Forum Topic

Hello Steven,As far as the percentage vote for Hamas in 2005, you seem to try to evade the issue that many voted against Fatah more than in favour of Hamas.  Very similar to the last election in the UK where more people voted against the Conservatives rather than in favour of Labour.  You also forget a comment you made in a post sometime ago that the popularity of Hamas stands today at 37% to which I replied that, by definition, 63% of Palestinians are against Hamas.Since 2005, Israel has maintained, and continuous to maintain, a blockade of the Gaza Strip, limiting the movement of goods and people in and out of the Gaza Strip.  That is by land, air or sea.  So, no Palestinians cannot leave Gaza, at all.  I wish to reiterate something I have repeated constantly but ignored by many.  I do NOT support Hamas by any stretch of the imagination.  That does not mean that I support the Israeli government, far from it.  It is NOT an either or situation.But Netanyahu wants to take over Gaza and, with Trump, create a Riviera of the Middle East.  Recently, they have spoken of paying the Palestinians to leave...  Really?  They cannot leave by land, sea or air.......What it is very true is that Gaza infrastructure is being decimated, people are moved from pillar to post at will, to stay in tents that are then bombed and there is no food in Gaza.  So, this definition is rather apt:The legal term “genocide” refers to certain acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.Whether you approve of it or not. 

Ivonne Holliday ● 6h

Mr Rose'Rather than relying on the opinion of 120 out of 500 genocide scholars, why not consider the facts? 'People like Ainsworth and Carter are not interested in 'the facts' and hence your typical nuanced, balanced and even handed analysis counts for nought.They refuse to recognise the risk, intended if not capable of ultimate success, that Hamas pose to Israel's survival.They refuse to read and acknowledge the Hamas Charter which states this openly.That is because they also do not believe Israel has the right to exist as an independent state and that is predicated on antisemitic beliefs.All they can do is to disgorge anti-Israel and anti-Jewish gobbets of hate.Just imagine were others to make racist comments against blacks of a nature similar to those the antisemite tendency on this Forum make against Israelis and Jews.In fact I am shocked that they get away with it when the anti-discrimination laws make it an offence to discriminate on the basis of 'race including colour, nationality, ethnic or national origin, religion or belief'.I suppose in affect they are not discriminating in the terms of the act but are just expressing opinion - attacking people of a particular 'nationality, ethnic or national origin, religion or belief'.To some extent their freedom to do such is a compliment to British freedom of speech just as is my freedom to call them antisemites.And equally important it keeps in the public domain the fact that even in, or perhaps particularly in, the British white middle class which is the dominant grouping in Putney, antisemitism still lives and thrives.PS Note I have still not heard from Carter or Ainsworth (I get them mixed up and am beginning to believe each is the other's doppelgänger) -1) Their approach to the resolution to the Middle East conflict.2) Whether the existence of an independent state of Israel plays a part in this resolution.But then lobbing racist insults is easier than giving the matter serious intellectual attention.

John Hawkes ● 8h

Michael, I don't wish to minimise the suffering endured by civilians in Gaza. But it's a war in which Hamas have compromised the safety of the civilian population by using them as human shields. I don't think it is fair to characterise the warnings given by the IDF as an 'empty cynical gesture'. I am sure that many lives have been saved which would have been lost had no warning been given. By implying that the IDF should also provide the civilian population with buses, ambulances and lorries etc, you are applying unrealistic standards to Israel which have never been applied to any other country at war. Did the RAF give the citizens of Hamburg any warning in 1943? Did the USAAF warn the citizens of Tokyo and Hiroshima in 1945? Did Nato give prior warning of the bombing raid on Belgrade in 1999? Did Coalition forces provide the civilian population of Afghanistan and Iraq with the means to escape devastating raids? Moral indignation only seems to be directed at Israel, never at this country's armed forces.As to the charge that the population of Gaza are being punished for the 'action of others', that is only partly true. Almost half of all Palestinians voted in 2006 for Hamas, a party whose charter specifically enjoined the extermination of the Jewish population of Israel. Since then Hamas has enjoined widespread support in Gaza. Perhaps you remember the pictures of the local population cheering wildly when the body of the 22 year old German-Israeli girl, Shani Louk, who had been raped and tortured, was paraded on the back of a truck through the streets of Gaza.However my intention was not to defend every aspect of Israel's conduct of the war, merely to rebut the unfounded allegation of genocide.

Steven Rose ● 13h

Omer Bartov (born 1954) is an Israeli-American historian."In August 2023, Bartov was one of more than 1,500 U.S., Israeli, Jewish and Palestinian academics and public figures to sign an open letter stating that Israel operates "a regime of apartheid" in the occupied Palestinian territories and calling on U.S. Jewish groups to speak out against the occupation in Palestine.Bartov has said that the thirty-seventh government of Israel brought "a very radical shift", adding, "I am a historian of the 20th century and don't make analogies lightly" before recounting how the movement of fringe politics into the mainstream in Europe led to fascism, and emphasizing: "This is the current moment in Israel. It's terrifying to see it happening."In January 2024, Bartov said that Israel had repeatedly expressed genocidal intent against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip during the Gaza war. By August of that year, having visited Israel again in June, Bartov said it "was engaged in systematic war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocidal actions". On April 24, 2025, Bartov said: "It's a misnomer to call it a 'war'. [...] This is an occupation by the IDF designed to take over Gaza. There will, of course, be resistance, but it will be guerrilla resistance." He also noted the violence had escalated beyond Gaza to include the West Bank. In July 2025, Bartov wrote an essay in The New York Times in which he argued that Israel is committing genocide against the Palestinian people and noted that other experts in genocide studies had reached the same conclusion.""Bartov wrote in The Guardian, in August 2024: "By the time I travelled to Israel, I had become convinced that at least since the attack by the IDF on Rafah on 6 May 2024, it was no longer possible to deny that Israel was engaged in systematic war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocidal actions. It was not just that this attack against the last concentration of Gazans – most of them displaced already several times by the IDF, which now once again pushed them to a so-called safe zone – demonstrated a total disregard of any humanitarian standards. It also clearly indicated that the ultimate goal of this entire undertaking from the very beginning had been to make the entire Gaza Strip uninhabitable, and to debilitate its population to such a degree that it would either die out or seek all possible options to flee the territory. In other words, the rhetoric spouted by Israeli leaders since 7 October was now being translated into reality – namely, as the 1948 UN Genocide Convention puts it, that Israel was acting 'with intent to destroy, in whole or in part', the Palestinian population in Gaza, 'as such, by killing, causing serious harm, or inflicting conditions of life meant to bring about the group's destruction'""As their institutions have flailed in addressing the relentless Israeli assault on Gaza, and their colleagues have split into irreconcilable camps over whether to describe it as genocide, many scholars have diagnosed a “crisis” in the field of genocide studies. For some, the contradictions inherent in studying genocide from within institutions silent on or even supportive of it have become untenable. In June, Israeli Holocaust scholar Omer Bartov resigned from the editorial board of Yad Vashem Studies, the journal attached to the major Holocaust museum, where he had served for two decades. For editors of a Holocaust journal “to act as if the . . . extraordinary carnage by Israeli troops, including the killing and maiming of thousands of children, is either none of its business or perfectly justified will leave a stain on the journal and on Yad Vashem for generations to come,” he wrote in his resignation letter to the editorial board."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Omer_Bartovhttps://jewishcurrents.org/can-genocide-studies-survive-a-genocide-in-gaza

David Ainsworth ● 1d

Rather than relying on the opinion of 120 out of 500 genocide scholars, why not consider the facts? Richard's original post makes it clear that a crucial element of genocide is the 'intent' to destroy a national, ethnic or religious group. Where is the evidence that Israel is trying wipe out the Palestinians or even deliberately targeting civilians? If that were true, why would the IDF bother to give warnings of impending attacks or move civilians out of harm's way? Can someone answer that question? It is true that thousands of civilians have tragically lost their lives because they have been used as human shield by the Hamas and Islamic Jihad militants whom the Israelis are seeking to eliminate. But that does not amount to genocide. If the term 'genocide' is misused in this way, then every war where large numbers of non-combatants lose their lives can be termed a genocide. Were the Allies in the Second World War guilty of genocide given the hundreds of thousands of German and Japanese civilians who died in bombing raids? Are Britain and America guilty of genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan? Is Russia guilty of genocide in Ukraine? Are the Ukrainians guilty? These questions are not meant to be rhetorical. Would somebody like to answer them? I understand that people are appalled by the scale of death and destruction in Gaza. If one wants to make a case against Israel's conduct of the war, there are certainly many things  one can say. I myself believe that the IDF have been reckless at times in their pursuit of militants, resulting in the death of civilians and aid workers and even hostages in one dreadful case. What I don't understand is the need to elevate the charge to one of genocide. It is particularly wounding in the case of Israel which was founded in the aftermath of a terrible genocide. The accusation is unfounded and irrational, amounting to a blood libel. To some extent it is borne of anti-Semitism, though I wouldn't argue and don't believe that all the opponents of Israel are necessarily anti-Semitic.

Steven Rose ● 1d

Mr Carter'No need to take my word for it: the International Association of Genocide Scholars has carried by a massive majority (of those who voted on it, 86% voted in favour)'Poor analysis but the usual clever obfuscation on your part.We do only have your word for it and we all know from your comments your anti-Jewish even antisemitic bias.I wonder what qualification you need to have or more relevantly what position you have to take on Israel with regard to its defence against annihilation by Palestinian terrorists Hamas, to become a member of the International Association of Genocide Scholars.For instance might you qualify or would your breadth of knowledge on this subject be considered somewhat narrow as according to you only Israel, one of the few countries to have experienced it to the cost of 6,000,000 Jewish lives is committing genocide.I read in BBC News online -https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cde3eyzdr63o'Out of its (IAGS) 500 members, 28% (140) took part in the vote and 86% (120) of those who voted supported the resolution (24%).''The IAGS is the world's largest professional association of genocide scholars and includes a number of Holocaust experts'. I wonder how many members come from Palestinian or other Arab 'Institutes of Learning' ?And did you know that anyone can join the IAGS.https://genocidescholars.org/join/"Become an IAGS Member"'IAGS members are academic scholars, human rights activists, students, museum and memorial professionals, policymakers, educators, anthropologists, independent scholars, sociologists, artists, political scientists, economists, historians, international law scholars, psychologists, and literature and film scholars. IAGS was formed in 1994 and currently represents 600 members from all continents. We encourage anyone dealing with genocide in a scholarly or professional capacity to join'.Not sure if simply being an antisemite as you seem to be would gain you membership though your vast Wiki-knowledge of current Israeli genocide against Hamas might count in your favour.

John Hawkes ● 1d

Richard, I think it is rather disrespectful to refer to people who disagree with you on the subject of Israel as the 'usual suspects'. Perhaps you think disagreement with your views constitutes a crime.I haven't seen the reasoning behind this latest declaration, but if it is anything like the article written by a 'genocide scholar' which appeared in the 'New York Times' a few weeks ago, it's poisonous rubbish. I am not in the least impressed by the number of members of the International Association of Genocide Scholars who voted in favour. Nor do I care how many of them are Jewish. Genocide means the deliberate extermination of a national, ethnic or religious group. Genocide is what happened in the Second World War when six million Jews were murdered. Genocide is what occurred in Rwanda when the Hutus slaughtered over half a million Tutsis over ten days in 1994. Where is the evidence that Israel is trying to wipe out the population of Gaza? If the Israelis intended to exterminate the Palestinians, why would they bother giving warnings of impending raids or trying to  move the civilian population out of harm's way? Israel is at war with a territory led by fanatics with a  40 000 strong militia whose avowed aim is to annihilate Israel, who carried out an appalling pogrom which they threatened to repeat 'again and again', who are still holding over twenty hostages and who refuse to surrender. The accusation of genocide in this context is an anti-Semitic libel. When is this term ever applied to other nations at war? The Allies killed hundreds of thousand of German and Japanese civilians during Word War Two. Coalition forces killed hundreds of thousands of civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. Russia has killed thousands of Ukrainian civilians. The Ukrainians have probably killed many Russian civilians. Are all these nations guilty of genocide? Or is it just Israel?

Steven Rose ● 1d