Considering that Hamas would win a overwhelming victory in a democratic election according to polls in the west bank its not surprising why Israel wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot for that. If you get sane fair leaders on both sides it might become realistic.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Considering that Hamas would win a overwhelming victory in a democratic election according to polls in the west bank its not surprising why Israel wouldn't shoot themselves in the foot for that. If you get sane fair leaders on both sides it might become realistic.
i have absolutely no idea what you want from me.
I believe my country is killing tons of innocent people. Whether that is considered genocide by definition - I do not know. I know it's bad enough no matter how you call it.
I do not support this government at all, and normally I don't support my country when it comes to the Palestinian issue. Israel is the oppressor. But I think people here are not - cannot, and it's understandable - realize just how shocking the October 7 attacks were on Israelis, including lefties like myself.
We do realize how shocking it was. Just not in the sense you think.
Its a similar mentality to what a lot of folks in the US experienced across the political spectrum when 9/11 happened. A sort of collective trauma and ensuing bloodlust that galvanized citizens around the idea that the perpetrators had to be found/apprehended/killed, their infrastructure and funding decimated, and as many rules and norms as necessary broken along the way to make it happen. And obviously in retrospect many mistakes were made, which is what I suspect will be how Israelis look back at all of this in 10-20 years.
It's still a poor excuse.
You're not wrong. It's clear the government has no plan for the foreseeable future and is just making it up as it goes along, which is why I'd like to see an end to the war with an agreement that will release the hostages.
Until then, this is where the UN should be making themselves useful for once by pushing for some kind of international guardianship over Gaza for the time required to rebuild the region and to rebuild local institutions. That fat pig Guterres better not use any excuse to not do it because his predecessors have been done before. From memory, the UN gave the green light for KFOR to take control of peacekeeping in the aftermath of the war in Kosovo and until the country's security forces become self-suficient.
@Raoul, is this something you see as a possible long-term solution on the table? Or is it something that they are totally incapable of doing despite all precedents? Someone will have to step up to the plate anyway, whether that takes 10, 20 or 25 years.
Just curious, why don't you like him?
Nothing. You replied to me.
It makes a lot of sense for the UN, ideally with regional Arab peacekeepers on the ground, to do that. Although, the Israelis obviously won't allow it since there seems to be a pretty unified position that the Israelis have to retain the "security envelope" around Gaza, which means their security protocols would frequently clash with those of UN peacekeepers. This is why (imo) I don't think the Israelis (or the US) would buy into such a situation, particularly in light of the frayed relations between the Israeli government and the head of the UN.
Last edited:
For the same reason why I bear no sympathy for his 3 previous precedessors in their poor management of various conflicts and issues while they sat at the top of the United Nations, especially under Boutros Boutros during the 1990s. He should be proactive on the job and on equal measures.
Or the UN can send peacekeepers that are either unaligned and/or have a very solid record in those types of missions. Sending in a legion of Irish, Swiss, Austrians, Brazilians, Koreans and Japanese peacekeepers should be plenty good enough to get plenty of good press on all sides.
For the sake of the local population, I think it would make more sense to make sure the actual on the ground peacekeepers were from regional Arab states. Linguistically and culturally, it would be preferable imo. I'm sure a combination of Saudi, Egypt, UAE, and Jordan could do this on a temporary basis, perhaps by sector; similar to how the Soviets, American, Brits, and French did with post WW2 Berlin.
You'd really have to wonder why Hamas might be polling well at the moment.
They had enough support to win the election in Gaza after Israel gave them back the strip and forcibly removed israels from the land. Of course I wouldnt be surprised if someone provided evidence it wasnt a free and fair election. I know though that would you are saying is that Hamas is popular because hatred (and well deserved) of Israel trumphs all else, but you also have to look at how fecking awful a radical islamic terrorist organisation is at looking after the wellbeing or their populace well mingled with the ideology that dying in Jihad sends you to the highest heaven in a split second.
A lot of the accusations of genocide and ethnic cleansing are zionists telling on themselves. I like this account because it mostly just translates stuff from Hebrew newspapers.
Most of the other stuff is from Palestinian people and human rights organizations as you said on the ground. They are far closer to the ground and the reality than that poster will ever be.
I will ask once again, why was situation in Hamas-free West Bank for Palestinians untenable before October 7th? Because Hamas is obviously not the root of all issues in the area, rather a symptom of the way Palestinians were and are treated.
On the other hand you'd have to consider why people flock to voting for such an organisation at an election. Life wasn't exactly wonderful for Palestinians at the time Hamas were elected the government of Gaza. They were still under occupation, were still being oppressed by the Israelis on a daily basis, and the Fatah party had proven completely inept within the PA. The Palestinian people had opted for a secularist resistance for decades following the Nakba (long, long before Hamas even existed) until they were constantly undermined by Israel and its allies, to the point a heinous outfit like Hamas enjoyed support from an increasingly desperate population of Palestinians. Its an all too common lesson from History that Western powers fail to learn from. The whole 'Muslims gonna jihad' explanation is a lazy one at best.
Last edited:
So unless, you kill most of the Palestinians who lives in Gaza, they deserves to be under subjugation and control of another brutal occupation?
This is a question I wish journalists would press the likes of Levy and Regev with whenever they subject us to their usual "We're only at War with Hamas!" verbal diarrhoea. Why have 500 Palestinians been murdered in the WB? Why is there more settler terrorism? And more pressingly why is nothing being done about it?
The Hamas excuse is a useful blanket excuse they're using to justify the statewide violence and murder of Palestinians.
I didnt say anything about deserving, I said its unrealistic because the greater power in Israel are not going to to have Hamas on 2 sides.
It is not an excuse for the massacres and the profound destruction of Gaza nor a justification to understand your point of view in relation to your recent opinions.
Otherwise you are coming from the same ground that Hamas use, in how they justify their attack oct 7th in regard to the profound injustice and the massacres the Palestinians faced for the past 75 years.
They deserve the right of self determination as any other indigenous group of people to a land. What political party is active at the time is irrelevant. Now Hamas would not have been created in the first place if not for the injustice the Palestinians have suffered for the past 75 years.
And who is going to give it to them? Saying that a terrorist organisation being the prime ruler is irrelevant, is only irrelevant for all those who dont have something to lose from that.
More war crimes
Previously people here discussed what knowledge you can gain about a country you don't live in and a situation you see from afar.
Well, you can gain a lot of knowledge. But you can absolutely not understand what it feels to live it.
No it is irrelevant because Hamas or not, the injustice and occupation would continue regardless of who is in power.
By the same token would you know how it feels like to be a Palestinian Arab in your own country?
Remember that the BBC still to this day uses "Hamas-run health Ministry" in all of their reports.
Israel itself doesn't have a same fair leader though. You have a point in so much as Israel being the greater force will do whatever benefits them but that's just an explanation of reasoning and not a justification. The two are constantly confused in order to let third parties off from their humanitarian obligations to prevent states oppressing others. It's easy with Russia as they have a false reasoning where as we can understand some of Israels, yet neither Israel nor Russia are justified in their actions.
Amir above talks about the impact of Oct 7th on Israelis but the people of Gaza and the West Bank also have their traumas too. The reasoning of security can't apply to one state only or neither will ever be safe so outside forces are going to have to step in.
How you satisfy the revenge both sides feel they need is another matter. There needs to be some resolution but it's not going to happen with Hamas or Netanyahu being the key drivers.
Yes thats why i said it
I believe he's talking about a previous chat about the differences between learning about something on twitter and actually being on the ground in the same place.
How can anyone justify or defend this?
The question gets asked everyday, but there's never a proper answer. It's always:
A) But Hamas
B) What are Israel supposed to do
C) Is that source valid? I question this
And then just no coherent follow up until the question gets asked again
Your analysis is not only light-years off the mark but also as reductive and deep as a puddle.
The german media is doing an awesome job.
Im not german nor follow german media.