Israel v Hamas

[Stirlingsays]

So Grok upheld my points then pretty much. I should've said "Jewish lobbying" about his re-election rather than direct funding.

I think it upheld the points you made pretty much yeah.

AI isn't a god or anything and takes from literature out there but I think it gave your points a reasonable positive.

It makes for fascinating reading.

 

[Spindle]

It also demonstrates the experience that the British had with dealing with colonies, what works and what doesn't. The left would do well to realise just how good we were.

 

[Living In Hope]

I'm not against the existence of Israel for more than one reason in the modern day but that's a different topic.

However, purely for objectivity a couple of things should be said in relation to a point in your post.

We can argue (not that I'm that interested in it) on whether what the UN gave to the Jews after WW2 was valid or justice or whatever.

However,

Israel never stuck to the borders that the UN gave them (enforced by the British) and used the importation of millions of Jews over twenty years (allowed by the British) to start by forcing out the British by terrorist groups (the leader of one they later elected PM) by murdering our troops.

But once having forced out the British by bombing and hanging our troops (never apologised) but soon after they soon forced out 700,000 mostly Muslims living outside their set boundary by forcing them out and if they wouldn't move killing them. These weren't military they were civilians being attacked by Jewish militants mostly armed illegally (another story in of itself).

Is someone antisemitic if they regard that as wrong?

I don't so easily forget the murder of our troops as easily as career politicians do.

No, I don't have to like the net effect of Muslims and their own colonizations and wrong doings..... to say that in the modern world that's wrong......What wrong did Muslim civilians living outside the UN boundary do?

Since then they have continually expanded, even beyond the 1967 borders that become a compromise position later on. Not all those wars were started by them but they all resulted in Israel expansion due to several reasons....again beyond the scope of my post.

Resistance to Israel's expansion has become known as antisemitism.....It's not my war and I'm hardly pro Muslim due to what they do to others themselves.......but I find it quaint to know the history and still think it's all fine and dandy...and then get called anti semitic if you stay true to the history.

Not because I prefer Muslims to Jews....in fact it's very much the opposite.

But just if you stay objective.

But I find it quaint that if you have an issue with what happened and what's happening....which is essentially colonization by force of arms that it gets called antisemitism....In other words that you just hate Jews....even though I want British Jews to stay in my country and for Muslim trouble makers to be booted out.

But when if it was the British colonization and empire building in the past....that instead gets continually rejected as evil by everyone. No one says it's racial hatred or anti white or anti British or whatever to attack us....it literally gets taught in the schools that what we did (which every nation did at some point) was wrong and evil and no one bats an eyelid.....Even though I regard this lefty worldview as out of context and lacking nuance.

There is a double standard there.....and when you dig into it...the reason why is obvious.

For clarity I would never have reached the end of my post if I had attempted to argue about the definition of Zionism, but perhaps I should have. It most commonly refers to the right of Israel to exist, though it is sometimes interpreted as the right of Israel to expand, and these are fundamentally different. In stating that anti-Zionism is anti-semitism I am using the former definition. The view that Israel has no right to exist is anti-semitic, in fact it's genocidal racism that is not aimed at any other country in the world, to my knowledge, apart from the one Jewish state.

But the right of Israel to expand, and settle in the occupied territories is completely different. My post refers to Israel's borders being set by international law - clearly their extension into Palestinian territory is therefore contrary to international law, and in my view wholly wrong. I would argue strongly that our support for Israel should be on the expectation that it removes its settlements from the occupied territories. I also make no argument for the merits of Netanyahu and his government - of course it is not anti-semitic to criticise them and what they do.

I would point out however that if there was a country which neighboured Britain whose government was dedicated to the annihilation of Britain, and it launched a terror attack to murder thousands of our citizens (pro-rata on populations of Israel and Britain for the nit-pickers, 1,200 Israelis is equivalent of 8,200 Britons), I would probably demand that Britain utterly destroyed that government, and my sympathy for its citizens would in turn be quite limited.

But the argument that Israel has no right to exist is another matter altogether, and sadly most of the people out on the pro-Palestinian marches appear to believe it.

 

[Stirlingsays]

For clarity I would never have reached the end of my post if I had attempted to argue about the definition of Zionism, but perhaps I should have. It most commonly refers to the right of Israel to exist, though it is sometimes interpreted as the right of Israel to expand, and these are fundamentally different. In stating that anti-Zionism is anti-semitism I am using the former definition. The view that Israel has no right to exist is anti-semitic, in fact it's genocidal racism that is not aimed at any other country in the world, to my knowledge, apart from the one Jewish state.

The right for Israel is exist now....Well, I think that is only argued against by people who are anti semitic because for that to happen would have to involve genocide.

The right and wrongs of what happened in 47-49 during the formation of the original Israel state, that's a different matter. Einstein for example was against the formation of the Israeli state but said that once it was created that it had to fight for it's existence when attacked......I agree, but as the AI said, it was a complex situation with many moving parts.

There's a discussion to be had about the past if people want it, but I think that in the present no one sensible is suggesting that Israel shouldn't exist.

If you are against what has happened to the Palestinians and others under old Netty, then you'd also be against what would be required to make Israel not exist as well.

People talk about the genocide in Gaza, but they are talking less than a hundred thousand people....maybe it's more, we won't know properly for a long time. But Israel is over ten million people.

But the right of Israel to expand, and settle in the occupied territories is completely different. My post refers to Israel's borders being set by international law - clearly their extension into Palestinian territory is therefore contrary to international law, and in my view wholly wrong. I would argue strongly that our support for Israel should be on the expectation that it removes its settlements from the occupied territories. I also make no argument for the merits of Netanyahu and his government - of course it is not anti-semitic to criticise them and what they do.

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

What you are saying has basically been the position of everyone except the US and Israel for all my life. The only difference being that most US administration have said this but have in reality allowed Israeli governments to do what they want without it effecting the massive amounts of money they give them.....which has only increased over the years....essentially the expansion into the west bank and other areas was only possible with US tacit support.

I would point out however that if there was a country which neighboured Britain whose government was dedicated to the annihilation of Britain, and it launched a terror attack to murder thousands of our citizens (pro-rata on populations of Israel and Britain for the nit-pickers, 1,200 Israelis is equivalent of 8,200 Britons), I would probably demand that Britain utterly destroyed that government, and my sympathy for its citizens would in turn be quite limited.

This is of course true.

However, I would like to think that we wouldn't bomb a residential complex to get one person......If we do that then I condemn it. I would condemn it because I love my country and I have to think we have some kind of moral standard other than 'us good, them bad'.

I think the west has lost a lot of soft power since 9/11 and that saddens me.

But the argument that Israel has no right to exist is another matter altogether, and sadly most of the people out on the pro-Palestinian marches appear to believe it.

Agreed.....We have a lot of imported foreign loyalty, first and second generation, that is anti western and it shouldn't be here.

The left, social liberals (in power), left media and big business, worked their socks off to create that situation (whether deliberately or not) and continue to work their socks off to protect and nurture it today.

They betrayed their own working class to make it happen and demonise them every day for resisting these changes that they never agreed to.....Changes that effect their lives more than the mostly middle class and business and housing lobbies who ask and vote for it.

 

[ASCPFC]

The right for Israel is exist now....Well, I think that is only argued against by people who are anti semitic because for that to happen would have to involve genocide.

The right and wrongs of what happened in 47-49 during the formation of the original Israel state, that's a different matter. Einstein for example was against the formation of the Israeli state but said that once it was created that it had to fight for it's existence when attacked......I agree, but as the AI said, it was a complex situation with many moving parts.

There's a discussion to be had about the past if people want it, but I think that in the present no one sensible is suggesting that Israel shouldn't exist.

If you are against what has happened to the Palestinians and others under old Netty, then you'd also be against what would be required to make Israel not exist as well.

People talk about the genocide in Gaza, but they are talking less than a hundred thousand people....maybe it's more, we won't know properly for a long time. But Israel is over ten million people.



Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

What you are saying has basically been the position of everyone except the US and Israel for all my life. The only difference being that most US administration have said this but have in reality allowed Israeli governments to do what they want without it effecting the massive amounts of money they give them.....which has only increased over the years....essentially the expansion into the west bank and other areas was only possible with US tacit support.



This is of course true.

However, I would like to think that we wouldn't bomb a residential complex to get one person......If we do that then I condemn it. I would condemn it because I love my country and I have to think we have some kind of moral standard other than 'us good, them bad'.

I think the west has lost a lot of soft power since 9/11 and that saddens me.




Agreed.....We have a lot of imported foreign loyalty, first and second generation, that is anti western and it shouldn't be here.

The left, social liberals (in power), left media and big business, worked their socks off to create that situation (whether deliberately or not) and continue to work their socks off to protect and nurture it today.

They betrayed their own working class to make it happen and demonise them every day for resisting these changes that they never agreed to.....Changes that effect their lives more than the mostly middle class and business and housing lobbies who ask and vote for it.

The basic point with Israel is that it shows that actual power matters. Whenever it was attacked by seemingly more powerful countries, it actually expanded. We're so used to not seeing any real military power any more that it seems strange to us. Israel views things as fought for and died for, they're never keen on giving any thing up. I'd say there's at least fifty percent - although there is a large opposition - wanting rid of the Palestinians after the October attacks, and cumulative attacks over the years. That, combined with other Arab countries having been beaten whenever they tried to deal with, Israel means it's not looking good for the Palestinians. People can complain, protest, do what they like - the reality is the power is with Israel. The Palestinians and their most fervent Islamic supporters will have little recourse other than international protest, international legal courts which will not matter to Israel as they ignore the real power factor. And it won't be long now before an upsurge in linked terror attacks as used to be seen with the PLO.
The current consideration will be that that may be harmful to their cause. But sooner or later, they will want more international attention for their cause. They will, I suspect, work out a way to either attack US interests or the US itself in the near future.
The main point is recognise the real military power here. It means far more in Israel than we are considering. There was an attack on Israel as I was born. And a few since. They view it as the might and right of the victors who were attacked. People need to understand that and realise that Israel is unlikely to change course. They won't even listen to the US on this: after the October attacks.

 

[CPFCSaturn]

For clarity I would never have reached the end of my post if I had attempted to argue about the definition of Zionism, but perhaps I should have. It most commonly refers to the right of Israel to exist, though it is sometimes interpreted as the right of Israel to expand, and these are fundamentally different. In stating that anti-Zionism is anti-semitism I am using the former definition. The view that Israel has no right to exist is anti-semitic, in fact it's genocidal racism that is not aimed at any other country in the world, to my knowledge, apart from the one Jewish state.

But the right of Israel to expand, and settle in the occupied territories is completely different. My post refers to Israel's borders being set by international law - clearly their extension into Palestinian territory is therefore contrary to international law, and in my view wholly wrong. I would argue strongly that our support for Israel should be on the expectation that it removes its settlements from the occupied territories. I also make no argument for the merits of Netanyahu and his government - of course it is not anti-semitic to criticise them and what they do.

I would point out however that if there was a country which neighboured Britain whose government was dedicated to the annihilation of Britain, and it launched a terror attack to murder thousands of our citizens (pro-rata on populations of Israel and Britain for the nit-pickers, 1,200 Israelis is equivalent of 8,200 Britons), I would probably demand that Britain utterly destroyed that government, and my sympathy for its citizens would in turn be quite limited.

But the argument that Israel has no right to exist is another matter altogether, and sadly most of the people out on the pro-Palestinian marches appear to believe it.

How can you possibly conclude that?

On the whole 'right to exist' nonsense (that is never discussed in relation to any other nation or state, only ever Israel), I thought Tucker Carlson of all people did a good job of dismantling the premise of it;

 

[silvertop]

The right for Israel is exist now....Well, I think that is only argued against by people who are anti semitic because for that to happen would have to involve genocide.

The right and wrongs of what happened in 47-49 during the formation of the original Israel state, that's a different matter. Einstein for example was against the formation of the Israeli state but said that once it was created that it had to fight for it's existence when attacked......I agree, but as the AI said, it was a complex situation with many moving parts.

There's a discussion to be had about the past if people want it, but I think that in the present no one sensible is suggesting that Israel shouldn't exist.

If you are against what has happened to the Palestinians and others under old Netty, then you'd also be against what would be required to make Israel not exist as well.

People talk about the genocide in Gaza, but they are talking less than a hundred thousand people....maybe it's more, we won't know properly for a long time. But Israel is over ten million people.



Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

What you are saying has basically been the position of everyone except the US and Israel for all my life. The only difference being that most US administration have said this but have in reality allowed Israeli governments to do what they want without it effecting the massive amounts of money they give them.....which has only increased over the years....essentially the expansion into the west bank and other areas was only possible with US tacit support.



This is of course true.

However, I would like to think that we wouldn't bomb a residential complex to get one person......If we do that then I condemn it. I would condemn it because I love my country and I have to think we have some kind of moral standard other than 'us good, them bad'.

I think the west has lost a lot of soft power since 9/11 and that saddens me.




Agreed.....We have a lot of imported foreign loyalty, first and second generation, that is anti western and it shouldn't be here.

The left, social liberals (in power), left media and big business, worked their socks off to create that situation (whether deliberately or not) and continue to work their socks off to protect and nurture it today.

They betrayed their own working class to make it happen and demonise them every day for resisting these changes that they never agreed to.....Changes that effect their lives more than the mostly middle class and business and housing lobbies who ask and vote for it.

Much good in this.

There are many (I suspect most) who vehemently support the existence of Israel, but strongly object to its current policies. It is wholly appropriate and possible to hold both views.

That is where I am at odds with much myopic hostility on this sight. Many posters seem unable to grasp this simple but fundamental point.

The neighbouring country analogy would have to be contrived to death to align it with Israel's highly complex situation. However, like you, I would also condemn a Hamburg style bombardment by the RAF of an area in Dublin (?) where intelligence suggests a group of terrorists might be lurking, no matter the brutal murder of over 8,000 of our people. There are always other methods.

 

[silvertop]

The basic point with Israel is that it shows that actual power matters. Whenever it was attacked by seemingly more powerful countries, it actually expanded. We're so used to not seeing any real military power any more that it seems strange to us. Israel views things as fought for and died for, they're never keen on giving any thing up. I'd say there's at least fifty percent - although there is a large opposition - wanting rid of the Palestinians after the October attacks, and cumulative attacks over the years. That, combined with other Arab countries having been beaten whenever they tried to deal with, Israel means it's not looking good for the Palestinians. People can complain, protest, do what they like - the reality is the power is with Israel. The Palestinians and their most fervent Islamic supporters will have little recourse other than international protest, international legal courts which will not matter to Israel as they ignore the real power factor. And it won't be long now before an upsurge in linked terror attacks as used to be seen with the PLO.
The current consideration will be that that may be harmful to their cause. But sooner or later, they will want more international attention for their cause. They will, I suspect, work out a way to either attack US interests or the US itself in the near future.
The main point is recognise the real military power here. It means far more in Israel than we are considering. There was an attack on Israel as I was born. And a few since. They view it as the might and right of the victors who were attacked. People need to understand that and realise that Israel is unlikely to change course. They won't even listen to the US on this: after the October attacks.

Israel exists to a significant extent due to US support. The US is a diminishing power with a powerful movement to substantively reduce intervention overseas. Israel is probably an exception to this. For now...

The rising powers do not see support for Israel as a sacred duty like the US. The other powerful nations outside the US are ambivalent, save Germany for collective guilt and the UK as US poodle. The worse Israel behaves, the more likely support might morph from ambivalence to hostility.

How long that support lasts they last. Especially the US. Without their direct support, they may not have won any of those Arab-Israeli wars.

Israel are playing a very dangerous game.

 

[ASCPFC]

Israel exists to a significant extent due to US support. The US is a diminishing power with a powerful movement to substantively reduce intervention overseas. Israel is probably an exception to this. For now...

The rising powers do not see support for Israel as a sacred duty like the US. The other powerful nations outside the US are ambivalent, save Germany for collective guilt and the UK as US poodle. The worse Israel behaves, the more likely support might morph from ambivalence to hostility.

How long that support lasts they last. Especially the US. Without their direct support, they may not have won any of those Arab-Israeli wars.

Israel are playing a very dangerous game.

To them, I don't think it's a game. In their previous large conflicts, their main weaponry was British. Which sounds crazy now. I'm not so sure they're as reliant on the US as people think. I could be wrong but I think they can look after themselves.
The US is friendly with their previous enemies now, but it's not making any difference. Other Arab countries will not back the Palestinians now. You know the reasons. I won't go into it.
Ireland is fully behind the Palestinians. We'll send our army and Navy to deal with those darned aggressors and free the freedom fighters.

 

[silvertop]

To them, I don't think it's a game. In their previous large conflicts, their main weaponry was British. Which sounds crazy now. I'm not so sure they're as reliant on the US as people think. I could be wrong but I think they can look after themselves.
The US is friendly with their previous enemies now, but it's not making any difference. Other Arab countries will not back the Palestinians now. You know the reasons. I won't go into it.
Ireland is fully behind the Palestinians. We'll send our army and Navy to deal with those darned aggressors and free the freedom fighters.

You know what I mean!

They bought our weapons. They were not a gift.

I am pretty sure the US pretty much underwrote every campaign Israel has fought in and certainly stuffed them with sufficient intelligence so, alongside Israel's own highly capable intelligence service, they knew exactly who was coming, when, where, and with what.

 

[Spindle]

You know what I mean!

They bought our weapons. They were not a gift.

I am pretty sure the US pretty much underwrote every campaign Israel has fought in and certainly stuffed them with sufficient intelligence so, alongside Israel's own highly capable intelligence service, they knew exactly who was coming, when, where, and with what.

Good. Because if not the Muslims would've murdered every one of them.

Is that what you want?

 

[Stirlingsays]

The basic point with Israel is that it shows that actual power matters. Whenever it was attacked by seemingly more powerful countries, it actually expanded. We're so used to not seeing any real military power any more that it seems strange to us. Israel views things as fought for and died for, they're never keen on giving any thing up. I'd say there's at least fifty percent - although there is a large opposition - wanting rid of the Palestinians after the October attacks, and cumulative attacks over the years. That, combined with other Arab countries having been beaten whenever they tried to deal with, Israel means it's not looking good for the Palestinians. People can complain, protest, do what they like - the reality is the power is with Israel. The Palestinians and their most fervent Islamic supporters will have little recourse other than international protest, international legal courts which will not matter to Israel as they ignore the real power factor. And it won't be long now before an upsurge in linked terror attacks as used to be seen with the PLO.
The current consideration will be that that may be harmful to their cause. But sooner or later, they will want more international attention for their cause. They will, I suspect, work out a way to either attack US interests or the US itself in the near future.
The main point is recognise the real military power here. It means far more in Israel than we are considering. There was an attack on Israel as I was born. And a few since. They view it as the might and right of the victors who were attacked. People need to understand that and realise that Israel is unlikely to change course. They won't even listen to the US on this: after the October attacks.

Like me you're a pragmatist....well, maybe I'm idealistic about a couple of things but mostly we have to see the world as it is, not how right and wrong might tell us otherwise.

There is what someone might prefer and then there is what is possible.

All those interested in finding out will know why the power is with Israel....a tiny country....compared to its neighbours.

The question is more, what does the individual think is a fair settlement in the middle east. At the moment it doesn't look like Netty will settle for anything other than being the region's superpower.

Mostly paid for by the US taxpayer, whether they liked it or not.

 

[cryrst]

Israel exists to a significant extent due to US support. The US is a diminishing power with a powerful movement to substantively reduce intervention overseas. Israel is probably an exception to this. For now...

The rising powers do not see support for Israel as a sacred duty like the US. The other powerful nations outside the US are ambivalent, save Germany for collective guilt and the UK as US poodle. The worse Israel behaves, the more likely support might morph from ambivalence to hostility.

How long that support lasts they last. Especially the US. Without their direct support, they may not have won any of those Arab-Israeli wars.

Israel are playing a very dangerous game.

Your first sentence actually reads like you think it’s wrong that Israel exists at all.

 

[Hrolf The Ganger]

Your first sentence actually reads like you think it’s wrong that Israel exists at all.

Of course. Because like a handful of other leftist posters, he will say everything except what he actually thinks and that is that he wishes Israel would be destroyed by the Arabs.
The modern left have more in common with fascists than the right and they are prepared to cosy up with lunatics to maintain political power.

 

[Living In Hope]

The right for Israel is exist now....Well, I think that is only argued against by people who are anti semitic because for that to happen would have to involve genocide.

The right and wrongs of what happened in 47-49 during the formation of the original Israel state, that's a different matter. Einstein for example was against the formation of the Israeli state but said that once it was created that it had to fight for it's existence when attacked......I agree, but as the AI said, it was a complex situation with many moving parts.

There's a discussion to be had about the past if people want it, but I think that in the present no one sensible is suggesting that Israel shouldn't exist.

If you are against what has happened to the Palestinians and others under old Netty, then you'd also be against what would be required to make Israel not exist as well.

People talk about the genocide in Gaza, but they are talking less than a hundred thousand people....maybe it's more, we won't know properly for a long time. But Israel is over ten million people.



Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

What you are saying has basically been the position of everyone except the US and Israel for all my life. The only difference being that most US administration have said this but have in reality allowed Israeli governments to do what they want without it effecting the massive amounts of money they give them.....which has only increased over the years....essentially the expansion into the west bank and other areas was only possible with US tacit support.



This is of course true.

However, I would like to think that we wouldn't bomb a residential complex to get one person......If we do that then I condemn it. I would condemn it because I love my country and I have to think we have some kind of moral standard other than 'us good, them bad'.

I think the west has lost a lot of soft power since 9/11 and that saddens me.




Agreed.....We have a lot of imported foreign loyalty, first and second generation, that is anti western and it shouldn't be here.

The left, social liberals (in power), left media and big business, worked their socks off to create that situation (whether deliberately or not) and continue to work their socks off to protect and nurture it today.

They betrayed their own working class to make it happen and demonise them every day for resisting these changes that they never agreed to.....Changes that effect their lives more than the mostly middle class and business and housing lobbies who ask and vote for it.

I agree with pretty much everything you say here, except the bit in bold. I think you can support a very aggressive response from Israel to the atrocities of 7th October without supporting the extent of what Netanhayu has driven. It has in my view gone too far and some of its excesses have been shrouded in misinformation which discredits the Israeli regime.

 

[silvertop]

Your first sentence actually reads like you think it’s wrong that Israel exists at all.

Oh do be quiet.

 

[Stirlingsays]

I agree with pretty much everything you say here, except the bit in bold. I think you can support a very aggressive response from Israel to the atrocities of 7th October without supporting the extent of what Netanhayu has driven. It has in my view gone too far and some of its excesses have been shrouded in misinformation which discredits the Israeli regime.

From a non Zionist perspective it's definitely gone way too far.

However, if you are living in Israel the vast majority are going to support killing any physical threat out there.....It's just human nature. October 7th was the evidence you need just as 911 was for us.....I'm of the view that the October 7th plans must have been known about in advance....but there you go, a suspicion is just a suspicion. I think the whole thing is very dark.

It's very much in Netanyahu's interests to keep the wars going for now but on a steady low key basis. He needs time for political charges against him to be dropped and popular support for the war at home helps that.

​

​

 

[Spindle]

Of course. Because like a handful of other leftist posters, he will say everything except what he actually thinks and that is that he wishes Israel would be destroyed by the Arabs.
The modern left have more in common with fascists than the right and they are prepared to cosy up with lunatics to maintain political power.

......once power is gained then the lunatics, aka Islamists, will kill them. A la Iran 1979.

 

[cryrst]

Oh do be quiet.

I don’t believe we are married 🤣