40 Killed In Hamas Attacks In Israel

[Gofer Blue]

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?

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.

[Gofer Blue]

I don't care about PC or non PC.

I think everyone has a right to question (and condemn if they choose) the actions or even the existence of Hamas.

But you claimed that the death (murder) of Palestinian children is '100% down to the actions of Hamas'.

Not Israel.

That is what I responded to and what I called a 'crass apologist' claim. That is what it is.

Hamas were either stupid or deliberate when they attacked Israel last October, and my money is on the latter. Everybody knows that Israel has an eye-for-an-eye philosophy, possibly a two-eyes-for an-eye philosophy actually, and thus the October event effectively invited the IDF to come after Hamas in what is essentially guerilla warfare now.

I agree that Israel is hostile to the Palestinians and over the years their actions, and those of the illegal settlers, have caused a massive amount of resentment towards them. Clearly the IDF are directly responsible for the death, yes murder, of thousands of innocent children and that will be on their conscience. However I stick to what I wrote - I believe if Hamas had not carried out that attack in October then we would not be witnessing what we are now and hence are 100% responsible for the situation. If that makes me an apologist in your eyes then so be it.

[stevo]

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.

Not a rational response to Gofers comment.
I know it's warm today, but overheating and going OTT on what is a reasonable comment is pointless.

They could have prevented their own people being murdered by not sanctioning the slaughter of people at a festival, not kidnapping people and refusing to release them and not hiding their operatives amongst the men, women and children of Gaza mind.

More progress would likely have been made if many of the protesters in the west has recognised these facts a bit more.

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'?

[Citizen's Nephew]

Hamas were either stupid or deliberate when they attacked Israel last October, and my money is on the latter. Everybody knows that Israel has an eye-for-an-eye philosophy, possibly a two-eyes-for an-eye philosophy actually, and thus the October event effectively invited the IDF to come after Hamas in what is essentially guerilla warfare now.

I agree that Israel is hostile to the Palestinians and over the years their actions, and those of the illegal settlers, have caused a massive amount of resentment towards them. Clearly the IDF are directly responsible for the death, yes murder, of thousands of innocent children and that will be on their conscience. However I stick to what I wrote - I believe if Hamas had not carried out that attack in October then we would not be witnessing what we are now and hence are 100% responsible for the situation. If that makes me an apologist in your eyes then so be it.

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?

[stevo]

UN top court says Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories is illegal


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjerjzxlpvdo

[jeepster]

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

[jon1959]

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?

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.

[truthpaste]

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.

[Jordi Culé]

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?

[truthpaste]

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.

[Jordi Culé]

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.

[truthpaste]

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

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

[Citizen's Nephew]

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.

[truthpaste]

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.

[Gofer Blue]

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?

[Citizen's Nephew]

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.....

[Gofer Blue]

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.

[Gofer Blue]

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.

[Gofer Blue]

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.

[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.

[JamesWales]

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?

[SLUDGE FACTORY]

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

[truthpaste]

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?

[the other bob wilson]

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.

[truthpaste]

"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.