Forum Topic

Ms GrantThis may seem simplistic and I do not want to be patronising but to me the vast majority of Jewish citizens are totally British, differing from me only in the religion they adopt.They no more want to change my way of life or attack me than do the Methodists !I do not think this is the case with Muslims whose religion is a far more circumscribing 'way of life'.It also gives the impression that it decrees it is the duty of its adherents to both withdraw from many aspects of the way the majority lives and to impose its mores on them.I am sure the anti-Israeli pro-Palestine zeitgeist we are experiencing does have antisemitism at its root for why otherwise should the British feel so sympathetic to Arabs ?To be blunt, what are they to us especially since the atrocities of last October and the terrorist attacks Islamists have inflicted on this country in recent decades ?And why do those Arabs that choose to leave their homeland and live here think that any discrimination and disadvantage they might feel is caused by Jews ?Is it that we have so little to complain about concerning our own way of life that we, especially the younger generations, take on the woes of others; suffering by proxy ?Especially ironical in that some might describe Islam as misogynistic and homophobic; attitudes they would certainly abhor.  And of course you would know better than me that antisemitism is also founded on shame and jealousy as has been the case for millennia.Again not wanting to take a stereotypical view, Jews have always had the need, attitude and ability to look after each other and 'do well in life'.And some resent this whether it reflects their own inadequacies in not being so successful or shame because of their lack of effort.My own grandmother who, widowed at forty with three children and little if any state support, used to walk miles to clean for Jewish families in north London.Some of her comments were not always 'acceptable' but they were based on class differences and ignorance and the country then was not at all ethnically diverse.Today anti-Israel attitudes come mainly from a so called 'educated' middle class with a guilt complex and are certainly a cover for ongoing anti-semitism.This is bourn out by the increase in anti-semitic attacks you reference.And finally, though it might not be my place to say it, but if your 'friends' can't understand what has happened in the Middle East and distance themselves from you, were they friends worth having ? PS 'Myths and Facts. A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict' ISBN 1537152726   

John Hawkes ● 397d

Thank you for these timely reminders Mr Hawkes. In my pretty extensive knowledge about the Jewish diaspora in the UK (with the exception of the Ultra Orthodox who are so often pictured as representative of British Jews when they manifestly are not)they have assimilated into the wide British community. We have in my lifetime grown up alongside our non Jewish friends and neighbours and played a strong part in British history.As examples my British born Jewish father spent over 4 years as a POW in Burma and my German born Jewish mother made it a point to learn English and serve in the Fire Service here in London (when WW2 began) as soon as she arrived  here in August 1939.Now my extended family is frightened of showing any aspect that they are Jewish when they are out and about on their daily business whether on public transport, at university and school (heaven forbid they should be bullied for the 'crime' of being Jewish) at work where they no longer wear a Star of David in case someone starts questioning them about Gaza ... I could go on but you get the drift.I have lost count of the number of people I counted as friends and close acquaintances over the past few months simply because I  support Israel in its time of need. I have never supported the settlements in the West Bank nor the extreme rightwing government. But that government was elected democratically. Suffice it to day that Gaza has held no elections since 2006 when Israel left and Hamas took over.I make no apologies that this has turned into a personal essay but I feel that many posters are one sided in their views and have no appreciation about how Jewish lives have been so badly affected by the antisemitism that has reared its head since 7 October 2023. It's been unheard of in the UK since we were turfed out in the 13th century.

Lucille Grant ● 398d

Mr IxerDo you think Mr Khan KC is up to the job ?Below is a detailed rebuttal of his accusation by Jonathan Turner, Chief Executive of UK Lawyers for Israel to be found in the Spectator.(Yes, Turner is Jewish but Khan is a member of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community).15-all !'The Prosecutor’s public statement was not just insulting; its inaccuracy was embarrassing. He claimed: ‘The siege [of Gaza] also included cutting off cross-border water pipelines from Israel to Gaza – Gazans’ principal source of clean water – for a prolonged period beginning 9 October 2023.’The entirety of this statement is untrue. Prior to Hamas’s devastating attack on 7 October 2023, Israel was supplying less than 10 per cent of the clean water used in the Gaza Strip. In the course of the Hamas attack, two of the three pipelines were damaged, according to the IDF. Israel resumed the supply of clean water through the undamaged pipeline within six days of stopping it and through another pipeline when it was mended shortly afterwards.Khan also accused Israel of ‘cutting off and hindering electricity supplies from at least 8 October 2023 until today’. Nine out of the ten power lines from Israel to Gaza were damaged in the Hamas attack on 7 October. Electricity is used by Hamas to light and ventilate its terror tunnels and to launch its rockets aimed at Israeli civilians. Much of the electricity in Gaza is produced by individual generators and Israel has allowed in enough fuel to generate electricity for essential services, despite the risk that this fuel is taken by Hamas.The Prosecutor referred to ‘the imposition of a total siege over Gaza that involved completely closing the three border crossing points, Rafah, Kerem Shalom and Erez, from 8 October 2023 for extended periods’. Did he forget that the Rafah crossing, which he visited at the end of October 2023, is between the Gaza Strip and Egypt, not Israel (whoops !) – and that it was reopened for humanitarian supplies on 21 October? Did he not realise that the Kerem Shalom crossing was damaged in the Hamas onslaught on 7 October, but was reopened following repairs on 17 December? And is he not aware that the Erez crossing is not equipped for cargo transfers? These egregious inaccuracies raise further questions as to the approach of the ‘Panel of Experts in International Law’ who agreed with the Prosecutor. (The fragrant Mrs Clooney et al).Did they examine only what they were given by the Prosecutor or did they check this information by carrying out their own research? False information about Israel is so pervasive that no one should take what they are told for granted without carrying out independent checks'.

John Hawkes ● 398d

Mr Kettlekey'Contributors sitting in the safety of Putney feel they can afford to condone all of Israel's actions because they are under no threat themselves'.You are right in part of course but not I assume in the way you meant to be.I can find no reference to any British citizen being threatened, attacked or murdered by any Israeli or Jew and so I feel confident in saying that I do not feel under threat from them.If you manage to find one please post it on Forum.The reason is that Israelis and Jews have no reason to attack we British because we have a close social and political affinity to them and are certainly not attacking them.The situation in Israel is different because Palestinians have stated they wish to remove Israel and the Jews from the land they rightly occupy and as the October 2023 attack shows are willing to go to barbaric lengths to do so.On the other hand MANY UK citizens have been attacked, injured and killed by Islamist terrorists.For example -1994, 26–27 July: A group of Palestinians detonated two car bombs in London, one outside the Israeli embassy and one outside Balfour House, home to a Jewish charity. The attacks injured twenty people.2005, 7 July: 7/7 central London bombings conducted by four separate Islamist extremist suicide bombers, which targeted civilians using the public transport system during the morning rush hour. Three bombs were detonated on three separate trains on the London Underground and one on a double-decker bus. As well as the suicide bombers, 52 other people were killed and around 700 more were injured. It was the UK's worst terrorist incident since the 1988 Lockerbie bombing and the first Islamist suicide attack in the country.2007, 30 June: Two Islamist terrorists drove a Jeep Cherokee loaded with propane canisters into the glass doors of the Glasgow Airport terminal, setting it ablaze. Five people were injured and the only death was of one of the perpetrators, who later died in hospital from his injuries. It was the first terrorist attack to take place in Scotland since the Lockerbie bombing in 1988.2010, 14 May: MP Stephen Timms was stabbed during his constituency surgery by Roshonara Choudhry, a British Islamic extremist, in an attempt to kill him. She was found guilty of attempted murder and jailed for life with a minimum term of 15 years. Choudhry was the first Al-Qaeda sympathiser to attempt an assassination in Britain.2013, 22 May: A British soldier, Lee Rigby, was murdered in an attack in Woolwich by Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale, two Islamist extremists armed with a handgun, knives and a cleaver. Both men were sentenced to life imprisonment, with Adebolajo given a whole life order and Adebowale ordered to serve at least 45 years.2017, 22 March: 2017 Westminster attack – Khalid Masood, a 52-year-old Islamist, drove a car into pedestrians on Westminster Bridge, killing three and injuring almost fifty, one of whom died two weeks later. He ran into the grounds of the Palace of Westminster and fatally stabbed police officer Keith Palmer, before being shot dead by police. The attack was treated as an act of terrorism motivated by Islamic extremism.2017, 22 May: Manchester Arena bombing – An Islamist suicide bomber, 22-year-old Salman Abedi, blew himself up at Manchester Arena as people were leaving an Ariana Grande concert, killing 22 and injuring 139. It became the deadliest terrorist attack in Britain since the 7/7 London bombings in 2005. Many of the victims were children or teenagers, the youngest being an eight-year-old girl.2017, 3 June: 2017 London Bridge attack – Three Islamists drove a van into pedestrians on London bridge before stabbing people in and around pubs in nearby Borough Market. Eight people were killed and at least 48 wounded. The attackers were shot dead by police eight minutes after the incident was reported. All three were wearing fake suicide bomb vests.2017, 15 September: Parsons Green bombing – The London tube train was targeted and witnesses reported a flash and bang. Thirty people were injured, mostly with flash burns and crush injuries, but there were no fatalities. The threat level was raised to its highest point of critical soon after. Ahmed Hassan, who committed the bombing, received a life sentence with a minimum term of 34 years.2018, 14 August: 2018 Westminster car attack – A Ford Fiesta ran down pedestrians outside the palace of Westminster. The car then went on to crash into the security barrier, after aiming at two police officers. Salih Khater, who carried out the attack received a life sentence with a minimum term of 15 years.2018, 31 December: Mahdi Mohamud, a Dutch national from a Somali family, stabbed three in a knife attack at Manchester Victoria station. Mohamud shouted "Allahu Akbar!" and "Long live the Caliphate!" during the attack. Despite suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, Mahomud was convicted of a terror offence and attempted murder of three people due to his possession of significant amounts of extremist material and the attack's extensive planning.2019, 29 November: 2019 London Bridge stabbing – On 29 November 2019, police were called to a stabbing near London Bridge, in Central London, England, at 1:58 pm. A statement said that one man was detained, and "a number of people" were injured. Two people were killed in the attack and three were left injured. The attacker, 28 year old Usman Khan, was shot dead by police and confirmed dead on the scene.2020, 2 February: 2020 Streatham stabbing – Sudesh Amman, wearing a fake suicide vest similar to the one used in the 2019 London Bridge stabbing, was shot dead by armed police after stabbing and injuring two people in Streatham, London Borough of Lambeth. One of the victims sustained life-threatening injuries.2020, 20 June: 2020 Reading stabbings – On 20 June 2020, Khairi Saadallah, shouting "Allahu Akbar", attacked two groups of people socialising in Forbury Gardens, a public park in the centre of Reading, killing three and injuring three others. On 11 January 2021, he was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. The sentencing judge, Mr Justice Sweeney said that it was a terrorist attack and that the purpose was to advance an extremist Islamic cause.2021, 15 October: Murder of David Amess – Ali Harbi Ali stabbed MP Sir David Amess at his constituency surgery and was sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life order.2021, 14 November: Liverpool Women's Hospital bombing – Emad Al-Swealmeen, carrying a homemade bomb, arrived at the Liverpool Women's Hospital by taxi. The bomb exploded, killing him and injuring the driver. The incident was quickly described as terrorism.2023, 15 October: Ahmed Ali Alid stabbed 70-year-old Terence Carney to death in Hartlepool and seriously injured another man, who survived. Alid claimed the attack to be an act of protest against the Israel–Hamas war. Alid was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 44 years in May 2024.On the balance of evidence, which ethnic or religious group poses more of a threat to the peace and stability of the country, even that leafy part that is Putney ?

John Hawkes ● 398d

There are a number of assertions here. You suggest that  Israel has caused mass starvation in Gaza. Where is the evidence of this?  Has anyone died of hunger? So far the Chief Prosecutor has only charged Netanyahu of restricting food aid into Gaza. The case has not been heard, yet you have already found Israel guilty and added a further charge of genocide.You concede that civilian casualties are inevitable in a counter insurgency of this kind but suggest that the Israelis have caused ‘excessive levels of suffering’. Excessive in comparison to what? The level of civilian to military casualties is near 1 : 1, compared to the typical ratio of 10: 1 when militants are embedded in a civilian population. No army in history has ever employed leaflets and messages to warn civilians of impending attacks in the way that the IDF has tried to do.It is not a false dichotomy to say that that there is a choice between victory and defeat. It is a real dichotomy. If there is a ceasefire, which some on this Forum have called for, leaving Hamas in control of parts of Gaza and still holding their hostages, then Hamas will have won a significant victory, albeit at a terrible cost to themselves and the Palestinians of Gaza.  The threat to Israel will remain and Islamists everywhere will be emboldened.I don’t condone all of Israel’s actions. It is not possible to condone all the measures taken by one side in any war. War is an ugly business where soldiers in the heat of battle overreact and where mistakes are made. This is true of the Israelis in Gaza, it is true of the Americans in Iraq and Syria, it is is true of British troops in Afghanistan. But this is a war which Israel has to win for its own security given that its enemy, Hamas, has threatened to repeat the atrocity of October 7 ‘again and again’. If you were living in the south of Israel rather than in the safety of Putney, would you not expect your government to protect you and your family from rape, mutilation, abduction and murder?

Steven Rose ● 399d

Ms Bond'This explains the use of the word 'apartheid' in the placards'.I can remember when I protested against apartheid.It was when the white South African government firstly tried to set up puppet states or townships where blacks could be 'asked' to move to and secondly tried to enforce racial segregation in all aspects of social life and commerce.Would you answer whether in your view this is the nature of the apartheid you see currently in Israel ?And also as someone who strongly supports the current political aspirations of Palestinians, would you answer a question I posed earlier -'I have lost track of what the Palestinians are actually asking for and what compromises they are willing to make to gain it.1) Although the areas that they have governance of have been rocked recently by IDF responsive attacks in Gaza and settler incursion in the West Bank, assuming that in time these disturbances are resolved what further land masses do they claim to be part of Palestine ?2) Who represents 'the average Palestinian' and do they and their leaders accept the right of the state of Israel to exist within its current borders ?3) Hamas does not accept point 2) but are they truly representative of the Palestinians and their views ?4) If Hamas does represent the views of the majority of Palestinians especially over the right of Israel to exist, is there any hope of a peaceful settlement or will Israel have to wage a defensive war indefinitely ?I look forward to your response.

John Hawkes ● 399d

Mr Carter'Actually, I think silence is the most appropriate response, rather than provoking another round from the whatever-Israel-does-is-right keyboard warriors here'.Well said.You 'whatever-Palestinians-do-is-right and whatever-Israel-does-is-wrong keyboard warriors here' should be given as much opportunity as possible to also put forward your case.Let's face it you have the leader of South Africa, President Cyril Ramaphosa, calling for Israel to be brought before the ICJ for genocide.So the case must be strong.A leader who had stolen $580,000 he kept under his sofa.And that's the South Africa where previous President Zuma when deputy president of South Africa from 1999 to 2005 under President Thabo Mbeki, Nelson Mandela's successor was dismissed in 2005 after Zuma's financial adviser, Schabir Shaik, was convicted of making corrupt payments to Zuma in connection with the Arms Deal. Zuma was charged with corruption and was also acquitted on rape charges in the highly publicised 2006 trial. He managed to retain the support of a left-wing coalition inside the ANC.Yes, here's a country led by people well qualified to give moral guidance to Israel.Have others not noticed how the wheel of public sympathy can so quickly turn ?Remember the October 2023 pogrom by Palestinians from Gaza against Israeli women and children (many still held hostage) ?Response ?Initial condemnation....then forgotten."Small earthquake in Chile; not many dead" - Claud Cockburn.Israel naturally decides to retaliate seeing Hamas as an existential threat to its existence.But the brave Arab boys have infiltrated into the civilian population.Thus however much care the IDF take to minimise civilian casualties (and we only have Hamas' not independent verification of the numbers involved) they will of course occur under the physical circumstances of the fighting.And Hamas control what is revealed to the world's media, many of whom are licking their lips to publish photos of dead children and damaged hospitals.Media comment doubtless lapped up by many marching yesterday or protesting on the lawns of our major universities (before they leave for a 4 month vacation).Apart from the obvious antisemitic undertones of much pro-Palestine comment and activity, what sticks in my craw is the sheer unbalanced hypocrisy of so much of it. So yes Mr Carter, you bang your keyboard and I'll bang mine ! Oh and how did the pro-Palestine march go yesterday ?   

John Hawkes ● 401d

Ms Grant''Do you believe that Israel has a right to exist?' That is the question many pro Palestinians refuse to answer'.If I might suggest it, a very good book on the whole topic is 'Myths and Facts - A guide to the Arab Israeli Conflict' by Mitchell G. Bard. ISBN 1537152726.I found the following points interesting -1) Hebrews entered the land of Israel c.1300 BCE uniting under kings Saul, David, then Solomon.2) Palestine was never an exclusively Arab country, although Arabic became the language of most of the population after the Muslim invasions of the seventh century CE.3) No independent Arab or Palestinian state ever existed in Palestine.4) When a distinguished Arab-American historian, Princeton University professor Philip Hitti testified against Partition before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, he said "There is no such thing as 'Palestine' in history, absolutely not".5) Prior to partition, Palestinian Arabs did not view themselves as having a separate identity. When the First Congress of Muslim-Christian Associations met in Jerusalem in February 1919 to choose Palestinian representatives for the Paris Peace Conference, they adopted the following resolution:'We consider Palestine as part of Arab Syria, as it has never been separated from it at any time. We are connected with it by national, religious, linguistic, natural, economic and geographic bonds'.6) During the British Mandate period in 1937 a local Arab leader Auni Bey Abdul Hadi told the Peel Commission which suggested partition: "There is no such country as Palestine. There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria"7) At the Arab Higher Committee to the UN General Assembly  in May 1947, Ahmed Shuqeiri, later chairman of the PLO said: "It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria.Some say Palestinian Arab nationalism is largely a post-WWI phenomenon that did not become a significant political movement until after the 1967 Six-Day War.Food for thought ! Oh and back to your point on Israeli citizenship, apparently Arab states define citizenship strictly by native parentage and it is almost impossible to become a naturalized citizen in Algeria, Saudi and Kuwait.

John Hawkes ● 404d

'Do you believe that Israel has a right to exist?' That is the question many pro Palestinians refuse to answer. 'From the river to the sea' means the elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. This is a fact.Today's Guardian has an interesting article regarding the makeup of Israeli Jews, for those who are interested:https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/may/15/israelis-go-back-to-europe-slogan. It's worth the full read but here are a few highlights:'Of Israeli Jews alive today, 80% were born in Israel. A majority of Israel’s Jews are not descended from Europe but rather from Arab nations, including from the parcel of land known today as modern Israel. Known as Mizrachim in Hebrew, they hail from Iraq, Iran, Morocco, Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria and Algeria, as well as from the Asian ccaucasus region of the former Soviet Union. Those Israelis who are Ashkenazi, the Israeli term for Jews of European descent, are increasingly the minority inside Israel. There are, additionally, a small percentage of Jewish people from Ethiopia, and even a nominal number from India. And, while small in number, there are Jews in Israel who are descended from families that lived in the region under Ottoman rule, and centuries before that.Today,45% of the world’s Jewish people live in Israel, with a similar amount in the United States, and smatterings across other countries in Europe (including the former Soviet Union), Canada, Latin America, Australia and South Africa.'So Hamas (and their supporters) believe that half the Jewish population in the world today should be eliminated in order that Palestinians take over the entire land from the river (Jordan) to the sea (Mediterranean).

Lucille Grant ● 405d

You are right. I was concentrating on the question of what Israel should do differently. At least John Kettlekey had a go at answering this question, which I respect, though I don’t agree with his view.But to address his questions:1) As regards the hostages,  only around half have been released, which is disappointing. Unfortunately Hamas’s price for releasing the remaining hostages, a complete Israeli withdrawal, is unacceptable. This would leave Hamas in control of Gaza, ready to strike again. As regards eradicating Hamas, 20 of Hamas’ 24 battalions have been dismantled according to the IDF. Hamas has all but been defeated militarily, which is why their only hope is that pro-Palestinian demonstrators will put pressure on Western governments to suspend support for Israel.2) Though John Kettlekey did not frame this in the form of a question, I don’t agree with the view that a more moderate leader than Netanyahu would agree to a ceasefire. The BBC have propagated the trope that the Israelis want peace but the obstacle is Netanyahu ‘s right wing government. Netanyahu is unpopular because he allowed the attack of October 7 to take place but opinion polls show  that the majority of Israelis support the campaign to eradicate Hamas as a military force. 3) The dreadful missile strike on on the aid workers clearly shows that it is not possible to justify every attack carried out by the Israelis. War by its very nature is chaotic and mistakes are made. But I believe that the Israelis do not deliberately target civilians. Many civilians have undoubtedly died, but it is an exaggeration to claim that tens of thousands have died. Of the 35000 Palestinians who have died according to the Hamas ‘Health Ministry’, it is likely that almost a half are actually Hamas militants, some of whom may have participated in the atrocity of October 7.4) Lastly, though this too was not framed as a question, I don’t think it is true that terrorist movements can never be eradicated. Yes, there are a few  Republican terrorists around, but the IRA no longer poses a threat to civil society in NI. There are small pockets of Isis diehards, but Isis no longer has the capability of terrorising large swathes of Syria.

Steven Rose ● 405d

Dismissing as unreasonable a question you either cant’t or won’t answer is rather convenient. In this case the question is entirely reasonable. If you are going to criticise Israel’s conduct of the war, I think you need at least to  indicate what the Israelis should do instead. It is easy to say that it is up to the Israeli military to find a way of eradicating Hamas without harming civilians. What if there is no way of neutralising Hamas  without causing civilian casualties given that Hamas have deliberately embedded themselves in the civilian population? The answer which John Kettlekey has provided is that Israel should ‘scale back its attacks’. I presume this is not a call for a ceasefire, only for a reduction in the force used by the Israeli military. This would certainly suit Hamas, whose aim now is to hold out for as long as possible in the hope that eventually public pressure in the West, particularly America, will force Israel to give up. This would  leave Hamas in control of Gaza,  ready to regroup and strike again. Why would Israel, why would any country in the same circumstances, allow that to happen?The war is awful and tragically many civilians have died.  But the Israelis have tried as far as possible to avoid civilian casualties. I don’t think any army in history has ever sent out leaflets and text messages or made phone calls warning civilians of impending attacks. And contrary to the unjustified accusations of ‘genocide’ and ‘carpet bombing’ made on this Forum, the ratio of civilian to military casualties is near to 1 : 1, compared to the normal ratio of 10 : 1 when militants are embedded in the civilian population.

Steven Rose ● 405d

> Israel’s aim is to recover the hostages and eradicate the Hamas militants who have threatened to repeat the atrocity of October 7 ‘again and again’.So, do you think it is working on either front (recovering the hostages or eradicating Hamas)?One of Hamas's short term aims is to force a change in leadership in Israel. By keeping the hostages it is increasing pressure on Netanyahu who has promised to free them and is not delivering on this. Every day the hostages remain in captivity Netanyahu's popularity is weakening. If they can get Netanyahu replaced (hopefully with someone more moderate) then things may start to ease up. I very much doubt that an acceptable (to both sides) set of terms of a long term cease-fire are never going to happen under Netanyahu.Netanyahu's long term goal seems to be to put such hardship on the Palestinian people under the guise of "eradicating Hamas" that he hopes the Palestinian people will turn against Hamas. This is a dangerous strategy as he doesn't get to play by the same rules as terrorists (they will use innocent civillians as leverage).> If you believe that Israel response is ‘disproportionate’, I think you need to explain how Israel should act differently. Other than asking the civilian population to move out of areas which are being targeted, what else is Israel supposed to do?It should scale back it's attacks. Or do you believe that every single attack they have performed has been completely necessary? Do you believe that the scale of the collateral damage (tens of thousands of innocent civillians) is completely acceptable?It shouldn't hold back food/water/fuel getting in with the vague justification that it is being stolen by and feeding solely Hamas. Or do you agree that what is being done now is a perfect balance?It should provide clear and concise information about impending attacks. There are numerous news articles which show the advance information provided by the IDF is confusing or conflicting.Israel's International support is slipping with each negative newsworthy item.This is going to be a long, and almost certainly ultimately unwinnable, conflict against Hamas. As history has shown us the fight against a terrorist organisation like this is pretty much impossible to win. Various wings of the IRA are still active. ISIS/Daesh is still active. Boko Harum is still active. etc.

John Kettlekey ● 406d

I'm not interested in getting into this particular debate but I will step in on this point:> Israel is only seen as a pariah nation by those that believe it should not have reacted to defend itself after being invaded last October by the Palestinians.Part of the problem is the phrasing this as a kind of false dichotomy. It's not simply "defend itself or don't defend itself".If you don't get it the major push back on Israel's response is because many people believe it was just too much. No-one seriously believes that Israel doesn't have the authority to react/respond. (I'm sure there are plenty of deluded people who believe that Israel shouldn't have responded at all.)However many many people believe that Israel's response was over the top, or disproportionate, and that there have been too many civilian deaths and that the other actions (closing crossings, restricting movement of food/water/fuel) is punitively punishing innocent Palestinians caught up in this conflict.At some point in the future there will be a more objective review of Israel's actions throughout this conflict and whether they were disproportionate (in the subjective sense but also in the stricter sense of international laws governing war: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/13/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-proportionality-law-of-war.html ).There are plenty of contentious points, and I'm sure they will fall foul of at least some at varying levels of severity. No country can engage in conflict like this and come out squeaky clean. But what will be discovered eventually is the extent to which they pushed things too far if they did.Consider articles like this from that notorious left wing rag The Telegraph: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/05/14/uncertainty-israel-international-law-challenge-uk-ahmad/ Or this one from the Independent which quotes Lord Cameron as stating that Israel is risking committing war crimes if they continue down certain paths: https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/uk-warns-israel-over-rafah-war-crimes-risk-3045075So, I disagree with the statement "Israel is only seen as a pariah nation by those that believe it should not have reacted to defend itself after being invaded last October by the Palestinians." but would rather say that Israel is under increasing scrutiny for the strength and direction of their response to the attacks.

John Kettlekey ● 406d

Ms BondAll well and good banging on about 'apartheid' regarding Israel - a country where Arabs can and many do take Israeli citizenship and whose Parliament contains Arab members.This is a feeble student buzz word response perhaps to those  that use 'genocide' when looking at the overall historical context of the current dispute and Israel's response to it.However I note that as a strong supporter of the Palestinian cause and its pleas for a 'homeland' you and others like you do not seem to know what the Palestinians want in practicable terms. You nor anyone else has answered my questions below I posed earlier.'But I have lost track of what the Palestinians are actually asking for and what compromises they are willing to make to gain it.1) Although the areas that they have governance of have been rocked recently by IDF responsive attacks in Gaza and settler incursion in the West Bank, assuming that in time these disturbances are resolved what further land masses do they claim to be part of Palestine ?2) Who represents 'the average Palestinian' and do they and their leaders accept the right of the state of Israel to exist within its current borders ?3) Hamas does not accept point 2) but are they truly representative of the Palestinians and their views ?4) If Hamas does represent the views of the majority of Palestinians especially over the right of Israel to exist, is there any hope of a peaceful settlement or will Israel have to wage a defensive war indefinitely ?

John Hawkes ● 407d