If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
No doubt Israel will be much more secure as a result of this once the dust settles. Oh what a lovely war!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jan/15/israel-gaza-offensive-truce-talks
What is it going to take for someone to stop these fucking lunatic cunts??? :mad:
(and before someone starts I'm referring to the government and armed forces, not the people or the country)
They're illegal when used in certain ways (they are basically similar to napalm) and certainly attacking a hospital / refugee agency comes under that.
But I dunno. It's kind of got to the point whereby Israel isn't really accountable. They've ignored UN calls for peace and shown that the UN security council is ineffectual.
Wont there then be a number of people going back on what they said about the Iraq was being wrong because of lack of UN approval?
SURELY there is no intelligent person who can be ok with this. Wendy, come on, what do you say to that?
Yea it's a really shit situation. The UN was set up after the league of nations and is designed to be an international body to hold countries to some sort of international law. It 'governs' on humanitarian matters and should hold the bar up high.
From the other side of the fence, there is the perception the UN is overrun with muslim states and muslim members who are interested in serving their own interests. My point of view is as follows:
My personal opinion, is that Israel's actions in the region are unjustified and more than that they are a deliberate act of aggression not against hamas but against the people of gaza. No prime minister is naive enough to think invading and bombing an area such as gaza won't result in 'collateral damage'.
However, my personal opinion is in some ways irrelevent. The facts are that Israel is conducting military missions in Gaza and has increased policing of the West Bank area and mobilised it's armed forces. Furthermore, their missions have got them criticism from not only leaders of many governments around the world, but also from apolitical organisations such as the International Red Cross Committee, who have described the situation in Gaza as a 'humanitarian crisis'.
Another fact, is that the UN general assembly and the UN security council have passed binding and non-binding resolutions calling on Israel to stop. These have been ignored. Therefore, I believe strongly that if Israel decides it will not be held accountable for it's actions (whether they are right or wrong, but we can argue there is 'a strong case' that they might be wrong based on the weight of criticism they have received), then we should react to that by forcing them to be accountable.
This can be done by economic sanctions, political gestures, and so on. Currently I am considering whether to call a motion in my student union to see if the students believe that the student union should lobby the university to engage in an academic boycott of Israel. This is because Israel is home to many great scholars all with voting power - if they are alienated from the rest of the world because other places disagree with the politics of Israel then they will vote harshly against the current government and vote for a government that will be more accountable, and hopefully, more compassionate for the needs of the Gazan people.
Sorry if that was a bit long winded, I think it's important with the Israel issue to try and be level headed (something I am not at times, I do get angry/upset but I *try*!), otherwise any credibility arguments have are thrown away. I don't believe the people of Israel are very happy about the current situation either though, with opinion about the war and the government very divided.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/7833251.stm
I watched that and found it quite interesting, but don't you think his counterpoints were a little... missing the bigger picture. Saying Israel had occupied Gaza for 40 years and built "illegal" factories, farms, mills, and then said Israel said to the Gazan people: 'ok, you can have all of it for free, and we'll even give you aid'. Saying the Gazan people were ungrateful towards all Israel had done for it.
Just sounds like the rhetoric of someone who has been programmed to think one way. Even if Israel pull out, they're not complying with international law, or giving something the Gazans deserve as human beings (although, the borders are still closed to trade and travel), the pro-Israel lobby turns it round and says "look how nice we are! What the hell is wrong with you people?".
It's that kind of one-mindedness where they can't actually see from any other perspective than their own.
Either the politicians in Israel are monumentally stupid, or monumentally clever. Best case situation it returns to a tense peace now, no better than the situation before where a sustainable peace deal was within grasp (albeit with big hurdles! but now, they've alienated the entire region, what are they going to do?)
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2009/01/20091177657498163.html
I'm aware of the legal precedent - if a conflict spills over into civilian areas then it's -not- a war crime to attack civilian targets. But only if you explicitly know they're there. Either way, morality would dictate that the side that holds the ball (air, land, naval superiority) should be at least careful. It has the ability to strike any target inside gaza within a few minutes with cruise missiles, surgical precision is very possible, but caution has been thrown to the wind in my opinion in order to try to struggle to gain a decisive victory in gaza over hamas.
They knew they were up against time as international pressure mounts and the diplomatic cogs turned that would make their position in this conflict untenable and I think that has lead to a rushed operation that has resulted in excess civilian casualties and tragic mistakes.
Blatant use of white phosphorus, a violation of international law.
The UN has for the first time ever today referred to Israel's actions as 'war crimes'.
I think economic sanctions and a strict cultural and diplomatic boycott is the very least we should do. The Israeli Stage is as barbaric and repugnant as Apartheid South Africa- it should be treated similarly.
A larger image showing the use of white phosphorus against civilians and medics, in a hospital/civilian area.
Little wonder the fucking cunts are preventing international media from entering Gaza.
Countries have been bombed for less than this.
Right now Israel feels as if it could exterminate every last man, woman and child knowing no punishment or even condemnation will ever come from Western countries.
Disgusting.
No, this isn't genocide - it isn't that systematic or targeted - what it is is wanton and willfull recklessness on a massive scale. The white phosphorus issue may also be a political hot potato for the United States, given their usage of it in Falluja.
I have a friend who recently completed officer training, told me a story he heard about a commander on the line to one of his men in Iraq, instructing him to cut a large piece of his pal's face out with a knife to stop the stuff burning into his brain. It's completely inexcusable.
Oh and just a small point - Elizabeth Wurtzel (author of 'Prozac Nation') wrote the above article in The Guardian. It was published on Friday, and so far has attracted over 1100 (almost entirely negative) comments, about 10 times more than any other article.
It is the clearest example yet of double standards thinking between a people who are largely comfortable in a stable economy and society but experience intermittent (though largely ineffective) security threats; and those whose everyday existence is hellish and severe before the war or the Jihadis or anyone else even gets out of bed...
The reason everyone is critisizing Israel right now is not because the world is anti-semetic, but because it's the current issue. People will forget about it after the world's politicians have shook hands and smiled, will forget the plight of the people. Just like how there were mass demonstrations against China's treatment of tibetans during the olympics - where are they all now?
People only care about something when it's current. The difference being everyone else takes it on the chin (China pretends they don't exist), Israel and it's supporters call it anti-semitism. This further's the objective of making themselves out to the victims not just in this conflict but in the world.
Surely, there is a serious issue of the two sides having very different perspectives on things. I can see both sides. Why are they both so stubborn in trying to open their eyes? If I were to pretend they were characters in a play, Israel would be the suave cocky American who pisses everyone off then smiles graciously as if he's the star of the party, and Hamas is the angry man who gets dicked on and then after its all said and does starts ranting and telling whoever to piss off, after they're already walking away having done their business.
Both unlikeable characters, with civilians on both sides. If anything, I would argue Israel's is the more dangerous, as it *doesn't seem to care* that it hits civilians. It's like "hell yea, good job guys, we just kicked the shit out of em (with cigar, of course). Hamas is like Achmed the dead terrorist, all talk no action.
Lets not pretend Israel would be any less callous with any other party though, it's just a personality clash. Hamas don't want to compromise, and Israel demands for the process to be done in it's way. Of course it's unilateral, it is only peace if Israel says its peace. As far as the world is concerned, Israel really is the only legitimate state (even if Palestine is recognised diplomatically, countries don't take it seriously).
Isn't it ironic that the Israelites spent 40 years wandering the desert, and it's now been 40 years since many of the new inhabitants of the region were forced from there homes. How history repeats itself! (although, one would hope they have a map this time)
The real victims are the innocent people caught in the crossfire. The vast majority of which are not those who would cry out they're being targetting by anti semitic murderers (watching question time this week, the Editor of this Jewish newspaper thingy brings up the argument against hamas / justification for the bombardment of gaza "they want to kill me!!") - the real victims are those people living in and around Gaza.
god's special people, duh.
call rule 32
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/british-jews-attacked-for-progaza-solidarity-1418909.html
One thing the pro-Zinoist camp does better than anyone else on earth is PR. Quite how the Palestinians are actually seen by some around the world as extremists and terrorists, and the people who kill, rob and oppress them and their fanatical cheerleaders are considered fair, moderate and innocent victims really is the mother of all tricks.
Has the offensive in Gaza made life better for Jews? That's ultimately the question the Israeli government should be asking itself. No doubt, the spin will come up with 'well, we stopped... some rocket attacks, we showed hamas...' but for the average Jew, they face more anger globally over the situation that at any time since the second world war.
Israel isn't responsible for the plight of global jewry - it is responsible for its citizens and by stopping the rocket attacks it probably has made it better for its citizens
Now the question could also be asked of Hamas and the ordinary Palestinian and the answer has to be no, there actions haven't advanced there cause one iota and lots of Palestinians are dead or homeless.
There's lots of definitions of 'just wars', but one of the most common is whether the aim is achievable given the effusion of blood. It is obvious Hamas's aims aren't achievable (and Israel's rather more limited ones are).
Agreed with you on hamas pretty much, though it is a complicated issue if we consider there was the truce, hamas only broke it in retaliation for the November 4th assasinations.
I don't think Israel has achieved it's objectives. But then, I don't think now sadly the objectives of the peaceful Palestinian people (as I acknowledge plenty harbour much animosity towards Israel, to say the least, which is returned in good measure I'm sure) are not only unrealistic, but unideal.
It was 40 years ago when the arabs of what is now Israel were forced from their homes and into gaza and the west bank. Look at the census data for justification - 1967 half a million arabs in Israel, today there is one fifth that number.
But the children of Palestine today weren't born in what is now Israel, instead it is the children of Israel in newly created settlements. It is not right, and Israel were told off in the UN many times with many resolutions against it, but they have succeeded in putting off the UN long enough that the land is effectively theirs due to 'squatters right'.
I do think that the right of return should be extended unconditionally to all Palestinian citizens however, and the borders should be opened. I envisage a union of the two states as they are two close to remain hateful towards each other, in too close a space. If you picture this 'larger' state and ignore the boundaries (bear in mind, a unified state is what the arab league wanted back in 1947, heh), then it is effectively apartheid with the gentry Jewish populous having plenty and the underclass Palestinians in their areas having none.
Katchika - agreed 100%. But that's not to say it's not a by-product of this conflict.
Part of me wonders if a peace treaty resulting in the dissolution of Palestine into Eygpt, Jordan etc. wouldn't be all that terrible. A fair compromise to give the Palestinian (and Jewish) children of today safety in the future?
Not that that's fair, but does anyone believe there will be a fair and just resolution from Israel? Just like the US never gave a fair and just resolution to the native American Indians - just carted them off to reservations - it is just another tragedy in human history and we can't change what has passed and what is. We can only influence the future.
Regardless Israel is winning (or at least achieving its short and medium term objectives at a tolerable cost), it doesn't need to negotiate. Hamas is loosing (or at least shows no sign of getting any of its objectives fulfilled, even at a high cost). Its the loosing side which needs to compromise.
As I said I'm not a Moslem or a Jew, Palestinian or Israeli, so I look at this conflict neutrally as a vaguley interested bystander, albeit one who's had a professional understanding of what war is
Israel's point of view is that it's a matter of internal security, and really no other countries have any business sticking their nose in. Clearly, this represents the attitude that (whether they are right or wrong), they don't feel the need to answer the question of necessity or even justify their answer.
Hamas' point of view is that of a marginalised and radicalised group to a large extent. They believe they are the oppressed and that they are not terrorists, they are fighting for their freedom and more than that - for their children's freedoms. Like I said before, ideas can be dangerous.
If they can win their freedom without bloodshed (i.e. by Israel making concessions, opening up the borders) see how much support for wiping Israel off the map they have then. Contrary to popular beliefs, arabs are people like us who care about their families, who want their kids to get an education, to get married and give them grandkids. They don't want them to die in some futile war against a superpower for some supposed ideology.
It's easy to get it mixed up though when that superpower is holding a knife to your throat.
1) stop firing rockets and attacking your stronger neighbour. If some renegades want to continue kill them or if you can't ask Israel to do it for you (you may have noticwed they're good at it).
2) Drop the anti-Jewish propaganda in your schools and start teaching your kids that the Holocaust was the greatest crime of the twentieth century
3) When talking to fellow Arabs take Israel's side - walk out of the room at the merest hint of anti-semitism (making sure you tell the world why you left)
4) Support Israel in any trade negotiations (that'll be good for you as many boycotts of Israeli goods often manage to boycott Palestinian goods as well)
5) chanting that the US is the Great Satan whilst drinking coca-cola and wearing Levis is a lot less effective in building a nice relationship with them than just drinking coca-cola and wearing Levis.
6) Remember the left aren't your friends, they just see you as pawns in the battle against the Great Satan (see 5)
7) Remind everyone that Jews are children of Abraham as are Moslems and Christians (probably best not mention it to Hindus though)
8) Recognise Israel without preconditions - that way they might believe you are starting to accept there right to exist
9) Lobby Marks and Sparks to set up a store, good quality food and presents for granny as a bonus
10) Have I mentioned not attacking Israel?
In a few years you and Israel will be best buddies, though Syria and Iran might not like you. The plus side is that you're probably likely to be able to get a lot more from having Israel as your friend, not only a free Palestine, but one with decent economic links to one of the stronger Middle Eastern economies. And if your really good friends they're also likely to lobby the US for you to get some nice economic aid (it's in there interest to have a nice wealthy trading partner next door)
Yep, I'm telling them to be realistic instead of fighting a war that they're not going to win. The alternative is continued warfare in the hope for some miracle (and if they get it Israel is likely to not even be a puppet state).