They should always try to preserve civilian life. But that is of course not always going to happen
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
They should always try to preserve civilian life. But that is of course not always going to happen
The nutjobs i was referring to are right wing Israelis - like settlers and the like, not members of their armed forces who have to adhere to a certain set of guidelines.
So you don't have an opinion on this specific late attack? Was the cost (killed kids and families) worth it to kill these 3 militants?
Their guidelines seem to include murdering civilians on a regular basis. Not good enough.
Both sides aren't culpable in this one. It's on Israel. They absolutely have assets on the ground; the target was even painted in this situation. If you look at the photos, it took out one specific floor. Somebody made the decision (politically/in the IDF) that these civilians lives weren't worth the risk of the soldiers lives/intelligence loss/potential escape of targets.
The pertinent questions to me: Does the strike meet the standard of urgency and importance where those civilians were discounted? And was it so dangerous that they couldn't try to take them out with ground troops where potential impact on civilians was far lower?
You could just as easily say that if Palestinians don't fight back then they'll also cease to exist.
Or.....members of the current government for instance?
So it would seem. It after all Netanyahu we're talking about here.
Here is one of the ministers. Explaining why they killed the children. Apparently an annoying fly was hiding behind them. Or maybe the children themselves were the flies. Whatever…
Last edited:
The ridiculous thing in this forum is that same people are selling the same story over and over again. It is Palestinians who should accept their fate, remain silent and slowly dissapear. Any sort of agression and dissent from them, and they can be killed, they asked for it.
Yea it’s crazy. The forum will ban people if they said that Ukrainians should happily accept their children being killed or they should accept being invaded. But for some reason it’s fine to say about the Palestinians.
The conflicts are entirely different. If Israel treated the Palestinians like Russia do the Ukrainians, it would have been over long ago. And the Palestinians still lob far more missiles into and kill far more Israelis than the Ukrainians do Russians.
Yes, but he won't be enjoying this for much longer.
it's the most obvious "let's start a war to silence protests against me" there's probably ever been in Israel.
But you can be certain that a ceasefire will be in place in the next couple of days, a week tops (international pressure will do its thing if nothing else).
I hope as few people as possible lose their lives in the meantime.
And the masses will keep protesting outside his home in Caesarea/Jerusalem infinitely,
until this abhorrent "judicial revolution" gets crushed.
That our lives here will keep on being crap (and imagine how much worse the Palestinians are having it) after the revolution is done with,
Or that whoever replaces Bibi will probably won't make that much of a difference either way,
is a different story.
Last edited:
Aren't Ukrainians already bombing Russia? Was there any involvement in them killing that Russian influencer at the cafe?
Whilst that number includes members of terrorist organizations/civilians killed by PIJ missiles, there are reports today of the current Israeli government advancing with judicial reforms without negotiation.
Fecking depressing shite everywhere you look.
Speaking again on purely a military tactics aspect, Israel has proven that an avowed tactic of theirs to eliminate top tier terrorists is to target them while in their homeland, especially when a state of armed conflict is occurring. It's basically a fact. Israel isn't going to stop anytime soon, if ever. This is a pipe dream.
Collateral damage will occur unfortunately & will continue to occur when leadership is amongst the populace. The only way to stop it is to keep the two apart. The blame for continuing to allow such collateral damage to happen is on both sides here, there's no way around that. Israel doesn't care nor does the upper element of the PIL leadership. Someone mentioned propaganda earlier, the PIL actions by bringing the populace into a dangerous situation smacks of that.
One side has to give & its disappointing that neither side appears to be willing to do so.
There's obviously no comparison between the two conflicts, and one suspects the reason Ukraine keeps getting brought up is out of a desperate need for western PR on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which is being completely eliminated from news cycles because of Ukraine.
Last edited:
It is complicated somewhat by Iran backing terrorist groups in Palestine as well as supporting Russia. Ukraine are in turn supportive of Israel (refused to acknowledge a Nakba Summit at the UN yesterday). Although the power dynamics are wholly reversed, ideologically there is more aligned currently between Palestine and Russia than Ukraine.
I've seen some awful takes in this thread but this is definitely up there with them. What a crock of shite.
Does Iran provide military aid to terrorist organizations in Gaza? Yes
Has that same regime supported Russia in their war against Ukraine? Yes
Does Ukraine support Israel on the international stage (ie yesterday at the UN)? Yes
Nothing stated here is false.
Other than the power dynamics, their is more ideological unity between Ukraine and Israel than Palestine, and the world order Russia is purporting is more aligned with the political aims of Palestinian political groups. This is hardly a hot take.
Edit - I will spell out even clearer than in my initial point and say I'm speaking more from political/international relations view point rather than referencing the lived experiences of civilians.
Last edited:
There is no ideological 'unity' between Palestine and Russia. You're adding 2 with 2 and making 5. It's a complete misrepresentation of the reality.
Using your logic, you could say that Turkiye has also given military aid to Palestine...as well as giving military aid to Ukraine. So using your (ill)logic, you could make an (incorrect) assumption that there is ideological unity between Ukraine and Palestine.
So yea, it's an awful take, and shows a lack of understanding.
The reference to Ukraine was fighting off a foreign occupying invader - something that Palestinians have literally lived through.
Does USA support Saudi in their bombing of Yemen? Yes
Has the USA supported Ukraine? Yes
Does Saudi support Ukraine on the international stage? Yes
Nothing stated here is false.
So Ukraine and Saudi are ideologically alike?
Well, they're aligned to an extent, yeah - although Saudi Arabia are somewhat of an outlier in the region due to the breadth of their international relations.
Oh come off it - both Ukraine and Israel are/have been totally reliant on the support of the West (UK and US in particularly). Yesterday, Abbas laid blame on both the UK and the US for their role in the formation of the state of Israel.
The world orders that both Ukraine and Israel are dependent on for their existence are in opposition to the ones advocate by political leaders in Palestine.
I am certainly not supporting Israeli expansion projects nor looking to align myself in any way shape or form with their current - and dangerous - government, but I don't think it's as clear from a political or ideological standpoint where each sit in contrast to other global conflicts. Again, not referencing the lived civilian experiences, which are of course the most important issue in all of this, and which deserves real and long-term attention.
What vote are you talking about?
I was under the impression Ukraine usually abstains or avoids taking part in those votes concerning Israel/Palestine.
They refused to take part/recognize the first UN Nakba Day event yesterday
Or is it just another low intensity conflict barely worthy of attention and the news cycle. There are more atrocities on muslims daily than in Israel around the world, and there's no news mostly because its not committed by Jews/Israel. (And also because it's a great stick to beat the US/West with.) Trying to extricate Israel-Palestine discussion from antisemitism [and somewhat to anti-westernism] is impossible, even on a forum like this due to deep rooted innate hate for both Israel and Jews who refuse to be dominated in mind. (A 'good jew' is one who is left wing, supports Palestinians, hates Israel, yadayada. It's what a 'good black' was 100 years ago in the USA or a 'good woman' was at various points in history.)
This isn't whataboutism; what goes in in Israel and the lives of the Palestinians are awful. Just a comment on how it's framed around the world.
And people [in the west generally] have absolutely no idea the hate Ukrainians have for Russians. Ukrainians may be held up as paragons of virtue in our news, but they are damaged as hell. (as anybody from that kind of conflict is) They'd easily kill 10 Russian kids/civilians to take out a vatnik if they could. And then have a party.
ps. Just ranting really.
I’d agree that in terms of casualties, it is a relatively low-intensity conflict when measured against some of the other regional wars. And also that mutual hatred and extreme violence amounting to war crimes and ethnic cleansing tend to be features of most analogous conflicts. History has shown that the world can live with states founded on such a basis, or engaged in such conflicts.
But the occupation of the West Bank and the status of Gaza are really quite unique, and would merit the world’s attention regardless of the identity of the occupier (although I’d agree the antisemitism factor does explain some of the unique framing in certain contexts). This is the case whether you conceive of them as a feature of a conflict between two rival national movements or as a feature of Israeli ethnocracy/apartheid. In other analogous military occupations, the occupier has either annexed the territory in question and extended citizenship to all its inhabitants (e.g. Morocco in Western Sahara, China in Tibet, some would argue India in Kashmir), or expelled the undesirable population in the midst of war and declared independence (e.g. North Cyprus, or going further back, Israel in 1948, Turkey in 1919-22). I really can’t think of anything to compare to Israel’s refusal to either annex the territory or end the occupation, and by extension Israel’s refusal to declare its borders. Hence the growing perception that this is less a national conflict than a civil rights struggle, and thus worthy of particular attention.
Last edited:
I feel this perception is horribly and dangerously wrong. Like Benny Morris, I'd argue that Israel is fighting a rising tide that cannot persist indefinitely and it's absolutely existential for them. If you read the last page here (the whole article and even his books are worth it) it's fairly similar to my opinion. I've read a lot of him, and probably followed a similar ideological route myself. I don't see how one can honestly frame this as civil rights.
Perhaps Jabotinsky was right, Jews should have evacuated to Madagascar or Alberta in 1936.... (An interesting man, one who was attributed to wiping out Palestinians entirely, yet in other words advocated giving them equal rights in a Jewish/Palestinian Zionist state)
And yet its not existential for the Palestinians?? Perhaps we should arm the Palestinians, let them become the occupiers and let the Israelis live in a massive refugee camp. Then they could humbly not challenge Palestinian rights to exist and accept the apartheid status quo....
Evidently not. They've been there since the 1948 war and still exist there.
Last edited:
I'm incredibly confused by your first sentence, strongly dismissing what 2cents said and then linking a post of an author and asking us to read a page where he very explicitly states that the situation where they rule an occupied people that has no rights cannot persist in the 21st century, in the modern world. That is the language of civil rights movements.
I do not know what the solution is anymore. People step around it but the options are essentially ethnic cleansing (which is now seemingly no longer spoken about in hushed tones in Israeli politics), a civil rights movement or perpetual blockade and occupation. People talk about Palestinian refusal to acknowledge Israel's right to exist without acknowledging that the PM does not and has never acknowledged the possibility of a 2 state solution and that MKs and ministers have openly discussed expelling Palestinians....if they acknowledge the existence of such a people in the first place.
My position is that it's a national conflict, not a civil rights one, and that it is existential for Israel. The author I linked is very balanced [in my opinion] and there is no doubt in my opinion that the situation is untenable long term. If Palestinians control, Jews will be persecuted, massacred, and need to disperse. Whereas a civil rights issue would be about the rights and equality of a people within a nation which they and the oppressors both belong to and want to see prosper, not the destruction of the nation. Palestinians don't want rights within Israel; they want to takeover the state. (Civil rights was never about taking over the USA and dominating whites.) Either Israel moves (and thats my personal preference, though it'd never happen in a million years; move to Alberta or something) or there will be another massacre and a loss of any sense of self determination.
Morris said:
This is why for me, and for many others, the only solution is two states where the Palestinians are somewhat happy and Israel remains strong. And this is very complicated in itself. As to your bolded, you're 100% correct in my opinion. (notwithstanding my solution above.) There's no real answers, and a lot of the players on both sides won't even acknowledge the issues. The PM has often talked about a two state solution by the way, though never consistently, earnestly or honestly in my opinion. It's always about angles for him.
I do disagree with Morris in a sense, because nuclear weapons make things so damned unpredictable. But I am also pessimistic on the long term situation because there are strong forces in play and none seem self correcting. The best answers are also the least desirable.
Yes I appreciate that it is your position. My point (and 2cents' before that) is that what makes this particular conflict unique (and what makes some of the hiding behind anti-semitism inappropriate) is the prolonged nature and status of the subjugated peoples. As he said, in most such conflicts, the weaker side is either subsumed and given citizenship or ethnically cleansed for good. This literally decades long limbo of a lack of rights, whereby the Israelis essentially control almost every aspect of Palestinian lives in reality, without those individuals having any say whatsoever, essentially makes it a civil issue.
Palestinians would not have control, it would be roughly equal numbers. Regardless, I feel uncomfortable with the notion that Palestinians are such savages that if they were anything other than a downtrodden group, they would be rampaging through Jewish neighbourhoods.
I disagree with Morris as well. Because my honest opinion is that at some point, if the situation does become so existential for Israel, they will simply and sadly ethnically cleanse Palestinians and remove them (or the overwhelming majority) from west of the Jordan river, deal with the immediate fallout and carry on. Even that I assume will bring about support in one way or another from people.
The PM has talked about two states in the same way that I talk about one state. Its what I would prefer but I would prefer a genuine secular, multi-ethnic state. That is not the current situation on the ground and I understand and appreciate that. He 'supports' the 2 state solution, while also saying that he doesn't when its politically expedient, while building ever more settlements, while saying the Israelis would control security over the entire land, while having this as the current coalition government's policy guideline etc etc:
Thousands of Israeli nationalists have marched into the Muslim quarter of Jerusalem's Old City, with violence directed at media covering the event.
The flag parade is part of Israel's Jerusalem Day, marking its capture of the east of the city in the 1967 war.
A group of marchers threw stones, sticks and bottles at Palestinian and foreign journalists at the Damascus Gate entrance.
They also cheered and chanted racist slogans, including "Death to Arabs".
Far-right Israeli cabinet ministers joined the procession. One of them, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, declared: "Jerusalem is ours for ever."
Jerusalem: Journalists attacked as Israeli nationalists march in Old City - BBC News
Lovely bunch of people these Israelis.
The flag parade is part of Israel's Jerusalem Day, marking its capture of the east of the city in the 1967 war.
A group of marchers threw stones, sticks and bottles at Palestinian and foreign journalists at the Damascus Gate entrance.
They also cheered and chanted racist slogans, including "Death to Arabs".
Far-right Israeli cabinet ministers joined the procession. One of them, National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir, declared: "Jerusalem is ours for ever."
Jerusalem: Journalists attacked as Israeli nationalists march in Old City - BBC News
Lovely bunch of people these Israelis.
Is this Hamas terrorism at it again, Raoul/BBC/etc?
Those pesky Palestinians. Why can't people call for their death and they just...you know...take it!
Apparently not when it's about Palestinians.
They're fair game, not worth the fuss, and tough luck for anyone who was in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm also seeing amazing mental gymnastics from some posters to absolve Israel for literally anything they do and perpetuate the myth that somehow Palestinians are always the ones who start it, Israel only retaliating. As if the formers got nothing else to do other than waking up in the morning and firing some rockets for shit and giggles.
Edit: deleted a wrong statement.
Last edited:
Any criticism of Israel, and someone will probably call you anti-semitic.