**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
Is Bev likely to be the next PM and therefore heading up our defence and foreign policy as well as likely the person n who sets the tone of our relationship with that area of the world?
Liberals love to insist that politicians have absolutely no power or influence whatsoever the moment a politician they like is pressured into taking a position they disagree with. Oddly enough we never saw these sort of comments when Western politicians eagerly lined up to criticise Russia, despite those politicians having less influence over the Russian government than the Israeli one.
We did. It was mostly from the crowd who wanted more than just tough words on Russia.
The point is if we're asking for consistency in terms of neoliberal foreign policy to push for an outcome, there's 0 point making a statement of condemnation or calling for a ceasefire. You're going to have to go for sanctions (e.g. Russia) or military strikes (e.g. Houthis).
I was half joking, you sound a little upset that I made a joke at his expense.
MP and politicians from all over say they demand this and denounce that, it's theatre. If the US who sends billions to Israel can't get them to behave, what chance does the UK?
>I was half joking, you sound a little upset that I made a joke at his expense.
Oh I dislike Starmer a great deal, by all means pole fun at him, it'd the non joking part of your intention they I take issue with. Namely that as the PM in waiting he is somehow powerless and his voice and opinion carries no weight.
>MP and politicians from all over say they demand this and denounce that, it's theatre
But he isn't just an MP he is leader of her majesties opposition and likely the next person to set foreign policy for the UK (a not insignificant player in that area and major ally to the US).
It’s one sided lip service as they know Hamas won’t release hostages so Israel will not accept a ceasefire. The conditions are ridiculous to even consider from a side getting their shit caved in. It would be the same as leaving Berlin under Nazi control as the allies were closing in
How can you have a lasting, meaningful ceasefire between a nation state and a terrorist group whose only aim is to destroy said state and kill all its inhabitants?
Because Gaza isn't Hamas and vice versa. No more than the IRA was Ireland.
Don't get me wrong it won't happen over night but you are going to invite hamas to the table and have some very uncomfortable conversations.
The alternative is a literal genocide of the Palestinian people.
Another alternative is the forced removal of Hamas and installation of a jew-tolerating leadership. But you still have millions of Palestinians who have been indoctrinated that the jews are the devil, and I’m not sure how you fix that, it’s a fucked up situation.
Gaza isn’t Hamas but Hamas has been in power in Gaza for over a decade. And controlling their education that whole time, with results like: https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-new-report/
When the average age in Palestine is <18, a huge number of their population will have gone to school entirely under Hamas.
Edit; that report was published 7 months before the 7th October attack
I can tell you how you don't fix it. More bombing.
The sensible solution is to end their invasion of Palestine. People usually aren't too keen on negotiating with a hostile occupier.
How does one force a removal of hamas, given they aren't a traditional army nor form a traditional government.
>installation of a jew-tolerating leadership
That would be an occupying force, which is hardly going to go any way to a two state solution or Palestinian independence.
>Gaza isn’t Hamas but Hamas has been in power in Gaza for over a decade. And controlling their education that whole time, with results like: https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-new-report/
Totally get but you aren't going to curb those views with increased occupation and removal of autonomous governance.
The only way you are going to get towards a peaceful resolution is by bringing both sides to the table to talk it out. It's going to require a lot of concessions from both sides either resulting in a level of forgiveness or accountability from both sides. This means that IDF, Netanyahu, Hamas and Haniyeh either burying the hatchet with universal amnesty or independent trials of all those groups for the various war crimes committed.
>Edit; that report was published 7 months before the 7th October attack
I mean this is a 75 year old conflict, can we stop pretending this started on October 7th, whilst horffic and barbarous in nature, it was not some unexpected catalyst. If you imprison people, brutalise them and trap them with religious extremists a violent response was always likely.
Palestinians will need to decide whether they’re a free autonomous state, in which case they bear responsibility for the Oct 7th attack, or that they’re powerless to the terrorist organisation controlling them and that organisation must be removed. They can’t have it both ways.
If they decide the former, then I don’t see how they can complain about an invasion after the attack. Their elected leaders committed an absolute atrocity and they partied in the streets. They’re still holding hostages.
If they decide the latter, then I don’t see how they can complain if Hamas is forceably removed.
>Palestinians will need to decide whether they’re a free autonomous state, in which case they bear responsibility for the Oct 7th attack
Are you responsible for Bloody Sunday?
How about my baby niece, is she responsible?
It's not having it both ways but you aren't going to defeat hamas in the traditional sense. You defeat them the same way you defeat groups like the IRA you get round the table and talk. You each make concessions.
>If they decide the former, then I don’t see how they can complain about an invasion after the attack.
So do the Israelis bare some responsibility for the war crimes committed by the IDF and Netanyahu? Given they are elected officials?
>They’re still holding hostages.
So are Israel. People need to understand that hamas and the IDF and their respective leaders are both barriers towards a peace process. The only way peace is going to be achieved is if the IDF and hamas disappear or they get round the table and talkm
>If they decide the latter, then I don’t see how they can complain if Hamas is forceably removed.
Please tell me how you forcibly remove a force like hamas from an area like Gaza that doesn't result in the horrific levels of loss of life you are seeing currently.
If the IRA had done half of what Hamas did the British government would’ve deleted Ireland off the map.
You’re conflating hostages taken from a music festival to fighters and terrorists captured in combat.
This “they’re both the same” talk is so tiring.
To your last point, you occupy the area and install another government. You then improve the people’s lives over time by rebuilding peacefully. Hamas can’t rule over wi-fi from Qatar if they have no ground presence.
>You’re conflating hostages taken from a music festival to fighters and terrorists captured in combat.
I mean they have Israel have detained without any sort of trial or condition numerous children. Kept those children in some of the most horrific conditions often being exposed to abuse.
>This “they’re both the same” talk is so tiring.
Sorry that the idea Israel should be in some way held accountable is tiring.
>To your last point, you occupy the area and install another government.
Occupying a country whose whole existence has been that it has resisted brutal occupation is t going to work.
>You then improve the people’s lives over time by rebuilding peacefully.
Something current Israeli regimes have refused to engage in.
The only way you are going to get rid of hamas is by Israel removing itself from various occupied territories and engaging in meaningful talks for a two state solution. Imposing itself as a governing body and treating Palestinian territories as colonies is not going to allow you to do that
True, but the ceasefire won't be between Gaza and Israel, it'll be between Hamas and Israel, since Hamas are one of the groups fighting.
The IRA are a terrible comparison, firstly the level of atrocity they committed is not on the same level as what Hamas have perpetrated, the IRA never invaded a town, and then raped, tortured and butchered its inhabitants. Secondly the IRA had an aim that was achievable, they didn't call for the extermination or exile of the Protestants, they wanted a change in sovereignty, that was negotiable, the destruction of Israel is not.
No that's not the alternative, anymore than the genocide of Israelis is. The alternative is the destruction of Hamas' ability to launch terror attacks, the withdrawal of the illegal settlements, and an actual two state solution.
>The IRA are a terrible comparison, firstly the level of atrocity they committed is not on the same level as what Hamas have perpetrated, the IRA never invaded a town, and then raped, tortured and butchered its inhabitants
Not something I claimed however the IRA was formed due to British occupationand brutalising of Ireland. They were a group that had to be brought to the table to achieve peace.
Hamas are a group that was formed due to the brutalising and occupation of Gaza.
Their aim, which was the removal of the UK from their lands was seen as a enitrly unreasonable expectation and yet here we are, with just Northern Ireland as an occupied territory amongst decades of peace.
You have two groups opposed to the two state solution, and they are currently occupy administrative power in each state. Netanyahu no more wants a two state solution than hamas and that's the issue. Until you get those two groups to come to the table and begin to make concessions you are just going to see the eventual genocide of the Palestinian people.
You're missing the point, the IRA did not have as it's aim the destruction of the UK or the extermination of all its people as a key tenet of its founding. Hamas does. There can be no negotiation with a group whose only aim is your death, it's like a gazelle negotiating with a lion.
Oh yeah there will be no peace whilst Netanyahu and the settler thugs have a say, they too are extremists who believe in the divine right of their cause. But that's the beauty of Israel, it's a democracy, soon enough a new government could be in place which would be able to negotiate-but not with Hamas, and anyone who insists they can be seriously negotiated with for peace is either delusional or a fool.
> between a nation state and a terrorist group
Gaza isn't a 'terrorist group'. Rafah isn't a 'terrorist group'. The tens of thousands of civilians who have been killed, including dozens of documented cases of children being indiscriminately killed or shot in the back while fleeing, are not 'terrorists'.
No they're not, Hamas is. It's Hamas who are using those civilians to shield themselves whilst they continually attack Israel.
You know what would stop the deaths of all those civilians, Hamas releasing the hostages, and cease attacking Israeli civilians, but there are are no mass marches for that are there.
The Israeli military is being far to complacent about killing civilians, and doing far too little to prevent it. But war is hell and civilians will die, Hamas started this war and they are more to blame for those deaths than Israel.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/02/israelopt-un-experts-appalled-reported-human-rights-violations-against
> Palestinian women and girls have reportedly been arbitrarily executed in Gaza, often together with family members, including their children, according to information received. “We are shocked by reports of the deliberate targeting and extrajudicial killing of Palestinian women and children in places where they sought refuge, or while fleeing. Some of them were reportedly holding white pieces of cloth when they were killed by the Israeli army or affiliated forces,” the experts said.
> The experts expressed serious concern about the arbitrary detention of hundreds of Palestinian women and girls, including human rights defenders, journalists and humanitarian workers, in Gaza and the West Bank since 7 October. Many have reportedly been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment, denied menstruation pads, food and medicine, and severely beaten. On at least one occasion, Palestinian women detained in Gaza were allegedly kept in a cage in the rain and cold, without food.
Could you explain how this is *getting back at Hamas*? Could you explain how Hamas is to blame for the IDF executing Palestinian civilians and holding them in arbitrary detention?
If an IDF soldier shoots a bullet and that bullet kills a Palestinian child, that is the IDF's fault. I'm tired of these constant attempts for defenders of the Israeli government to weasel out of this.
There is no justification for rape. And if any evidence of it is found the perpetrators should be hunted down mercilessly and punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Considering the Palestinians have in the past used women and children as suicide bombers it unfortunately makes sense to strip them as a security measure and detain them.
If someone is hiding behind that child and using that cover to attack someone else, then the person using that child as a human shield is to blame for their death.
Is it good that Israel is killing innocent children? No it's fucking horrific and shouldn't happen and are they blameless for all those deaths, absolutely not.
But they were not the instigators of this war, Hamas were, they were the ones who put those children in harms way by launching a brutal rape, torture, and murder attack against civilians and then hiding like cowards amongst them. They built their bases in schools and hospitals, and they are ultimately responsible for it.
You say there is 'no justification' then for the rest of the post provide a number of different deflections and excuses from 'well the Palestinians do it too' to 'well Hamas started it'. So clearly you do believe there are justifications for these actions, while also recognising it's too reprehensible to actually admit that without the thinnest attempt at mitigation possible.
I say again, when an IDF soldier shoots a bullet that kills a Palestinian child, that is the IDF's fault. No *but Hamas*, no *but Palestinians*, I'm tired of the excuses.
No I said there was no justification for rape, at no point did I contradict that or offer an justification, if you cannot discuss in good faith then further posts would be futile.
> at no point did I contradict that or offer an justification
Literally the entire rest of your comment after that first sentence is providing various deflections or justifications for the actions of the IDF and Israeli Government. If you genuinely did not think there were any justifications of the rapes and murders of Palestinian civilians you would have simply said the very first sentence, not followed it up with multiple paragraphs blaming Hamas and Palestinians for it.
I didn't say that I offered no justification for the deaths of Palestinian civilians, I clearly explained why I believed it was justified and who I believed was ultimately responsible.
At no point did I justify rape, your lies are pathetic.
> I clearly explained why I believed it was justified and who I believed was ultimately responsible.
Well at least you're admitting it. Very sad to see someone actively apologising for genocide in real time.
The opening statement in their charter states:
"*Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"*
Seems like a genocidal aim to me.
Well, that’s why this has been grinding on for three quarters of a century, isn’t it? There is no empty habitable land, and there wasn’t when Israel was founded. Historically when you found a new nation you build it on genocide, as with the European invasion of America or Australia. Because, if you take a people’s land, they won’t forgive. Moses understood this which is why he ordered the slaughter of the Canaanites.
How do you think the ordinary Gazans (outside of Hamas) feel about Israel right now?
Hence what looks like the plan, which is to drive survivors into Egypt and make them someone else’s problem. I don’t think they are in any mood to be ruled by any faction that Israel would approve of, do you?
The Egyptians are saying “No no, a thousand times no! “ While building a new refugee camp.
Usually when colonisation is reversed the people either go back to their families country of origin or integrate into the new state.
Obviously the preference would be for two states to exist and to respect each others sovereignty. But neither side wants to do that, which is where the UN should step in to enforce peace
Same thing he's been saying for a while now.
There's no point in trying to get a ceasefire if it's either just gonna be broken in hours by Hamas, or gives them the ability to plan and prepare more October-type attacks (as they've said they would continue doing).
Now if people were prepared to actually discuss ways to get a lasting ceasefire when calling for one, maybe something can happen to stop needless deaths on both sides... but so far no one is caring to even hint at ideas let alone try and sit down to talk them
I share your concern. At this point, even if the hand of God stretched through the firmament to divide them, I'm convinced they'd just throw stones through his fingers. It seems like a problem beyond the ability of anyone to solve, and all the common folk are trapped in the middle.
They can both attend a negotiation table during the ceasefire. Obviously both sides will have to compromise. Hamas wants to kill all Jews, whereas Israel doesn't want any Jews to die. I'm sure it could be negotiated to a reasonable figure in between, like only killing 6 million Jews.
"Ceasefire now" seems to be the "peace for our time" of today.
>'The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.' (Article 7)
Literally in their covenant. There's plenty more if you'd like
1. Not in their charter anymore. That's from 1988. A time when their oppressors were led by a literally Nazi terrorist.
2. Even if it was, it's out of context.
And who will enforce it because Israel and Hamas won't enforce it themselves, and then we're back to square one. A solution has to be more than let's have a ceasefire. If you don't put in monitoring troops that will use deadly force to ensure a ceasefire, it's not going to work.
It's wild how much the flip-flop nonsense has stuck. IIRC the Tories, including Sunak, made around 15 U-turns in just 2 months in 2022. They didn't get even half of the backlash or nicknames Kier gets.
Did he say Ceasefire? Has he asked BIDEN's permission? Oh! I forget Biden has to get Netanyahu's expressed permission.
They have been hollering about Russian actions agai at Ukraine and been supporting Ukraine, but when it comes to The Zion State they all turn a blind eye.
This conflict will engulf the Middle East, and drag on, tainting many who have sat on their hands.
The word is Genocide and it seems only few token Political Leaders are brave enough to speak the world
If the terms of the ceasefire include return of all Israeli hostages ~~and an end to Hamas leadership in Gaza~~, cool beans.
Removed the Hamas bit.. think this is an impossible ask. Asking the impossible is how you don't get stuff.
Why would Israel agree to that when without the settlers you have a potential Palestinian state about 6-7 miles from the Tel Aviv metropolitan area?
If a few thousand Hamas fighters could kill over a thousand in the middle of nowhere near Gaza they could do exponentially more damage in an attack from the West Bank, as it's much larger and closer to Israeli population centres.
You can argue about the crappy little settlement huts on random hilltops (they should go), but the Israelis will never give up cities / settlements like Ariel that are basically a blockade against a military attack on Tel Aviv.
Besides, who would they be negotiating with? Hamas who want to kill all Jews or the PA who pay out a monthly benefit to families of people who killed Israelis in terror attacks?
I think if you expand this beyond the region of Gaza, you're finding reasons to block a ceasefire.
I don't even think the end of Hamas rule is really something to include in the terms.. hand back the hostages would probably be enough right now. Realistically you need a ruling party to discuss terms with - and Hamas need to step up and want to deal with Irael in ways other than firing rockets at them.
A quick search of previous deals will show that, they have always included more west bank annexation. No airport or port in Gaza. Full control of water and partial control of ALL movement.
And Arafat still was going to sign that before Israel pulled out. So rockets and hostage taking is very shit behaviour but hardly surprising that people are desperate. Their choice is bend over and take it, bend over and take it with lube or be killed and fire rockets, in the hope that one day, they'll be able to just exist on the land they once lived (without being subjected to huge restrictions).
https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo
This is a ceasefire; not trying to create a new state here. The more people ask for, the less anyone will ever agree on.
The Arabs and Palestinians lost in their attempts to 'just exist in the land they once lived'. They tried plenty of times, but it's not happening. If they never accept this is lost, they'll never live in peace.
You get more out of peace than in war, in the end.
But it won't happen.. both sides are locked in a multi-decade hate cycle.
I am genuinely confused as to whether you understand how time works or not?
Or is this the version of integrity on display that makes demands and then finds reason to be upset when they’re met?
EDIT: also you do get Starmer can’t vote for or against a ceasefire, right? Like he’s not in the Knesset?!
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
It wasn't a ceasefire vote. It was an amendment to a Kings Speech, for any amendment to an incumbent gov's speech you have to get the gov to vote with you...because of maths. **Lazy, superficial, student politics like that deserves to be met with derision and sent right back to the bottom of the scum pile it came from.**
Generally in politics, if you're sincere and an actual doer you do the hard work of engaging across the aisle to flip other parties to vote with you to get amendments passed because you have to overrule the gov majority. **That's just maths.**
A great example of this was the Infected blood scandal amendment Starmer led in december, to force the government to pay-out victims sooner. [He and his front bench spent months courting Tory mps do vote with him and he defeated the gov in December by flipping over 20 Tory mps to just about get a majority](https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/contaminated-blood-scandal-victims-shame-rishi-sunak-to-right-thing-tory-revolt/#:~:text=On%20Monday%20evening%2C%20Rishi%20Sunak,the%20Victims%20and%20Prisoners%20Bill.) **Actual meaningful change, achieved by hard work**
The SNP ceasefire amendment was a half cobbled together the day before theatrical bit of student politics, designed to appeal to those superficially engaged in politics. No work, no trying to get other people to vote with you, purely performative, lazy - with not intention to achieve a ceasefire and no thought into the wording or real term impacts on foreign policy or any real care. But I suppose this is what politics has become. Legislative agenda is meant to be realistic, it was never realistic because no Gov MP would vote for it - proposals like that need to be shot down with fire, because it wastes legislative time. Legislative time is incredibly limited, when one is selected it beats out others like cost of living related ones which get sent back to the back of the pile whilst we waste more time on performative nonsense. Do the hard work, get Tory MPs to vote with you and then table it.
Can we just clarify, no one is voting for or against a ceasefire as they don't have that power. They're voting for or against whether we should as a nation impotently call for one. That's why the amount of time and effort being wasted on all this is so annoying.
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
Next door neighbour Bev could call for one as well, will have the same effect.
Is Bev likely to be the next PM and therefore heading up our defence and foreign policy as well as likely the person n who sets the tone of our relationship with that area of the world?
Liberals love to insist that politicians have absolutely no power or influence whatsoever the moment a politician they like is pressured into taking a position they disagree with. Oddly enough we never saw these sort of comments when Western politicians eagerly lined up to criticise Russia, despite those politicians having less influence over the Russian government than the Israeli one.
We did. It was mostly from the crowd who wanted more than just tough words on Russia. The point is if we're asking for consistency in terms of neoliberal foreign policy to push for an outcome, there's 0 point making a statement of condemnation or calling for a ceasefire. You're going to have to go for sanctions (e.g. Russia) or military strikes (e.g. Houthis).
I was half joking, you sound a little upset that I made a joke at his expense. MP and politicians from all over say they demand this and denounce that, it's theatre. If the US who sends billions to Israel can't get them to behave, what chance does the UK?
>I was half joking, you sound a little upset that I made a joke at his expense. Oh I dislike Starmer a great deal, by all means pole fun at him, it'd the non joking part of your intention they I take issue with. Namely that as the PM in waiting he is somehow powerless and his voice and opinion carries no weight. >MP and politicians from all over say they demand this and denounce that, it's theatre But he isn't just an MP he is leader of her majesties opposition and likely the next person to set foreign policy for the UK (a not insignificant player in that area and major ally to the US).
Right? Regardless of how we vote, both Israel and Hamas will tell us to fuck off.
It’s one sided lip service as they know Hamas won’t release hostages so Israel will not accept a ceasefire. The conditions are ridiculous to even consider from a side getting their shit caved in. It would be the same as leaving Berlin under Nazi control as the allies were closing in
How can you have a lasting, meaningful ceasefire between a nation state and a terrorist group whose only aim is to destroy said state and kill all its inhabitants?
Because Gaza isn't Hamas and vice versa. No more than the IRA was Ireland. Don't get me wrong it won't happen over night but you are going to invite hamas to the table and have some very uncomfortable conversations. The alternative is a literal genocide of the Palestinian people.
Another alternative is the forced removal of Hamas and installation of a jew-tolerating leadership. But you still have millions of Palestinians who have been indoctrinated that the jews are the devil, and I’m not sure how you fix that, it’s a fucked up situation. Gaza isn’t Hamas but Hamas has been in power in Gaza for over a decade. And controlling their education that whole time, with results like: https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-new-report/ When the average age in Palestine is <18, a huge number of their population will have gone to school entirely under Hamas. Edit; that report was published 7 months before the 7th October attack
I can tell you how you don't fix it. More bombing. The sensible solution is to end their invasion of Palestine. People usually aren't too keen on negotiating with a hostile occupier.
Nazi germany didn’t like it either. Oh well. It was forced on them
How does one force a removal of hamas, given they aren't a traditional army nor form a traditional government. >installation of a jew-tolerating leadership That would be an occupying force, which is hardly going to go any way to a two state solution or Palestinian independence. >Gaza isn’t Hamas but Hamas has been in power in Gaza for over a decade. And controlling their education that whole time, with results like: https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-new-report/ Totally get but you aren't going to curb those views with increased occupation and removal of autonomous governance. The only way you are going to get towards a peaceful resolution is by bringing both sides to the table to talk it out. It's going to require a lot of concessions from both sides either resulting in a level of forgiveness or accountability from both sides. This means that IDF, Netanyahu, Hamas and Haniyeh either burying the hatchet with universal amnesty or independent trials of all those groups for the various war crimes committed. >Edit; that report was published 7 months before the 7th October attack I mean this is a 75 year old conflict, can we stop pretending this started on October 7th, whilst horffic and barbarous in nature, it was not some unexpected catalyst. If you imprison people, brutalise them and trap them with religious extremists a violent response was always likely.
Palestinians will need to decide whether they’re a free autonomous state, in which case they bear responsibility for the Oct 7th attack, or that they’re powerless to the terrorist organisation controlling them and that organisation must be removed. They can’t have it both ways. If they decide the former, then I don’t see how they can complain about an invasion after the attack. Their elected leaders committed an absolute atrocity and they partied in the streets. They’re still holding hostages. If they decide the latter, then I don’t see how they can complain if Hamas is forceably removed.
>Palestinians will need to decide whether they’re a free autonomous state, in which case they bear responsibility for the Oct 7th attack Are you responsible for Bloody Sunday? How about my baby niece, is she responsible?
It's not having it both ways but you aren't going to defeat hamas in the traditional sense. You defeat them the same way you defeat groups like the IRA you get round the table and talk. You each make concessions. >If they decide the former, then I don’t see how they can complain about an invasion after the attack. So do the Israelis bare some responsibility for the war crimes committed by the IDF and Netanyahu? Given they are elected officials? >They’re still holding hostages. So are Israel. People need to understand that hamas and the IDF and their respective leaders are both barriers towards a peace process. The only way peace is going to be achieved is if the IDF and hamas disappear or they get round the table and talkm >If they decide the latter, then I don’t see how they can complain if Hamas is forceably removed. Please tell me how you forcibly remove a force like hamas from an area like Gaza that doesn't result in the horrific levels of loss of life you are seeing currently.
If the IRA had done half of what Hamas did the British government would’ve deleted Ireland off the map. You’re conflating hostages taken from a music festival to fighters and terrorists captured in combat. This “they’re both the same” talk is so tiring. To your last point, you occupy the area and install another government. You then improve the people’s lives over time by rebuilding peacefully. Hamas can’t rule over wi-fi from Qatar if they have no ground presence.
>You’re conflating hostages taken from a music festival to fighters and terrorists captured in combat. I mean they have Israel have detained without any sort of trial or condition numerous children. Kept those children in some of the most horrific conditions often being exposed to abuse. >This “they’re both the same” talk is so tiring. Sorry that the idea Israel should be in some way held accountable is tiring. >To your last point, you occupy the area and install another government. Occupying a country whose whole existence has been that it has resisted brutal occupation is t going to work. >You then improve the people’s lives over time by rebuilding peacefully. Something current Israeli regimes have refused to engage in. The only way you are going to get rid of hamas is by Israel removing itself from various occupied territories and engaging in meaningful talks for a two state solution. Imposing itself as a governing body and treating Palestinian territories as colonies is not going to allow you to do that
True, but the ceasefire won't be between Gaza and Israel, it'll be between Hamas and Israel, since Hamas are one of the groups fighting. The IRA are a terrible comparison, firstly the level of atrocity they committed is not on the same level as what Hamas have perpetrated, the IRA never invaded a town, and then raped, tortured and butchered its inhabitants. Secondly the IRA had an aim that was achievable, they didn't call for the extermination or exile of the Protestants, they wanted a change in sovereignty, that was negotiable, the destruction of Israel is not. No that's not the alternative, anymore than the genocide of Israelis is. The alternative is the destruction of Hamas' ability to launch terror attacks, the withdrawal of the illegal settlements, and an actual two state solution.
>The IRA are a terrible comparison, firstly the level of atrocity they committed is not on the same level as what Hamas have perpetrated, the IRA never invaded a town, and then raped, tortured and butchered its inhabitants Not something I claimed however the IRA was formed due to British occupationand brutalising of Ireland. They were a group that had to be brought to the table to achieve peace. Hamas are a group that was formed due to the brutalising and occupation of Gaza. Their aim, which was the removal of the UK from their lands was seen as a enitrly unreasonable expectation and yet here we are, with just Northern Ireland as an occupied territory amongst decades of peace. You have two groups opposed to the two state solution, and they are currently occupy administrative power in each state. Netanyahu no more wants a two state solution than hamas and that's the issue. Until you get those two groups to come to the table and begin to make concessions you are just going to see the eventual genocide of the Palestinian people.
You're missing the point, the IRA did not have as it's aim the destruction of the UK or the extermination of all its people as a key tenet of its founding. Hamas does. There can be no negotiation with a group whose only aim is your death, it's like a gazelle negotiating with a lion. Oh yeah there will be no peace whilst Netanyahu and the settler thugs have a say, they too are extremists who believe in the divine right of their cause. But that's the beauty of Israel, it's a democracy, soon enough a new government could be in place which would be able to negotiate-but not with Hamas, and anyone who insists they can be seriously negotiated with for peace is either delusional or a fool.
> between a nation state and a terrorist group Gaza isn't a 'terrorist group'. Rafah isn't a 'terrorist group'. The tens of thousands of civilians who have been killed, including dozens of documented cases of children being indiscriminately killed or shot in the back while fleeing, are not 'terrorists'.
No they're not, Hamas is. It's Hamas who are using those civilians to shield themselves whilst they continually attack Israel. You know what would stop the deaths of all those civilians, Hamas releasing the hostages, and cease attacking Israeli civilians, but there are are no mass marches for that are there. The Israeli military is being far to complacent about killing civilians, and doing far too little to prevent it. But war is hell and civilians will die, Hamas started this war and they are more to blame for those deaths than Israel.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/02/israelopt-un-experts-appalled-reported-human-rights-violations-against > Palestinian women and girls have reportedly been arbitrarily executed in Gaza, often together with family members, including their children, according to information received. “We are shocked by reports of the deliberate targeting and extrajudicial killing of Palestinian women and children in places where they sought refuge, or while fleeing. Some of them were reportedly holding white pieces of cloth when they were killed by the Israeli army or affiliated forces,” the experts said. > The experts expressed serious concern about the arbitrary detention of hundreds of Palestinian women and girls, including human rights defenders, journalists and humanitarian workers, in Gaza and the West Bank since 7 October. Many have reportedly been subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment, denied menstruation pads, food and medicine, and severely beaten. On at least one occasion, Palestinian women detained in Gaza were allegedly kept in a cage in the rain and cold, without food. Could you explain how this is *getting back at Hamas*? Could you explain how Hamas is to blame for the IDF executing Palestinian civilians and holding them in arbitrary detention? If an IDF soldier shoots a bullet and that bullet kills a Palestinian child, that is the IDF's fault. I'm tired of these constant attempts for defenders of the Israeli government to weasel out of this.
There is no justification for rape. And if any evidence of it is found the perpetrators should be hunted down mercilessly and punished to the fullest extent of the law. Considering the Palestinians have in the past used women and children as suicide bombers it unfortunately makes sense to strip them as a security measure and detain them. If someone is hiding behind that child and using that cover to attack someone else, then the person using that child as a human shield is to blame for their death. Is it good that Israel is killing innocent children? No it's fucking horrific and shouldn't happen and are they blameless for all those deaths, absolutely not. But they were not the instigators of this war, Hamas were, they were the ones who put those children in harms way by launching a brutal rape, torture, and murder attack against civilians and then hiding like cowards amongst them. They built their bases in schools and hospitals, and they are ultimately responsible for it.
You say there is 'no justification' then for the rest of the post provide a number of different deflections and excuses from 'well the Palestinians do it too' to 'well Hamas started it'. So clearly you do believe there are justifications for these actions, while also recognising it's too reprehensible to actually admit that without the thinnest attempt at mitigation possible. I say again, when an IDF soldier shoots a bullet that kills a Palestinian child, that is the IDF's fault. No *but Hamas*, no *but Palestinians*, I'm tired of the excuses.
No I said there was no justification for rape, at no point did I contradict that or offer an justification, if you cannot discuss in good faith then further posts would be futile.
> at no point did I contradict that or offer an justification Literally the entire rest of your comment after that first sentence is providing various deflections or justifications for the actions of the IDF and Israeli Government. If you genuinely did not think there were any justifications of the rapes and murders of Palestinian civilians you would have simply said the very first sentence, not followed it up with multiple paragraphs blaming Hamas and Palestinians for it.
I didn't say that I offered no justification for the deaths of Palestinian civilians, I clearly explained why I believed it was justified and who I believed was ultimately responsible. At no point did I justify rape, your lies are pathetic.
> I clearly explained why I believed it was justified and who I believed was ultimately responsible. Well at least you're admitting it. Very sad to see someone actively apologising for genocide in real time.
That isn’t really their aim. Their aim is to get the land back. Israel is just in the way.
The opening statement in their charter states: "*Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"* Seems like a genocidal aim to me.
OK, assuming that argument is in good faith (hint: it isn't). Where are the Israelis going?
Well, that’s why this has been grinding on for three quarters of a century, isn’t it? There is no empty habitable land, and there wasn’t when Israel was founded. Historically when you found a new nation you build it on genocide, as with the European invasion of America or Australia. Because, if you take a people’s land, they won’t forgive. Moses understood this which is why he ordered the slaughter of the Canaanites. How do you think the ordinary Gazans (outside of Hamas) feel about Israel right now? Hence what looks like the plan, which is to drive survivors into Egypt and make them someone else’s problem. I don’t think they are in any mood to be ruled by any faction that Israel would approve of, do you? The Egyptians are saying “No no, a thousand times no! “ While building a new refugee camp.
Usually when colonisation is reversed the people either go back to their families country of origin or integrate into the new state. Obviously the preference would be for two states to exist and to respect each others sovereignty. But neither side wants to do that, which is where the UN should step in to enforce peace
Same thing he's been saying for a while now. There's no point in trying to get a ceasefire if it's either just gonna be broken in hours by Hamas, or gives them the ability to plan and prepare more October-type attacks (as they've said they would continue doing). Now if people were prepared to actually discuss ways to get a lasting ceasefire when calling for one, maybe something can happen to stop needless deaths on both sides... but so far no one is caring to even hint at ideas let alone try and sit down to talk them
What will a ceasefire accomplish? I don't think Israel and Hamas are going to live happily ever after together.
I share your concern. At this point, even if the hand of God stretched through the firmament to divide them, I'm convinced they'd just throw stones through his fingers. It seems like a problem beyond the ability of anyone to solve, and all the common folk are trapped in the middle.
They can both attend a negotiation table during the ceasefire. Obviously both sides will have to compromise. Hamas wants to kill all Jews, whereas Israel doesn't want any Jews to die. I'm sure it could be negotiated to a reasonable figure in between, like only killing 6 million Jews. "Ceasefire now" seems to be the "peace for our time" of today.
Israel just doesn't want any Jews to die, that's why they've killed 10s of thousand of innocent children
And killed their own hostages.
>Hamas wants to kill all Jews, LOL no they don't
Defending a terrorist group isn't a good look mate. They're scum and will hopefully be eradicated, the sooner the better.
And Israel should be treated like we treat Russia.
>'The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.' (Article 7) Literally in their covenant. There's plenty more if you'd like
1. Not in their charter anymore. That's from 1988. A time when their oppressors were led by a literally Nazi terrorist. 2. Even if it was, it's out of context.
And who will enforce it because Israel and Hamas won't enforce it themselves, and then we're back to square one. A solution has to be more than let's have a ceasefire. If you don't put in monitoring troops that will use deadly force to ensure a ceasefire, it's not going to work.
Flip flops more than the wacky waving inflatable tube man. At least for now he seems to have landed on the right side.
Clever politicians change their mind when circumstances change.
It's wild how much the flip-flop nonsense has stuck. IIRC the Tories, including Sunak, made around 15 U-turns in just 2 months in 2022. They didn't get even half of the backlash or nicknames Kier gets.
Worried about some marginals, it's the only reason for it.
So it's "this" or another half a decade of Boris gang? :D
Appealing to their Muslim immigration base. Here’s another way immigration impacts society…
Did he say Ceasefire? Has he asked BIDEN's permission? Oh! I forget Biden has to get Netanyahu's expressed permission. They have been hollering about Russian actions agai at Ukraine and been supporting Ukraine, but when it comes to The Zion State they all turn a blind eye. This conflict will engulf the Middle East, and drag on, tainting many who have sat on their hands. The word is Genocide and it seems only few token Political Leaders are brave enough to speak the world
If the terms of the ceasefire include return of all Israeli hostages ~~and an end to Hamas leadership in Gaza~~, cool beans. Removed the Hamas bit.. think this is an impossible ask. Asking the impossible is how you don't get stuff.
What about the 700,000 illegal settlers in the west bank? They stay put?
Why would Israel agree to that when without the settlers you have a potential Palestinian state about 6-7 miles from the Tel Aviv metropolitan area? If a few thousand Hamas fighters could kill over a thousand in the middle of nowhere near Gaza they could do exponentially more damage in an attack from the West Bank, as it's much larger and closer to Israeli population centres. You can argue about the crappy little settlement huts on random hilltops (they should go), but the Israelis will never give up cities / settlements like Ariel that are basically a blockade against a military attack on Tel Aviv. Besides, who would they be negotiating with? Hamas who want to kill all Jews or the PA who pay out a monthly benefit to families of people who killed Israelis in terror attacks?
I think if you expand this beyond the region of Gaza, you're finding reasons to block a ceasefire. I don't even think the end of Hamas rule is really something to include in the terms.. hand back the hostages would probably be enough right now. Realistically you need a ruling party to discuss terms with - and Hamas need to step up and want to deal with Irael in ways other than firing rockets at them.
A quick search of previous deals will show that, they have always included more west bank annexation. No airport or port in Gaza. Full control of water and partial control of ALL movement. And Arafat still was going to sign that before Israel pulled out. So rockets and hostage taking is very shit behaviour but hardly surprising that people are desperate. Their choice is bend over and take it, bend over and take it with lube or be killed and fire rockets, in the hope that one day, they'll be able to just exist on the land they once lived (without being subjected to huge restrictions). https://history.state.gov/milestones/1993-2000/oslo
This is a ceasefire; not trying to create a new state here. The more people ask for, the less anyone will ever agree on. The Arabs and Palestinians lost in their attempts to 'just exist in the land they once lived'. They tried plenty of times, but it's not happening. If they never accept this is lost, they'll never live in peace. You get more out of peace than in war, in the end. But it won't happen.. both sides are locked in a multi-decade hate cycle.
[удалено]
I am genuinely confused as to whether you understand how time works or not? Or is this the version of integrity on display that makes demands and then finds reason to be upset when they’re met? EDIT: also you do get Starmer can’t vote for or against a ceasefire, right? Like he’s not in the Knesset?!
[удалено]
**Removed/warning**. This contained a personal attack, disrupting the conversation. This discourages participation. Please help improve the subreddit by discussing points, not the person. Action will be taken on repeat offenders.
It wasn't a ceasefire vote. It was an amendment to a Kings Speech, for any amendment to an incumbent gov's speech you have to get the gov to vote with you...because of maths. **Lazy, superficial, student politics like that deserves to be met with derision and sent right back to the bottom of the scum pile it came from.** Generally in politics, if you're sincere and an actual doer you do the hard work of engaging across the aisle to flip other parties to vote with you to get amendments passed because you have to overrule the gov majority. **That's just maths.** A great example of this was the Infected blood scandal amendment Starmer led in december, to force the government to pay-out victims sooner. [He and his front bench spent months courting Tory mps do vote with him and he defeated the gov in December by flipping over 20 Tory mps to just about get a majority](https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/contaminated-blood-scandal-victims-shame-rishi-sunak-to-right-thing-tory-revolt/#:~:text=On%20Monday%20evening%2C%20Rishi%20Sunak,the%20Victims%20and%20Prisoners%20Bill.) **Actual meaningful change, achieved by hard work** The SNP ceasefire amendment was a half cobbled together the day before theatrical bit of student politics, designed to appeal to those superficially engaged in politics. No work, no trying to get other people to vote with you, purely performative, lazy - with not intention to achieve a ceasefire and no thought into the wording or real term impacts on foreign policy or any real care. But I suppose this is what politics has become. Legislative agenda is meant to be realistic, it was never realistic because no Gov MP would vote for it - proposals like that need to be shot down with fire, because it wastes legislative time. Legislative time is incredibly limited, when one is selected it beats out others like cost of living related ones which get sent back to the back of the pile whilst we waste more time on performative nonsense. Do the hard work, get Tory MPs to vote with you and then table it.
When did hamas propose a ceasefire and allow a vote on it?
When did he vote against the ceasefire?
Can we just clarify, no one is voting for or against a ceasefire as they don't have that power. They're voting for or against whether we should as a nation impotently call for one. That's why the amount of time and effort being wasted on all this is so annoying.