Also In The News - part 3

[Lionator]

I fear if they can free the hostages and evacuate people, there’s a small chance of Israel nuking the Gaza Strip. If they make it unliveable then that solves the problem. 

[Dunge]

14 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I fear if they can free the hostages and evacuate people, there’s a small chance of Israel nuking the Gaza Strip. If they make it unliveable then that solves the problem. 

No, I see zero chance of this.

But conquering and displacing all Palestinians from it is another matter.

[LiberalFox]

2 hours ago, st albans fox said:

He met them on the evening that Israel went into Gaza on the ground 

it was covered extensively on the news that night 

 

he isn’t popular in Israel - even less so than when all this began 

his attendance at any funerals would not be clever 

 

but the country is at war and in those circumstances will rally around the leadership - until it’s over when he will be political toast 

regarding the hostages - there was a story a few weeks back on a Friday where Hamas declared that they wanted to release two old women on humanitarian grounds but Israel had refused to accept them.  the two women were released on the Monday. I can say for certain that if hostages were offered for release without any preconditions that it was felt would heavily compromise the war aims then it would be done. 
 

israel has a history of exchanging vast numbers of Palestinian prisoners for very few hostages.  Infact some of those considered responsible for planning oct 7 were among 1200 exchanged for just one soldier a decade ago.  The idea that Israel has ‘written off’ the hostages is fanciful.  Hostages go deep into the Israeli psyche. 

 

we should take any stories about hostage releases with a large dose of salt. there is much going on in the background that we won’t know about in detail.  Hamas simply won’t release all the hostages because then they are exposed completely below ground (yeah - sounds odd ). I would expect that at some point quite soon we will see the dozens on non Israeli hostages released.  The additional complication is that Hamas is not holding all of them. 

Fair enough. I know a bit about Israeli history and talk a little with some Israelis (over the internet) but I won't pretend to know everything. I'm aware they are usually very willing to consider negotiating over hostages so wondered if there's been a sudden shift in policy. 

[westernpark]

52 minutes ago, Lionator said:

I fear if they can free the hostages and evacuate people, there’s a small chance of Israel nuking the Gaza Strip. If they make it unliveable then that solves the problem. 

Absolutely no way, just think of the potential radiation to Israel itself. They would be disowned by the West. 

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

I fear if they can free the hostages and evacuate people, there’s a small chance of Israel nuking the Gaza Strip. If they make it unliveable then that solves the problem. 

if by small you mean zero then i agree with you

 

51 minutes ago, Dunge said:

No, I see zero chance of this.

But conquering and displacing all Palestinians from it is another matter.

i have mused about the thought that swapping gaza for an equal sized piece of land north of the west bank up towards galilee would make a two state solution more practical. but that's a long way off (and v unlikely anyway). for now, as confirmed yesterday by the most right wing PM israel has ever had, there is no desire or intention to re occupy gaza beyond non permanent security personnel.

 

 

 

 

Edited 10 November 2023 by st albans fox

[Mickyblueeyes]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

if by small you mean zero then i agree with you

 

i have mused about the thought that swapping gaza for an equal sized piece of land north of the west bank up towards galilee would make a two state solution more practical. but that's a long way off (and v unlikely anyway). for now, as confirmed yesterday by the most right wing PM israel has ever had, there is no desire or intention to re occupy gaza beyond non permanent security personnel.

 

 

 

 

I think the bigger problem for a two state solution (which I struggle to see how it can be fixed) causes more of an issue. 
 

1. the Temple Mount. Who controls that. And how ? It’s so significant to both Israelies and Palestinians, taking it away from Israeli control would be rejected, keeping it in Israeli control would be rejected and having it as a neutral location would be incredibly difficult. 
 

2. The vast amount of exiled Palestinians without a right of return.

 

I think these two problems in itself causes significant issues for long term peace (alongside the rest of it).

 

i also don’t think Israel nukes Gaza. Don’t get me wrong, I think there are members in their Cabinet who would happily do so but I think the majority of those members see Gaza as an extension of Israel. They’d rather occupy than destroy. A lesser evil perhaps.

Edited 10 November 2023 by Mickyblueeyes

[Bellend Sebastian]

1 hour ago, westernpark said:

Absolutely no way, just think of the potential radiation to Israel itself. They would be disowned by the West. 

It would be like Chester nuking Wrexham.

 

Mind you, can't even rule that out 

[st albans fox]

27 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

I think the bigger problem for a two state solution (which I struggle to see how it can be fixed) causes more of an issue. 
 

1. the Temple Mount. Who controls that. And how ? It’s so significant to both Israelies and Palestinians, taking it away from Israeli control would be rejected, keeping it in Israeli control would be rejected and having it as a neutral location would be incredibly difficult. 
 

2. The vast amount of exiled Palestinians without a right of return.

 

I think these two problems in itself causes significant issues for long term peace (alongside the rest of it).

 

i also don’t think Israel nukes Gaza. Don’t get me wrong, I think there are members in their Cabinet who would happily do so but I think the majority of those members see Gaza as an extension of Israel. They’d rather occupy than destroy. A lesser evil perhaps.

Yep

 

on point one there were efforts under Clinton and bush which may have worked given implementation negotiations 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-agreed-to-give-up-sovereignty-in-part-of-jerusalem-old-city-in-2000-document/

https://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-never-said-no-to-2008-peace-deal-says-former-pm-olmert/

 

on point 2, it’s simply not feasible to give 15 million Palestinians the right to live in Israel. There are currently 2 million Arabs/Palestinians living in Israel (25% of the population) . I couldnt see any sovereign state allowing that ratio to increase. 

Imo, Israel really has no desire to make Gaza part of the wider country - Gaza was originally part of Egypt before the 67 war. Unlike parts of the West Bank it has no strong biblical connections so the religious groups are not drawn to it for the reasons that it wasn’t part of biblical Israel until the reign of king David. 

it’s important to realise that after the next GE, the very right wing parties (together with their unpleasant opinions)  that currently prop up BN will no longer be part of the conversation. (And none of these politicians are part of the war cabinet)

 

Edited 10 November 2023 by st albans fox

[westernpark]

2 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

It would be like Chester nuking Wrexham.

 

Mind you, can't even rule that out 

Probably more likely

[Trav Le Bleu]

12 minutes ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

It would be like Chester nuking Wrexham.

 

Mind you, can't even rule that out 

The people of Wrexham need to rise up!

[st albans fox]

Are there actually any real journalists on bbc live webpage?

 

this is from their live feed this afternoon.  Someone must be responsible for proof reading what is posted. 

 

I'm outside the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City, just a few hundred metres away from Israeli tanks approaching from the north and south. The vicinity is every now and then subjected to Israeli airstrikes, artillery shelling and gunshots.

I can hear the sounds of explosions and shelling, and have seen bodies being brought here in vehicles and carts drawn by horses and donkeys.

Inside this hospital there are tens of thousands of injured people, many of whom are still in a critical condition due to the serious injuries they have sustained. They cannot leave the hospital because of their wounds.

 

 

(A couple of days ago Al Jazeera reported that there could be 5000 injured patients in the hospital (which has a capacity of 800)).

Edited 10 November 2023 by st albans fox

[Super_horns]

Sure the 2.4 million pay off will compensate somewhat for the money lost.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67377140

[Mike Oxlong]

5 hours ago, Bellend Sebastian said:

It would be like Chester nuking Wrexham.

 

Mind you, can't even rule that out 

Does mean we get shot of the Reynolds/McElhenny axis 🤔

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Are there actually any real journalists on bbc live webpage?

 

this is from their live feed this afternoon.  Someone must be responsible for proof reading what is posted. 

 

I'm outside the Al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City, just a few hundred metres away from Israeli tanks approaching from the north and south. The vicinity is every now and then subjected to Israeli airstrikes, artillery shelling and gunshots.

I can hear the sounds of explosions and shelling, and have seen bodies being brought here in vehicles and carts drawn by horses and donkeys.

Inside this hospital there are tens of thousands of injured people, many of whom are still in a critical condition due to the serious injuries they have sustained. They cannot leave the hospital because of their wounds.

 

 

(A couple of days ago Al Jazeera reported that there could be 5000 injured patients in the hospital (which has a capacity of 800)).

 

Impossible That's like 10,000, 15,000 20,000 upwards to 99,000'

 

Sensationalism in the press once again. And the BBC are pretty much amongst the worst.

 

Talking of sensationalism. BBC news keeps referring to the initial attack by Hamas and the 1400 innocent Israeli's killed at a music festival. I agree, horrific and should be condemned. But, the BBC reports continue to use words like "murdered, slaughtered, innocents, barbaric" to describe the attack and the victims.

 

I have heard no such terms for the killing of innocent Palestinians

Edited 10 November 2023 by Parafox

[LiberalFox]

I'm not anti-Israel but I think it's unjust what is happening in Gaza. We can debate hypothetically what 'we' (Britain) would do if faced with a similar situation but we aren't and we wouldn't be because we're a European nation whose borders and relationship with neighbouring countries have been established over 100's if not 1000s of years and our sovereignty is respected. If some British based group went and carried out an atrocity in say France and killed a bunch of people then it wouldn't be seen as acceptable for the French air force to respond by dropping bombs on a British housing estate, killing 100 civilians. 

 

But if you live in Gaza it seems you have no state to back you up. If you don't like Hamas you can't vote them out. If you don't want to live there you can't leave either. Who decides how many children it is acceptable to kill in order to destroy Hamas? In reality it is Israel with the USA acting as the ultimate backstop. For all the talk about Israel being surrounded by enemies I'm not sure that holds true. Egypt and Jordan are both US client states. The USA makes sure Israel's armed forces massively overmatch any of them. There's really no world where either of those countries are able to intervene militarily. They have to make their case to the US who then ask the Israelis to be a bit more careful. 

 

Iran is the source of Israel's greatest military threat and groups like Hamas are its proxies even if it doesn't control them directly. I fail to see how this is going to make the region more peaceful. Will it remove the motive for young Palestinians to become drawn into extremism? Will it neutralize Iran's claim to be the only nation standing up for Palestinians? Who is going to run the Gaza strip once the IDF have declared victory? Who is going to pay to rebuild all the homes and schools and places of work that have been destroyed?

 

I feel like the only hope is that Israel elects a far more moderate government in the near future and that increased world attention makes this a much bigger issue for whoever wins the US presidency. 

 

Of course as a British person while I'm free to be critical of things my government does in the present and historically, I don't need to fear that this could be used as a pretext for the complete destruction of the British state and result in my forced removal from my own country. I've always found it a bit easier to understand and sympathise with Israel. As I understand it the desire is for a Jewish majority state with continuous and defensible borders. The state of Israel has given Jewish people somewhere they don't have to barter for their rights and provided access to the most holy sites in Judaism. I do think Israel and the existence of a Jewish state is a good thing. 

 

 

[Daggers]

4 hours ago, Mike Oxlong said:

Does mean we get shot of the Reynolds/McElhenny axis 🤔

Watching a documentary about Reynolds atm. He talks to animals and kills women. I’m amazed people aren’t concerned about this. The WFA must know this makes him unfit to own a club. 

[dsr-burnley]

1 hour ago, LiberalFox said:

I'm not anti-Israel but I think it's unjust what is happening in Gaza. We can debate hypothetically what 'we' (Britain) would do if faced with a similar situation but we aren't and we wouldn't be because we're a European nation whose borders and relationship with neighbouring countries have been established over 100's if not 1000s of years and our sovereignty is respected. If some British based group went and carried out an atrocity in say France and killed a bunch of people then it wouldn't be seen as acceptable for the French air force to respond by dropping bombs on a British housing estate, killing 100 civilians. 

 

But if you live in Gaza it seems you have no state to back you up. If you don't like Hamas you can't vote them out. If you don't want to live there you can't leave either. Who decides how many children it is acceptable to kill in order to destroy Hamas? In reality it is Israel with the USA acting as the ultimate backstop. For all the talk about Israel being surrounded by enemies I'm not sure that holds true. Egypt and Jordan are both US client states. The USA makes sure Israel's armed forces massively overmatch any of them. There's really no world where either of those countries are able to intervene militarily. They have to make their case to the US who then ask the Israelis to be a bit more careful. 

 

Iran is the source of Israel's greatest military threat and groups like Hamas are its proxies even if it doesn't control them directly. I fail to see how this is going to make the region more peaceful. Will it remove the motive for young Palestinians to become drawn into extremism? Will it neutralize Iran's claim to be the only nation standing up for Palestinians? Who is going to run the Gaza strip once the IDF have declared victory? Who is going to pay to rebuild all the homes and schools and places of work that have been destroyed?

 

I feel like the only hope is that Israel elects a far more moderate government in the near future and that increased world attention makes this a much bigger issue for whoever wins the US presidency. 

 

Of course as a British person while I'm free to be critical of things my government does in the present and historically, I don't need to fear that this could be used as a pretext for the complete destruction of the British state and result in my forced removal from my own country. I've always found it a bit easier to understand and sympathise with Israel. As I understand it the desire is for a Jewish majority state with continuous and defensible borders. The state of Israel has given Jewish people somewhere they don't have to barter for their rights and provided access to the most holy sites in Judaism. I do think Israel and the existence of a Jewish state is a good thing. 

 

 

We had exactly the same problem with Germany in the second world war.  The German government was at war with Britain, but obviously the German people didn't have the right to remove their government, so was Britain right to fight back?  Or should we have allowed the status quo in Germany to continue and just accepted the collateral damage?

 

I think the point about the attack by Hamas on the music festival is that many people (including, I hope, yourself) don't see it as a military target.  In the same way as the bombing at Ariana Grande's concert in Manchester wasn't seen as a military target, with the obvious difference that the UK bombing was not (so far as we know) organised by a foreign government, while the Israel attacks were.  Israel, on the other hand, is targetting military targets, though obviously as the military are hiding behind civilians, there are civilian deaths.  This is the problem when a man approaches you to kill you and all those around you, carrying a gun in one hand and a baby in the other.  If you fight back and the baby dies, who is at fault?

[Lionator]

6 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

We had exactly the same problem with Germany in the second world war.  The German government was at war with Britain, but obviously the German people didn't have the right to remove their government, so was Britain right to fight back?  Or should we have allowed the status quo in Germany to continue and just accepted the collateral damage?

 

I think the point about the attack by Hamas on the music festival is that many people (including, I hope, yourself) don't see it as a military target.  In the same way as the bombing at Ariana Grande's concert in Manchester wasn't seen as a military target, with the obvious difference that the UK bombing was not (so far as we know) organised by a foreign government, while the Israel attacks were.  Israel, on the other hand, is targetting military targets, though obviously as the military are hiding behind civilians, there are civilian deaths.  This is the problem when a man approaches you to kill you and all those around you, carrying a gun in one hand and a baby in the other.  If you fight back and the baby dies, who is at fault?

I’m not sure that razing everything to the ground is the answer though? If they’re that convinced that Hamas are hiding in hospitals, why don’t they send in the special forces for a fire fight rather than obliterating whole hospitals killing hundreds of innocents each time? A fire fight would still kill innocents but not at the same level. It’s warped. 

[Mike Oxlong]

8 hours ago, Daggers said:

Watching a documentary about Reynolds atm. He talks to animals and kills women. I’m amazed people aren’t concerned about this. The WFA must know this makes him unfit to own a club. 

More likely alcohol, a vape and concocting your next post match thread pictorial to get partially banned 

[Free Falling Foxes]

Volcano concern in Iceland

[Mickyblueeyes]

8 hours ago, dsr-burnley said:

We had exactly the same problem with Germany in the second world war.  The German government was at war with Britain, but obviously the German people didn't have the right to remove their government, so was Britain right to fight back?  Or should we have allowed the status quo in Germany to continue and just accepted the collateral damage?

 

I think the point about the attack by Hamas on the music festival is that many people (including, I hope, yourself) don't see it as a military target.  In the same way as the bombing at Ariana Grande's concert in Manchester wasn't seen as a military target, with the obvious difference that the UK bombing was not (so far as we know) organised by a foreign government, while the Israel attacks were.  Israel, on the other hand, is targetting military targets, though obviously as the military are hiding behind civilians, there are civilian deaths.  This is the problem when a man approaches you to kill you and all those around you, carrying a gun in one hand and a baby in the other.  If you fight back and the baby dies, who is at fault?

The sheer number of bombs dropped on Gaza in 3 weeks, I think anyone who thinks that the entire approach has been a well thought out, strategic military operation is (at best) naive.
 

There is evidently revenge here. The rhetoric of some of the Israeli cabinet suggests so. In any case, Hamas though an organised operation are significantly smaller than the 6000 bombs dropped to eradicate them (yet, blowing up the Al Shifa is now also necessary apparently).
 

It’s Macron today who is telling them to stop the carnage. ****ing Macron. Macron. Couldn’t believe it. 
 

 

 

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

The sheer number of bombs dropped on Gaza in 3 weeks, I think anyone who thinks that the entire approach has been a well thought out, strategic military operation is (at best) naive.
 

There is evidently revenge here. The rhetoric of some of the Israeli cabinet suggests so. In any case, Hamas though an organised operation are significantly smaller than the 6000 bombs dropped to eradicate them (yet, blowing up the Al Shifa is now also necessary apparently).
 

It’s Macron today who is telling them to stop the carnage. ****ing Macron. Macron. Couldn’t believe it. 
 

 

 

One of Macron’s USP is international diplomacy to be fair, it’s one of the things that he’s genuinely good at. I’ve seen a clip this morning of the Israeli UN delegate suggesting that UN volunteers in Palestine are members of Hamas. Wild stuff. 

[Mickyblueeyes]

Well done Suella you waste of space. Far right animals doing what they can to destroy the silence

[Parafox]

3 hours ago, Lionator said:

I’m not sure that razing everything to the ground is the answer though? If they’re that convinced that Hamas are hiding in hospitals, why don’t they send in the special forces for a fire fight rather than obliterating whole hospitals killing hundreds of innocents each time? A fire fight would still kill innocents but not at the same level. It’s warped. 

This  is something I've wondered about. Israel are reputed to have one of the best special forces in the world yet they still continue with the blunt tool of bombing then claiming that Hamas are using hospitals, school and civilian districts as bases. How do we, in the West, know this to be true? Have we seen any decent evidence of Hamas fighters being killed or displaced as a result? Where are the weapons that surely would be found in the rubble?

 

I can't think of any.

[Zear0]

8 minutes ago, Mickyblueeyes said:

Well done Suella you waste of space. Far right animals doing what they can to destroy the silence

Ah Tommy Robinson and his posse. How I miss thee like a hemorrhoid.