Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

WeePat said:
Yeah I would definitely take any pro Palestinian content from Candace Owens with a huge pinch of salt because, knowing her history of vile antisemitism, it’s most likely not coming from a position of solidarity with the Palestinian cause.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, there will be a lot of in fighting on the right, effectively eating their own. I always found it odd why the left got tarnished with being anti-Semitic when the right has a huge issue with this as well but they seem to get a pass.

Alas, the right cratering and showing their Nazi like tendencies will be a good thing, as they end up with the likes of that anus hair, Nick Fuentes.
 
glazed said:
It's not incoherent it simply contradicts your world view which is not based on the reality of the situation. Gaza cannot provide water for itself even in the best circumstances and certainly not now its desalination and power plants have been destroyed. Opening up the sea border or airspace would not alter that (even if Israel were to do that which it will not.) This is a classic water war of the kind taking place all over the global south, not least on the West Bank.

What obligation do you think Israel has? They are at war with Hamas. Hamas is widely recognised (accurately) as a terrorist organisation who have promised to repeat October 7 the first chance they get. As long as they are theoretically in charge of Gaza the Israelis don't have to lift a finger to help Gazans and nor will they. They will simply say international aid can deal with it and it is Egypt's problem to get it through. The UN can complain all they like but they cannot do a thing about it. And the Egyptians see Hamas as just as big a threat as the Israelis do.
Click to expand...
Israel has a legal obligation as occupying power, as already stated.

Egypt has zero obligation vis a vis Gaza. In any case, it is not Egypt that is preventing aid from entering through Rafah. That is 100% Israel.
 
gfactor86 said:


Looks like Hamas was hiding hostages within the Shifa hospital
Click to expand...

What are we seeing? Looks like people being bought into a hospital?

Also, around 13 seconds, look at the CCTV clock and the clock on the wall. They don't match. The two angles also have different inversion of the time/dates on the CCTV footage itself...

This looks heavily doctored.

Waiting for independent verification is best.
 
Super Hans said:
Israel has a legal obligation as occupying power, as already stated.
Click to expand...

Good luck telling the government that (though the Israeli Supreme Court would probably agree with you.)

Super Hans said:
Egypt has zero obligation vis a vis Gaza. In any case, it is not Egypt that is preventing aid from entering through Rafah. That is 100% Israel.
Click to expand...

https://www.reuters.com/world/egypt...a-opening-rafah-crossing-0600-gmt-2023-10-16/

There's a lot of truth to this latter statement. Clearly Israel has a big responsibility for preventing aid coming in right now. But medium term Israel would like nothing better than for the Rafah crossing to be opened up and for Egypt to take a role in south Gaza. That's literally one of their big strategic goals. In the 1970s they begged Sadat to take control of Gaza and he refused.

And if the definition of occupation is simply preventing access then Egypt is also an occupier. They have kept their border sealed for years for the same reason Israel has - Gaza has a terrorist Islamist government which would prove an unacceptable security risk. If Israel has an obligation to provide aid, so does Egypt. It's a bit academic though. The Israeli government doesn't accept the idea it is an occupier. It regards the blockade as purely an act of self defence after the Gazans elected Hamas as their government and started attacking them constantly. So they're not going to feel bound by some definition created by a UN they see as anyway part of the enemy camp.
 
gfactor86 said:
why does everything have to be a conspiracy?
Click to expand...
They said the hospital is the Headquarters and the command center of Hamas, in a move to legitimise the attack and cut everything on that hospital.

So, where is the command center?
 
Dirty Schwein said:
What are we seeing? Looks like people being bought into a hospital?

Also, around 13 seconds, look at the CCTV clock and the clock on the wall. They don't match. The two angles also have different inversion of the time/dates on the CCTV footage itself...

This looks heavily doctored.

Waiting for independent verification is best.
Click to expand...

Not sure there is such a thing as independent verification given the security situation.
 
Dirty Schwein said:
What are we seeing? Looks like people being bought into a hospital?

Also, around 13 seconds, look at the CCTV clock and the clock on the wall. They don't match. The two angles also have different inversion of the time/dates on the CCTV footage itself...

This looks heavily doctored.

Waiting for independent verification is best.
Click to expand...

The clock on the wall clearly isn't working. The colour of the date and time is directed by the brightness of the background. Certainly not difficult to add later but saying it "looks heavily doctored" right off the bat seems fairly premature to me.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
The clock on the wall clearly isn't working. The colour of the date and time is directed by the brightness of the background. Certainly not difficult to add later but saying it "looks heavily doctored" right off the bat seems fairly premature to me.
Click to expand...
The colour on the date and time on a CCTV camera wouldn't adjust to lighting, they're usually overlayed as a separate asset. As I said, it looks doctored, which is a reasonable stance given the IDF track record but also I stated that I would prefer to wait for verification.

I still don't understand what we're seeing in the video besides a group of people bringing an injured person into the hospital?
 
Dirty Schwein said:
The colour on the date and time on a CCTV camera wouldn't adjust to lighting, they're usually overlayed as a separate asset. As I said, it looks doctored, which is a reasonable stance given the IDF track record but also I stated that I would prefer to wait for verification.

I still don't understand what we're seeing in the video besides a group of people bringing an injured person into the hospital?
Click to expand...

I mean it's quite clear someone getting dragged into a hospital. Not how you would bring a normal patient in for treatment
 
Dirty Schwein said:
The colour on the date and time on a CCTV camera wouldn't adjust to lighting, they're usually overlayed as a separate asset. As I said, it looks doctored, which is a reasonable stance given the IDF track record but also I stated that I would prefer to wait for verification.

I still don't understand what we're seeing in the video besides a group of people bringing an injured person into the hospital?
Click to expand...

Several of the group are armed with machine guns.

It would not make sense for someone doctoring footage to go to the extent of changing the colour of the text based on background if such a possibility could not exist on the original footage. It involves extra steps being made in order to create a less believable product. Who's gonna do that? At any rate, a brief perusal of Google indicates that several CCTV cameras can and do adjust the date and time based on the brightness of the background. Here's one
 
glazed said:
There's a lot of truth to this latter statement. Clearly Israel has a big responsibility for preventing aid coming in right now. But medium term Israel would like nothing better than for the Rafah crossing to be opened up and for Egypt to take a role in south Gaza. That's literally one of their big strategic goals. In the 1970s they begged Sadat to take control of Gaza and he refused.

And if the definition of occupation is simply preventing access then Egypt is also an occupier. They have kept their border sealed for years for the same reason Israel has - Gaza has a terrorist Islamist government which would prove an unacceptable security risk. If Israel has an obligation to provide aid, so does Egypt. It's a bit academic though. The Israeli government doesn't accept the idea it is an occupier. It regards the blockade as purely an act of self defence after the Gazans elected Hamas as their government and started attacking them constantly. So they're not going to feel bound by some definition created by a UN they see as anyway part of the enemy camp.
Click to expand...
Why would Egypt take on Israel's problem in Gaza?

Egypt has no obligation to open its border and no responsibility to provide aid. Egypt sees Gaza, correctly, as Israel's problem as the occupying power. Israel prevents anything coming in or out by sea. That leaves full responsibility for Gaza's welfare with Israel. I should add that Israel has exercised significant control over the Rafah crossing, at the very least for periods of time, and possibly most of the time. Bear in mind Israel controls the Palestinian population registry which exercises significant control over where Palestinians are allowed to live and travel. https://gisha.org/en/the-population-registry/

Additionally, do you have evidence that after Hamas was elected they "started attacking them constantly"? There were plenty of attacks emanating from Gaza from all Palestinian factions before Hamas was elected and I don't think there is clear evidence to support the assertion that Hamas just started attacking Israel "for no reason" from 2006. There is in fact evidence that Israel is the party that usually breaks ceasefires. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/reigniting-violence-how-d_b_155611
 
gfactor86 said:
I mean it's quite clear someone getting dragged into a hospital. Not how you would bring a normal patient in for treatment
Click to expand...
I'm not saying it's not Hamas, I'm saying I don't know what we're seeing that exposes anything beyond an injured person being bought into a hospital.
Ekkie Thump said:
Several of the group are armed with machine guns.

It would not make sense for someone doctoring footage to go to the extent of changing the colour of the text based on background if such a possibility could not exist on the original footage. It involves extra steps being made in order to create a less believable product. Who's gonna do that? At any rate, a brief perusal of Google indicates that several CCTV cameras can and do adjust the date and time based on the brightness of the background. Here's one
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Although even the area with the date and time looks weird and not an untampered overlay at all. Even changes size etc, as if a point is trying to be made. all a bit strange.

And what is this video proving? Genuinely curious.
 
Last edited:
Raoul said:
You don’t have to believe either side, but that doesn’t mean what either side are saying can’t be posted and discussed.
Click to expand...
Never said they can't, take a look at the comment accompanying the tweet.
 
Super Hans said:
Why would Egypt take on Israel's problem in Gaza?

Egypt has no obligation to open its border and no responsibility to provide aid. Egypt sees Gaza, correctly, as Israel's problem as the occupying power. Israel prevents anything coming in or out by sea. That leaves full responsibility for Gaza's welfare with Israel. I should add that Israel has exercised significant control over the Rafah crossing, at the very least for periods of time, and possibly most of the time. Bear in mind Israel controls the Palestinian population registry which exercises significant control over where Palestinians are allowed to live and travel. https://gisha.org/en/the-population-registry/

Additionally, do you have evidence that after Hamas was elected they "started attacking them constantly"? There were plenty of attacks emanating from Gaza from all Palestinian factions before Hamas was elected and I don't think there is clear evidence to support the assertion that Hamas just started attacking Israel "for no reason" from 2006. There is in fact evidence that Israel is the party that usually breaks ceasefires. https://www.huffpost.com/entry/reigniting-violence-how-d_b_155611
Click to expand...

Sisi doesn’t want Palestinian refugees for obvious reasons. He’s an autocrat who just toppled a Muslim Brotherhood guy to gain power, so he obviously wont want to risk destabilizing his own regime by infusing 2 million Palestinians into the country.
 
VorZakone said:
Click to expand...


Apartheid is expensive. It crumbled in SA partly due to the high costs of maintaining a violent police state at home, fighting on multiple fronts against other African states, and dwindling receipts due to embargos. Hopefully in this situation, they're brought to the point of reason through bankruptcy.
 
Super Hans said:
Why would Egypt take on Israel's problem in Gaza?
Click to expand...

Because they are fellow arabs perhaps who claim to care about the Palestinians. Israel makes no such claims. As I understand it the Gaza border was open until Hamas came to power. There's no doubt in my mind Israel will at least try to starve the Gazans out. America might make them stop or they might not. Will Egypt really sit by and do nothing if they don't?

That_Bloke said:
Yes, they are.

It's truly amazing to see how enriching your posts are since you decided to not crap all over this thread and call it an echo chamber.
Click to expand...

I thought you blocked me for suggesting the German army wasn't entirely innocent of wrongdoing in the events leading up to the founding of the Israeli state?

It is an anti-Israeli echo chamber full of embarrassing propaganda that sometimes drifts into low key anti-semitism. I'm quite clear about that. But don't assume from this that I am entirely pro-Israel. I'm mainly seeking a realistic understanding of the situation and see rights and wrong on both sides. For example I reject the idea that this is genocide but I do think the Israeli goal is ethnic cleansing. I do think Hamas bears a huge responsibility for what is happening and they see civilian deaths as a propaganda win. It's not the simple morally black and white situation that the 'River to the Sea' mob would have us believe.
 
Raoul said:
Sisi doesn’t want Palestinian refugees for obvious reasons. He’s an autocrat who just toppled a Muslim Brotherhood guy to gain power, so he obviously wont want to risk destabilizing his own regime by infusing 2 million Palestinians into the country.
Click to expand...

But there is a middle ground where they provide aid inside Gaza. They look like they don't want to do that either. They may have to.
 
glazed said:
And if the definition of occupation is simply preventing access then Egypt is also an occupier. They have kept their border sealed for years for the same reason Israel has - Gaza has a terrorist Islamist government which would prove an unacceptable security risk. If Israel has an obligation to provide aid, so does Egypt. It's a bit academic though. The Israeli government doesn't accept the idea it is an occupier. It regards the blockade as purely an act of self defence after the Gazans elected Hamas as their government and started attacking them constantly. So they're not going to feel bound by some definition created by a UN they see as anyway part of the enemy camp.
Click to expand...

No, Israel is an occupier because they violate Gaza's border at will, and block Palestinians from leaving their territory by air, sea and land. Egypt only prevents Palestinians from entering their territory (with some exceptions) but they are exercising their rights as a sovereign nation. Israel goes far beyond that.

Israel has an obligation to provide aid because they are the primary reason things are so fecked up in Gaza. Egypt doesn't have an obligation to provide aid any more than any other country not named Israel, and they've been the main conduit for aid into Gaza.

Why would you place any stock in what the Israeli government thinks of itself?

And why would a blockade of another country be acceptable, just because you have differences with their government? The only other case that comes to mind (the US blockade of Cuba) is universally condemned as a violation of human rights.

Is any of this really foreign to you?
 
Raoul said:
Sisi doesn’t want Palestinian refugees for obvious reasons. He’s an autocrat who just toppled a Muslim Brotherhood guy to gain power, so he obviously wont want to risk destabilizing his own regime by infusing 2 million Palestinians into the country.
Click to expand...

No, I think the main reason is that he knows that once Gaza is emptied Israel will convert the land to settlements and lock Palestinians out of their land. Another Nakba. Egypt and Jordan know this, which is why they (correctly) rebuff the very suggestion of a "temporary" relocation. Why can't Israel move Palestinians to it's version of the Sinai?
 
adexkola said:
No, I think the main reason is that he knows that once Gaza is emptied Israel will convert the land to settlements and lock Palestinians out of their land. Another Nakba. Egypt and Jordan know this, which is why they (correctly) rebuff the very suggestion of a "temporary" relocation. Why can't Israel move Palestinians to it's version of the Sinai?
Click to expand...

Why would Sisi care about that ? He's the autocratic dictator of another country and has no interest in Palestinians other than to protect his regime and throw a bone to common Egyptians protesting the war.
 
glazed said:
But there is a middle ground where they provide aid inside Gaza. They look like they don't want to do that either. They may have to.
Click to expand...

My understanding is the bottleneck on getting aid in is on the Israeli side because they want to obsessively check cargos and obviously avoid what is being brought in being used by Hamas.
 
Raoul said:
Why would Sisi care about that ? He's the autocratic dictator of another country and has no interest in Palestinians other than to protect his regime and throw a bone to common Egyptians protesting the war.
Click to expand...

Why would Sisi care about 2 million additional people on his land, who (unlike the guys Moses took back across the Red Sea) have no avenue of returning to where they came from? :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.