I understand that. In my personal example, I always vote Labour as I am a lefty. However with them also taking the position to not call for a ceasefire and in fact advocate for collective punishment of civilians I will not vote for them. The Whatsapp groups I am in will also not vote for them now with Keir in charge. Everyone has a redline and for some people that line was crossed here. But you are right, most people wouldn't factor foreign policy in their voting.
Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
A set of surveys were conducted in Gaza, finalised on the 6th October 2023. The surveys showed majority of Gazans had grown weary of Hamas and had also lost faith in the PA.
44% said they had no trust in Hamas whilst 29% said they had very little trust in Hamas.
44% said they had no trust in Hamas whilst 29% said they had very little trust in Hamas.
I don’t think your post was off the mark at all, and I should have added that I didn’t actually watch the Abbey Martin video, so can’t really comment on the intent of those using “the Arabs” in those particular cases.
There’s much I could add about my own experiences of living in Israel in the past, but given that the discussion has moved on and been overtaken by tonight’s news, it’s probably best left for another time.
Source please? Looks like an interesting read
Apologies for not replying to you all lately. Needed to take a few days to step back as I felt it was all getting very personal and hateful. @africanspur I always love reading your posts. Very thoughtful balanced and insightful. I'll try to get round to replying eventually.
Finding it rather difficult to weave the nuanced line between Israels right to defend itself and the unspeakable casualties in Gaza. Also in being able to explain that line to others coherently. And you end up feeling attacked from all sides. Unpleasant emails/messages from the IDF for not coming, and the feeling that half the Muslim world feel that Israel is a legitimate target to wipe out, and that isn't shared by the vast majority of Jews, and that any support for the Israeli states makes you personally a valid target of hatred. I feel a strong undercurrent of what I consider antisemitism from some posters, and still hold my main positions on the subject. Seems if you are an Israeli/Jew (and like it or not, most jews want this, despite the gaslighting) who wants Israel to exist and defend itself, but not to expand and kill all the arabs, you're a target on all sides.
I appreciate those who try to thread a similar position to me like @Amir and possibly a few others. It also feels like we're homeless politically somewhat now. (perhaps less in Israel itself)
Finding it rather difficult to weave the nuanced line between Israels right to defend itself and the unspeakable casualties in Gaza. Also in being able to explain that line to others coherently. And you end up feeling attacked from all sides. Unpleasant emails/messages from the IDF for not coming, and the feeling that half the Muslim world feel that Israel is a legitimate target to wipe out, and that isn't shared by the vast majority of Jews, and that any support for the Israeli states makes you personally a valid target of hatred. I feel a strong undercurrent of what I consider antisemitism from some posters, and still hold my main positions on the subject. Seems if you are an Israeli/Jew (and like it or not, most jews want this, despite the gaslighting) who wants Israel to exist and defend itself, but not to expand and kill all the arabs, you're a target on all sides.
I appreciate those who try to thread a similar position to me like @Amir and possibly a few others. It also feels like we're homeless politically somewhat now. (perhaps less in Israel itself)
Who is this?
What would you do if Israel did expand and killed the Arabs?
The Saudis will no doubt care more about their own brand and staying in the good graces of the US than putting a lot of political capital into the Palestinian issue.
What can I do? I'd obviously be disgusted like I am with their actions in the west bank, and I wouldn't fight for them unless it was truly existential (I wont anyway so its the same) but I can't exactly call up Ben Gvir and explain to him how to jump off a building. I'd possibly post on bluesky about how much I hated it, and how my country had been turned evil.
I can do the same as just about anybody else regarding any atrocity in the world, absolutely nothing.
On 9 August 2023, hundreds of Israeli and American academics published a statement claiming that the ultimate purpose of the judicial overhaul was to "annex more land, and ethnically cleanse all territories under Israeli rule of their Palestinian population".
Seeing some videos on Twitter about IDF bombing a camp in Jabalya (sp?) and I can’t but think about the loss of human lives. I’m wondering if this relentless attack is going to create even further resentment towards Israel and the US among the more moderates in this world.
Has Netanyahu lost it for Israel?
Has Netanyahu lost it for Israel?
They want a security agreement with the US in exchange, that Houthi rocket really made them shit their pants. They are so inept, all they have is money.
I doubt that very much.
If Saudi and other countries still want to normalise relations, there is only one way this ends.
Its an article in the Financial Times about how Hamas attacks and is definitely fairly interesting.
https://www.ft.com/content/913d366e-0ace-4463-a004-d293aa49c673
It'll be behind a paywall so you might not be able to read it.
I doubt the Saudis are scared of the Houthis. MBS only cares about his project, which now includes the World Cup, so the Saudis won’t be rocking the boat anytime soon.
The United Kingdom’s national funding agency today suspended operations of its newly formed diversity advisory panel “with immediate effect” after science minister Michelle Donelan expressed “disgust and outrage” that members of the panel had publicly posted opinions about the Israel-Hamas conflict that she viewed as “extremist.”
https://www.science.org/content/art...ity-panel-following-pressure-science-minister
Michelle Donelan championed legislation promoting academic freedom last year
For context:
The posts that originally drew Donelan’s ire are no longer publicly available because both researchers subsequently set their X accounts to private. But according to Donelan’s letter, University College London social scientist Kamna Patel “amplified” a post that condemned violence on both sides of the conflict, but “[made] reference to Israel’s ‘genocide and apartheid.’” Public bodies “cannot be seen to take political positions or promote extremist ideologies,” Donelan wrote.
In the second post, which has been seen by Science, Heriot-Watt University gender studies professor Kate Sang posted a link to a news story in The Guardian with the headline “Suella Braverman urges police to crack down on Hamas support in UK.” Sang added the comment: “This is disturbing.” Donelan writes that “Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organization. It is completely unacceptable for anyone to be expressing sympathy or support for them.” Sang and Patel did not respond to requests for comment.
https://www.science.org/content/art...ity-panel-following-pressure-science-minister
Michelle Donelan championed legislation promoting academic freedom last year
For context:
The posts that originally drew Donelan’s ire are no longer publicly available because both researchers subsequently set their X accounts to private. But according to Donelan’s letter, University College London social scientist Kamna Patel “amplified” a post that condemned violence on both sides of the conflict, but “[made] reference to Israel’s ‘genocide and apartheid.’” Public bodies “cannot be seen to take political positions or promote extremist ideologies,” Donelan wrote.
In the second post, which has been seen by Science, Heriot-Watt University gender studies professor Kate Sang posted a link to a news story in The Guardian with the headline “Suella Braverman urges police to crack down on Hamas support in UK.” Sang added the comment: “This is disturbing.” Donelan writes that “Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organization. It is completely unacceptable for anyone to be expressing sympathy or support for them.” Sang and Patel did not respond to requests for comment.
Do these subtitles really match what these guys are saying? I assume they are speaking Hebrew?
If there is one way to reach Hamas directly in those tunnels without actually dropping bombs on the ground (those that kill most civilians right now), it would be by drilling a tunnel with a TBM to thread water from the Mediterranean and towards that network sitting 40 meters below sea level. Ideally, the process should flood the entire tunnel network with enough sea water to trap the majority of Hamas fighters in there. The only problem with that approach is that we don't know how stable/unstable the ground would be in the aftermath. Only engineers and geologists can answer that question for me.
About the bombing on the refugee camp... what the feck are the IDF even thinking? That is shockingly pathetic.
Equally pathetic by Egypt.
This is from an israeli documentary film… I believe these to be the official subtitles.
No they haven’t… but the president threatened it and is going further tonight:
“I have decided to call our ambassador in Israel for consultation. If Israel does not stop the massacre of the Palestinian people we cannot be there.”
Wikipedia article about the film: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantura_massacre#Subsequent_developments
The "Katz controversy" section of the same article is interesting, that student Katz has apparently had mental issues and no longer works after his thesis was rejected. (I got that from some youtube interview of Illan Pappe, an Israeli historian in Britain who supported that student)
I don’t agree. In the short term, accepting refugees makes sense. However, preventing them from entering Egypt is good in the long term for the Palestinians. If they leave, there’s no coming back.
It’s from Financial Times -
https://www.ft.com/content/913d366e-0ace-4463-a004-d293aa49c673
And yep really interesting read. Basically Hamas have made Gaza into a mini Vietnam and the tactics they will use are going to be similar to the Vietcong.
Israel has not lost anything. More countries will rush to do trade with Israel.
Oh he really is. That missile that hit so close when they were hosting the F1 really shook him up. It would have been an absolute disaster for his vanity projects if it actually hit the race track. But it's not just the Houthis it's also the various Iranian proxy militias which he's had little success in curbing in the region either.
He won't be normalising for nothing, fully fledged American security and investment into his projects will be the price.
Last edited:
Best guess I've seen so far is get a few hostages, trade them for prisoners/hostages, and possibly more labor permits (they've been trading for those, though not sure that would have been part of their predictions fort his deal) and maybe the port of Gaza opened somewhat? Maybe someone can link to a good article on this, I've seen more smattering of comments.
The West Bank is becoming more and more Israeli via settlements and Gaza is a permanent prison, so if you're in charge of Gaza, you can either say "we need to scare the Israelis into concessions, or we need to cut our losses and take any deal we can get." Is there a deal on the table? Not really. I guess a good enough offer, the Israelis would be pressured to take, but the people of Gaza and the West Bank wouldn't support it or abide by it. They'd simply start supporting and joining other groups. They don't have real sovereignty.
I'm not sure how long Israel will have that either. If Gantz replaces Netanyahu as the polls suggest, and he has the coalition and desire to stop the settlements and say open up the port of Gaza with inspections done by the U.S or whoever, how long until the settlers/religious Zionists turn to insurrection? Or another Intifida starts? I'm probably guilty of overreacting to the events in a long conflict that have occurred during my early adult life, but I think the 2 state solution is probably dead, and I'm not sure how the hell a 1 state solution would even work. I've met a few Palestinians, but I'm a Jew who's been to Israel and follows Israeli politics and the demographic trends are moving further away from peace, and the appetite for peace just isn't there. There may be an appetite there to end the war if it goes on too long, but that's different than ending the settlement expansion or making peace.
The attack was horrible, but of course there's a strategic reason behind it, just like there is for the Israeli mass bombing campaign. There's almost always a strategic reason when it's not just a mob of people or a lone attacker, and even then there's often sort of one those too, unless they're non-political.
Looking at some poll results from the Israel Democracy Institute:
To what extent do you think that Israel should take into consideration the suffering of the civilian Palestinian population in Gaza when planning the next phases of fighting there?
Not at all: Jews 47.5 Arabs 1.2
Not so much: Jews 35.9 Arabs 4.5
Quite a lot: Jews 7.7 Arabs 21.2
Very much: Jews 5.2 Arabs 62.1
Don't know: Jews 3.7 Arabs 11.0
Do you agree or disagree that when undertaking military operations, the IDF should ensure that it is not breaking international laws and rules of war?
Strongly agree: Jews 14.3 Arabs: 71.2
Somewhat agree: Jews 33.6 Arabs 11.4
Somewhat disagree: Jews 26.6 Arabs 3.8
Strongly disagree: Jews 19.2 Arabs 1.1
Don't know: Jews 6.5 Arabs 12.5
Only 12.9% of Jews in Israel in high support of "considering the suffering of the civilian Palestinian population." 47.5% believes they should not be considered at all.
A larger percentage of Jews in Israel strongly support breaking international laws and rules of war (19.2%) than upholding them (14.3%).
To what extent do you think that Israel should take into consideration the suffering of the civilian Palestinian population in Gaza when planning the next phases of fighting there?
Not at all: Jews 47.5 Arabs 1.2
Not so much: Jews 35.9 Arabs 4.5
Quite a lot: Jews 7.7 Arabs 21.2
Very much: Jews 5.2 Arabs 62.1
Don't know: Jews 3.7 Arabs 11.0
Do you agree or disagree that when undertaking military operations, the IDF should ensure that it is not breaking international laws and rules of war?
Strongly agree: Jews 14.3 Arabs: 71.2
Somewhat agree: Jews 33.6 Arabs 11.4
Somewhat disagree: Jews 26.6 Arabs 3.8
Strongly disagree: Jews 19.2 Arabs 1.1
Don't know: Jews 6.5 Arabs 12.5
Only 12.9% of Jews in Israel in high support of "considering the suffering of the civilian Palestinian population." 47.5% believes they should not be considered at all.
A larger percentage of Jews in Israel strongly support breaking international laws and rules of war (19.2%) than upholding them (14.3%).
This. Already seen it with the Norwegian government. In general I feel the population has been more pro-Palestine than Israel for a while, but the shift in the government's stance has now been very visible also. After October 7th every politician focused on having Hamas listed as a terrorist group (Norway never designated them as such before) and the whole "I stand with Israel" charade was very visible. Gradually this has started to change after Israel racked up one war crime after the other, so far culminating in Norway deciding to break away from the its allies and vote for the UN resolution calling for a ceasefire and allowing humanitarian aid as the only Nordic country to do so, with the new foreign minister also publicly calling out "our friend" Israel for the attack on Gaza and also saying that Israel is slowly degrading any support they have built up over the years. Hopefully more will follow suit.
Obviously small steps in a time where much more is needed, but at the same time in the cowardly world of geopolitics still significant developments.
The more I learn about Churchill, the less I want to know. I am wondering if that was the general view around the time and Churchill's views are not out of the ordinary.
Is this different to before 7th Oct?
As a small data point on this, a so-called 'citizen's initiative' in Denmark just reached the required 50,000 signatures, which means that parliament has to at least consider it. The headline for the initiative reads: "Denmark must condemn Israeli warcrimes, increase humanitarian aid for Palestine and work towards a political solution to the conflict".
It's a relatively minor thing, I know, but it does show that the entire population doesn't agree with what our politicians are saying.
Hard to say. The same question wouldn't be asked each time.
In 2020, this question was asked:
"The chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court in The Hague has announced that there is a basis to open an investigation against Israel on suspicion of committing war crimes in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip. Some claim that Israel should not cooperate with this investigation since it will be biased against it from the start, and some claim that in order to prove such crimes were not committed and to bolster Israel’s international status, it should cooperate with the investigation. With which position do you agree more?”
55% of Jews said Israel should not cooperate; 29% of Jews said it should.
In 2014, Israelis were asked about the amount of firepower used in Operation Protective Edge.
48% of Jews said the amount used was appropriate and 45% said the amount was too little. 6% thought too much firepower was used. The numbers for Arabs were 62% too much, 10% too little, 3% the appropriate amount.
Between 1000-1500 civilians died in Operation Protective Edge.