignore the bigger picture. It will infuriate the jon1959's of this world, but Israel will do more than survive, they will prosper; and the sooner the 'god of this world' gets used to that promise, the better.

---

It appears to me you've (conveniently?) forgotten Israel's contribution and influence in putting Hamas in government within Palestine?

I'm assuming it's just an oversight on your behalf?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordi Culé

It appears to me you've (conveniently?) forgotten Israel's contribution and influence in putting Hamas in government within Palestine?

I'm assuming it's just an oversight on your behalf?

---

I suggest you look back at history and the circumstances of their take over, this isn't the time for froth.

The Guardian - June 2007


Hamas fighters today basked in triumph after taking complete control in Gaza as the west scrambled for a response to the arrival of Islamist power on Israel's doorstep.

In a stark demonstration of the new facts on the ground, a masked Hamas fighter sat down at the desk of the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, and declared an end to the western-backed authority in the Gaza strip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

I suggest you look back at history and the circumstances of their take over, this isn't the time for froth.

The Guardian - June 2007


Hamas fighters today basked in triumph after taking complete control in Gaza as the west scrambled for a response to the arrival of Islamist power on Israel's doorstep.

In a stark demonstration of the new facts on the ground, a masked Hamas fighter sat down at the desk of the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, and declared an end to the western-backed authority in the Gaza strip.

---

No froth and I have looked back at the rise of Hamas in Palestine.

No time to discuss now as I'm getting ready to have all day on the rip and you've got Songs of Praise to watch this afternoon.

Perhaps later although I'm hoping I'll be an absolute dribbling mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordi Culé

No froth and I have looked back at the rise of Hamas in Palestine.

No time to discuss now as I'm getting ready to have all day on the rip and you've got Songs of Praise to watch this afternoon.

Perhaps later although I'm hoping I'll be an absolute dribbling mess.

---

What an interesting take you have on Christian life :hehe:

Later it is, assuming you survive R.I.P. ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

Your response discounts the evil agenda of Hamas. If they had not been put in charge of the region by those in palestine (for younger people in Palestine - by the previous generation), then yes. A reasonable dialogue could be had and the bloodshed may not have happened.
But that's like saying that Churchill could have negotiated with Germany and ignored the presence and influence of Hitler.
You remove the head of the snake, period. And if the snake has wrapped itself around the people, then the snake still has to go, as it will become stronger if left to grow.
Yes the bloodshed has been terrible, but Israel is more than aware that the threat to their nation is far bigger than this specific conflict, they are a nation the size of Wales trying to live in the midst of nations that want them driven into the sea.

To look at this conflict in isolation is to ignore the bigger picture. It will infuriate the jon1959's of this world, but Israel will do more than survive, they will prosper; and the sooner the 'god of this world' gets used to that promise, the better.

---

What would Jesus have advocated? Nobody seems to want to have a go at answering that......he's pretty fundamental to the Christian lifestyle. Seems to me like we need Christianity 2.0 just to deal with the hypocrisy....no doubt you'll write an essay on this but it's not really necessary. You could just ignore me. I'm watching the Hungarian GP so I'm not around anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

What would Jesus have advocated? Nobody seems to want to have a go at answering that......he's pretty fundamental to the Christian lifestyle. Seems to me like we need Christianity 2.0 just to deal with the hypocrisy....no doubt you'll write an essay on this but it's not really necessary. You could just ignore me. I'm watching the Hungarian GP so I'm not around anyway.

---

Jesus didn't suffer fools gladly, so forget 'gentle Jesus meek & mild' when it came to dealing with religious zealots. The term 'brood of vipers' and 'whitewashed walls' were how he described those who got things out of proportion.

So Christianity 1.0 is just fine, as it always has been.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

What would Jesus have advocated? Nobody seems to want to have a go at answering that......he's pretty fundamental to the Christian lifestyle. Seems to me like we need Christianity 2.0 just to deal with the hypocrisy....no doubt you'll write an essay on this but it's not really necessary. You could just ignore me. I'm watching the Hungarian GP so I'm not around anyway.

---

I cannot say for sure what Jesus would do today but I suspect he would say something along the lines of “well you brought this on yourselves” in same way as he spoke to the religious leaders at the time.

This is what the writer Luke records:

"When he (Jesus) drew near and saw the city (Jerusalem), he wept over it, saying “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

Within one generation the armies of Rome invaded the nation, and their chief general, amid a crisis in the city of Rome, was summoned back to become emperor. He left instructions for his son, Titus, to continue the invasion of Israel. Under his leadership, Titus brought troops to surround Jerusalem. His father, the emperor, instructed him: “Every man, woman, and child in that city shall be destroyed.” We think of World War II and the atrocities committed by Hitler in the Holocaust. The first holocaust was here in AD 70, when Josephus tells us that 1,100,000 Jews—men, women, and children—were annihilated in Jerusalem. Not one stone was left upon another as the city was burned to the ground.

This came to pass after Jesus's time on Earth so he wasn't physically around at the time but he had predicted that if they ignored his teaching and refused to recognise who he really was, then these events would occur. And here is Israel 2000 years on.....we have to ask, have they brought this on themselves by the way the have treated the Palestinian people?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gofer Blue

I cannot say for sure what Jesus would do today but I suspect he would say something along the lines of “well you brought this on yourselves” in same way as he spoke to the religious leaders at the time.

This is what the writer Luke records:

"When he (Jesus) drew near and saw the city (Jerusalem), he wept over it, saying “Would that you, even you, had known on this day the things that make for peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For the days will come upon you, when your enemies will set up a barricade around you and surround you and hem you in on every side and tear you down to the ground, you and your children within you. And they will not leave one stone upon another in you, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”

Within one generation the armies of Rome invaded the nation, and their chief general, amid a crisis in the city of Rome, was summoned back to become emperor. He left instructions for his son, Titus, to continue the invasion of Israel. Under his leadership, Titus brought troops to surround Jerusalem. His father, the emperor, instructed him: “Every man, woman, and child in that city shall be destroyed.” We think of World War II and the atrocities committed by Hitler in the Holocaust. The first holocaust was here in AD 70, when Josephus tells us that 1,100,000 Jews—men, women, and children—were annihilated in Jerusalem. Not one stone was left upon another as the city was burned to the ground.

This came to pass after Jesus's time on Earth so he wasn't physically around at the time but he had predicted that if they ignored his teaching and refused to recognise who he really was, then these events would occur. And here is Israel 2000 years on.....we have to ask, have they brought this on themselves by the way the have treated the Palestinian people?

---

I just want to say that I really value your comprehensive reply. I'm not being condescending but genuine. This isn't about disagreement or whether I feel your argument is solid (I'm too tired to get into this).

I'll just say that I think we (people) could argue theologically and academically on many issues you've raised. That, though, is how I feel we've (humanity) got to the bloodshed in the first place. If only we could celebrate our similarities and not focus on our differences. It's interesting but I think the mindsets of leaders like Mandela and Gandhi are what's desperately needed in the world right now.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon have been resisting calls (from Israel and others) for them to take in large numbers of Gazans. Egypt has kept the border fairly tight - although they have still let almost 100,000 Gazans cross in the past 9 months - before that they didn't have a major Palestinian refugee population.

I think there are two main reasons:

Jordan already has 2.4m Palestinian refugees living in camps; Syria has 584k; Lebanon 491k; and even Saudi Arabia has 240k. They don't want to add to an already difficult situation for the refugees and host countries.

The other reason is that they don't want to collude in ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Palestine. They know that driving arabs out of the West Bank and Gaza so those territories can be fully occupied and annexed is an Israeli government aim - articulated by Netanyahu as much as Smotrich and Ben-Gvir. Their demand is for a ceasefire, release of hostages, aid, power, sanitation and water, followed by urgent rebuilding - so that people can live in their homeland and not be part of another Nakba.

A 'Kinder Transport' for orphaned Palestinian children might well have different motives and might in a limited way be a good thing - whether to neighbouring countries or to 'the West'. But it might still play in to a bigger Gazan ethnic cleansing project.

---

I find it very sad that orphaned children might be used as political pawns in that way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Citizen's Nephew

I just want to say that I really value your comprehensive reply. I'm not being condescending but genuine. This isn't about disagreement or whether I feel your argument is solid (I'm too tired to get into this).

I'll just say that I think we (people) could argue theologically and academically on many issues you've raised. That, though, is how I feel we've (humanity) got to the bloodshed in the first place. If only we could celebrate our similarities and not focus on our differences. It's interesting but I think the mindsets of leaders like Mandela and Gandhi are what's desperately needed in the world right now.....

---

Thanks for your response. If you are saying that religion is part of the reason we have arrived at the bloodshed in Palestine we are at now, I agree with you! Jesus could see the proverbial writing on the wall back then in pre-70AD but humanity has gone its own sweet way and love thy neighbour has long gone out of the window when it comes to territorial matters.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

Let's go back to the troubles of NI. Supposing the IRA had done a mass bombing exercise throughout major cities in Great Britain and killed say, 1000-2000 civilians. And in response, the British Army were tasked with wiping out the IRA and in doing so, killed about 40,000 Irish people, most of which were women and children. Would you say then 'well, it's the IRA's fault. You can blame them'?

---

The two conflicts are not comparable and your scenario is hypothetical.

According to Wikipedia 3,500 people were killed in the conflict during the “Troubles” in N.I, of whom 52% were civilians (1820), 32% were members of the British security forces (1120), and 16% were members of paramilitary groups (560). Of these roughly half were Nationalists (UDF etc) and half Republicans (IRA etc).

90% of the civilians who died during the “Troubles” were killed by paramilitaries and 10% by the security forces. This would be akin to Hamas fighters killing ordinary Palestinians who lived alongside them and the remainder killed by the IDF.

My scenario is indeed hypothetical. And I’m not saying that what happened in NI is comparable with Gaza. Just curious as to whether Truthpaste and James Wales would hold a different view if 30,000 UK civilians were killed and would they say, ah well it’s the IRAs fault not the British forces.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

My scenario is indeed hypothetical. And I’m not saying that what happened in NI is comparable with Gaza. Just curious as to whether Truthpaste and James Wales would hold a different view if 30,000 UK civilians were killed and would they say, ah well it’s the IRAs fault not the British forces.

---

Excuse me? What is my view on the Israeli - Gaza war then Stevo?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

My scenario is indeed hypothetical. And I’m not saying that what happened in NI is comparable with Gaza. Just curious as to whether Truthpaste and James Wales would hold a different view if 30,000 UK civilians were killed and would they say, ah well it’s the IRAs fault not the British forces.

---

You are spot on

Completely wasting your time though , he's incapable of being wrong , ever

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

My scenario is indeed hypothetical. And I’m not saying that what happened in NI is comparable with Gaza. Just curious as to whether Truthpaste and James Wales would hold a different view if 30,000 UK civilians were killed and would they say, ah well it’s the IRAs fault not the British forces.

---

Neither of us have said that the IDF are faultless? All we have highlighted are those who lit the match before the 'building' was set completely alight.

Out of interest, what view would you prefer us to have? And why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

Neither of us have said that the IDF are faultless? All we have highlighted are those who lit the match before the 'building' was set completely alight.

Out of interest, what view would you prefer us to have? And why?

---

"As per B'Tselem, an Israeli human-rights organisation, 10,712 Palestinians and 1,330 Israelis had been killed since 2000 till this year"

This is as of pre 7 October 2023 - the Israeli response had been disproportionate before the awful Hamas attack almost ten months ago and has certainly been that since then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

"As per B'Tselem, an Israeli human-rights organisation, 10,712 Palestinians and 1,330 Israelis had been killed since 2000 till this year"

This is as of pre 7 October 2023 - the Israeli response had been disproportionate before the awful Hamas attack almost ten months ago and has certainly been that since then.

---

Agreed. Yet the figures would be dramatically different if there was nothing (prior/ post Oct 2023) to respond to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

You are spot on

Completely wasting your time though , he's incapable of being wrong , ever

---

How do my views on the war differ to yours Sludge?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

Excuse me? What is my view on the Israeli - Gaza war then Stevo?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

Neither of us have said that the IDF are faultless? All we have highlighted are those who lit the match before the 'building' was set completely alight.

Out of interest, what view would you prefer us to have? And why?

---

You have both put the blame for the death of 10s of thousands of Palestinians wholly on Hamas and none of it on Israel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

What an interesting take you have on Christian life :hehe:

Later it is, assuming you survive R.I.P. ?

---

I've survived. A day on the beer takes it out of me but back to the question at hand.

Israel helped Hamas, it tacitly funded them and continued to do so via Qatar until last October. Israels strategy here can be likened to one of these stupid, steroided up to the eyeballs, tattooed knobheads that keep an XL Pitbull and encourages the dog to act like an aggressive and intimidate all and wthen wonders why the dog named Hamas has then attacked everyone in the kitchen at their house party when they've been dancing to the Sugababes?

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/comment...failed-policy/

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...as-2024-01-19/

There's a lot more in depth reporting on this out there some really interesting in relation to the Israeli motives.

I'll state my opinion that both Hamas and the current Israeli government are both a gaggle of *****.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordi Culé

I've survived. A day on the beer takes it out of me but back to the question at hand.

Israel helped Hamas, it tacitly funded them and continued to do so via Qatar until last October. Israels strategy here can be likened to one of these stupid, steroided up to the eyeballs, tattooed knobheads that keep an XL Pitbull and encourages the dog to act like an aggressive and intimidate all and wthen wonders why the dog named Hamas has then attacked everyone in the kitchen at their house party when they've been dancing to the Sugababes?

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/comment...failed-policy/

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...as-2024-01-19/

There's a lot more in depth reporting on this out there some really interesting in relation to the Israeli motives.

I'll state my opinion that both Hamas and the current Israeli government are both a gaggle of *****.

---

Cracking post:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jordi Culé

I've survived. A day on the beer takes it out of me but back to the question at hand.

Israel helped Hamas, it tacitly funded them and continued to do so via Qatar until last October. Israels strategy here can be likened to one of these stupid, steroided up to the eyeballs, tattooed knobheads that keep an XL Pitbull and encourages the dog to act like an aggressive and intimidate all and wthen wonders why the dog named Hamas has then attacked everyone in the kitchen at their house party when they've been dancing to the Sugababes?

https://www.japantimes.co.jp/comment...failed-policy/

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe...as-2024-01-19/

There's a lot more in depth reporting on this out there some really interesting in relation to the Israeli motives.

I'll state my opinion that both Hamas and the current Israeli government are both a gaggle of *****.

---

:thumbup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

You have both put the blame for the death of 10s of thousands of Palestinians wholly on Hamas and none of it on Israel.

---

Completely false, so you kindly retract that!

I said that Hamas could have prevented a lot of Palestinians dying since October by not sanctioning a slaughter at a festival and by not kidnapping people and holding them as hostages. Manifestly, that would have prevented many deaths that have come from Israeli hands.

I also said many protests [in the west] have been wrong in failing to call out Hamas enough. I think that would have helped the situation more by piling pressure on Hamas to release them.

I've no interest in any Zionism or "from the river to the sea" bollocks. Two state solution is the only viable solution and that requires changes in behaviour and government in both countries, not just one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I said that Hamas could have prevented a lot of Palestinians dying since October by not sanctioning a slaughter at a festival and by not kidnapping people and holding them as hostages. Manifestly, that would have prevented many deaths that have come from Israeli hands.

I also said many protests [in the west] have been wrong in failing to call out Hamas enough. I think that would have helped the situation more by piling pressure on Hamas to release them.

I've no interest in any Zionism or "from the river to the sea" bollocks. Two state solution is the only viable solution and that requires changes in behaviour and government in both countries, not just one.

---

Had you equally ascribed bollocks to Zionism you might have appeared a tad more credible but I doubt it was an oversight. Also it's worth remembering that the end goal of Zionism is "from the river to the sea".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Had you equally ascribed bollocks to Zionism you might have appeared a tad more credible but I doubt it was an oversight. Also it's worth remembering that the end goal of Zionism is "from the river to the sea".

---

Happy to confirm, I was applying "bollocks" to both of those ideas / slogans.

In that case, I retract my statement with full apologies. I’m sorry.

But only as far as you’re concerned. There are others in here who are clearly putting 100% of the blame on Hamas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

In that case, I retract my statement with full apologies. I’m sorry.

But only as far as you’re concerned. There are others in here who are clearly putting 100% of the blame on Hamas.

---

I've not seen anyone do that? Sure, a few have pointed out that Hamas lit the flame in a massive way, but that's not the same that saying every life lost is soley due to Hamas.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

In that case, I retract my statement with full apologies. I’m sorry.

But only as far as you’re concerned. There are others in here who are clearly putting 100% of the blame on Hamas.

---

No need to apologise, but appreciate the message 👍

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stevo

In that case, I retract my statement with full apologies. I’m sorry.

But only as far as you’re concerned. There are others in here who are clearly putting 100% of the blame on Hamas.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

I've not seen anyone do that? Sure, a few have pointed out that Hamas lit the flame in a massive way, but that's not the same that saying every life lost is soley due to Hamas.

---

"How many times have we seen weeping Palestinian mothers holding the corpses of their children and asking what did he/she do to deserve this? The answer of course is nothing but is 100% down to the actions of Hamas."

I wonder who wrote this and who piled in to support it? (Clue - many bibles were bashed that day!)

To put it bluntly - Benjamin Netanyahu is the enemy of the Israeli people, the Palestinian people, and of every person on this earth who values human life. He is also personally responsible for October 7. The fact that he spoke in Congress, with tens of thousands dead in Gaza and no hostage deal in sight, is an embarrassment to Congress and to every single representative who attended.

https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...e-him-to-speak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JamesWales

I said that Hamas could have prevented a lot of Palestinians dying since October by not sanctioning a slaughter at a festival and by not kidnapping people and holding them as hostages. Manifestly, that would have prevented many deaths that have come from Israeli hands.

I also said many protests [in the west] have been wrong in failing to call out Hamas enough. I think that would have helped the situation more by piling pressure on Hamas to release them.

I've no interest in any Zionism or "from the river to the sea" bollocks. Two state solution is the only viable solution and that requires changes in behaviour and government in both countries, not just one.

---

The two-state solution is generally accepted in modern times to be THE solution. It would appear from our perspective in 2024 to be the lessor of many evils, but it will never provide the peace that we all want to see. The need to eradicate the Jews has never gone away since the rise of Hitler in the 1930's; different vessels are employed to complete the task, but the chief enemy (of Israel) will not stop his efforts until he is dealt with himself, and at the right time, he will be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by truthpaste

The two-state solution is generally accepted in modern times to be THE solution. It would appear from our perspective in 2024 to be the lessor of many evils, but it will never provide the peace that we all want to see. The need to eradicate the Jews has never gone away since the rise of Hitler in the 1930's; different vessels are employed to complete the task, but the chief enemy (of Israel) will not stop his efforts until he is dealt with himself, and at the right time, he will be.

---

THE solution would be a single democratic state in which Jews, Christians, Muslims and people of no faith or belief could live side by side with the same laws, the same rights and the same security. Not a Jewish state. Not an Islamic state. Just a democratic state.

We are on a path to a single state - a Political Zionist state - in which non-Jews are either killed or expelled (in the occupied territories) and kept as exploited second class citizens with reduced rights (in Israel).

Two states is supported by the vast majority of the world as the best viable compromise solution that gives some rights to the indigenous people of Palestine - but it can only happen (even for the short-medium term) if the illegal settlers are removed from the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Israel has spent all the years since Oslo changing 'the facts on the ground' so that two states is unviable. If the world is serious about two states (the West isn't) Israeli expansionism and ethnic cleansing will have to be rolled back, and the 1967 border re-established.

There is no place in the world of 2024 for settler-colonialism, for ethnic cleansing, or for white/Jewish supremacy (or for any other kind of racist supremacy). Unfortunately that ideology, and the war crimes, human rights abuses and genocide that come from it, have many supporters - even on Cardiff City message boards!.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

THE solution would be a single democratic state in which Jews, Christians, Muslims and people of no faith or belief could live side by side with the same laws, the same rights and the same security. Not a Jewish state. Not an Islamic state. Just a democratic state.

We are on a path to a single state - a Political Zionist state - in which non-Jews are either killed or expelled (in the occupied territories) and kept as exploited second class citizens with reduced rights (in Israel).

Two states is supported by the vast majority of the world as the best viable compromise solution that gives some rights to the indigenous people of Palestine - but it can only happen (even for the short-medium term) if the illegal settlers are removed from the West Bank and East Jerusalem. Israel has spent all the years since Oslo changing 'the facts on the ground' so that two states is unviable. If the world is serious about two states (the West isn't) Israeli expansionism and ethnic cleansing will have to be rolled back, and the 1967 border re-established.

There is no place in the world of 2024 for settler-colonialism, for ethnic cleansing, or for white/Jewish supremacy (or for any other kind of racist supremacy). Unfortunately that ideology, and the war crimes, human rights abuses and genocide that come from it, have many supporters - even on Cardiff City message boards!.

---

Your wishes are clear. The future reality will unfold just as clearly as it did from 1867 to 1917 and then 1917 to 1967, and it will be interesting to see how people react to those events.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jon1959

"How many times have we seen weeping Palestinian mothers holding the corpses of their children and asking what did he/she do to deserve this? The answer of course is nothing but is 100% down to the actions of Hamas."

I wonder who wrote this and who piled in to support it? (Clue - many bibles were bashed that day!)

---

As you know I wrote that and I stick by what I said, although it has been misinterpreted to suggest that I meant Hamas are directly responsible for the slaughter of Palestinian children. Obviously that is not the case – as far as I know Hamas have not gone around blowing up houses in Gaza. They are 100% responsible in the sense that the massacre last October triggered the events that followed.

As I wrote previously Hamas were either stupid or deliberate when they launched that attack and I would opt for the latter. Every man and his brother knows that Israel is not a nation to “turn the other cheek” and if attacked will hit back twice as hard – witness the current reaction to the missile strike on the football pitch in the north. I'm pretty sure they needed very little excuse to turn their sights on Hezbollah inside Lebanon – witness the interview with frightened Israelis who live near the Lebanon border as they know that war could be coming to them any time soon. Likewise the people living on the other side of the border are probably anticipating Gaza Mk.2 especially if Hezbollah are embedded amongst the population as Hamas are in Gaza. That doesn't make the Israeli response justifiable, just inevitable of course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gofer Blue

As you know I wrote that and I stick by what I said, although it has been misinterpreted to suggest that I meant Hamas are directly responsible for the slaughter of Palestinian children. Obviously that is not the case – as far as I know Hamas have not gone around blowing up houses in Gaza. They are 100% responsible in the sense that the massacre last October triggered the events that followed.

As I wrote previously Hamas were either stupid or deliberate when they launched that attack and I would opt for the latter. Every man and his brother knows that Israel is not a nation to “turn the other cheek” and if attacked will hit back twice as hard – witness the current reaction to the missile strike on the football pitch in the north. I'm pretty sure they needed very little excuse to turn their sights on Hezbollah inside Lebanon – witness the interview with frightened Israelis who live near the Lebanon border as they know that war could be coming to them any time soon. Likewise the people living on the other side of the border are probably anticipating Gaza Mk.2 especially if Hezbollah are embedded amongst the population as Hamas are in Gaza. That doesn't make the Israeli response justifiable, just inevitable of course.

---

Ethically the question is shouldn't Israel turn the other cheek if the result will be slaughtering innocents? Maybe they should take their losses but maintain the moral high ground!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dorcus

Ethically the question is shouldn't Israel turn the other cheek if the result will be slaughtering innocents? Maybe they should take their losses but maintain the moral high ground!

---

Fat chance!! Quote from BBC report today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6p2j85k8dro

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has promised that Hezbollah will pay "a heavy price" for an attack that killed 12 children at a football pitch in Majdal Shams on the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights on Saturday.