Israel - Palestine Discussion | Post Respectfully | Discuss more, tweet less

Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...

There’s some survivor testimony that mentions something similar in the kibbutz as well - that Hamas took hostages and the IDF would rather blow up the whole house, hostage, Hamas and all rather than try and get their people out. I think I posted it a while back (Mondoweiss link).
 
glazed said:
Presumably is doing a lot of work there. Why were his wife, children and siblings there? Or maybe they were all in South Gaza. You have no idea. It's all just indiscriminate fodder for your echo chamber as the blood libels and veiled religious themes start to pick up pace on this increasingly toxic thread.
Click to expand...

This takes some doing, but your previous two pages of posts leading to this point may be the weirdest thing I’ve seen on Redcafe.

EDIT: I just caught up on the following pages… wild. You outdid yourself
 
Last edited:
That_Bloke said:
I wish that people would stop posting crap coming from more than dubious sources.

On another topic I recently watched a recent video of Norman Finkelstein, who was asked about the Hamas massacre on 10/7 and the motivations behind it, comparing it to Nat Turner's rebellion in 1831 which then inspired John Brown's insurrection about 30 years later (the mentioned part starts at roughly 48:00). Both being extremely controversial personalities as well as religious fanatics which he also recognizes. He sees both of them as a link in a chain, a bloody one, just like Hamas is in the Israel-Palestine conflict.

What's your take on it?
Click to expand...

I'm sure if you went back to 1833's version of Red Cafe you'd have a good amount of people calling Nat Turner an irrational terrorist, and just pleading for "peace" (a peace where millions of people were enslaved, sold, bought, brutalized, exploited, raped, killed...)
 
VivaObertan said:
This takes some doing, but your previous two pages of posts leading to this point may be the weirdest thing I’ve seen on Redcafe.

EDIT: I just caught up on the following pages… wild. You outdid yourself
Click to expand...

Sure. Feel free to address my specific points and questions since you are so sure of your opinion.
 
adexkola said:
Bit of burying the lede in that tweet so I'll spit it out: Israel's strategy to eliminate Hamas isn't working.
Click to expand...

It obviously is working given that they already control a large swath of northern Gaza in just a few weeks on the ground.
 
Sweet Square said:
Click to expand...



I reported this a week or so ago. My source was a friend of a friend inside Gaza. Also was something mentioned by one of the rave organisers and a woman survivor called Yasmin Porat (I think I wrote).

I was told off for inventing things.
 
Raoul said:
It obviously is working given that they already control a large swath of northern Gaza in just a few weeks on the ground.
Click to expand...


I'm hearing that over 2k IDF soldier have been killed since the attack on Gaza. Not confirmed by official media type sources just word of mouth from those inside who have links with people I know.

Any news on Israeli casualties??
 
80 confirmed dead after the bombing of the UN refugee camp. Is there a secret Hamas base beneath that too?
 
adexkola said:
Bit of burying the lede in that tweet so I'll spit it out: Israel's strategy to eliminate Hamas isn't working.
Click to expand...

I doubt that is their real strategy since it's unachievable and not especially productive. More likely they want to force as much of the population as far south as possible and then into Egypt with or without Egyptian consent. Ethnic cleansing and reduce Gaza to rubble.

Not saying it will work but more likely what they want.
 
glazed said:
I doubt that is their real strategy since it's unachievable and not especially productive. More likely they want to force as much of the population as far south as possible and then into Egypt with or without Egyptian consent. Ethnic cleansing and reduce Gaza to rubble.

Not saying it will work but more likely what they want.
Click to expand...

I agree it's not their real strategy, you're fighting an enemy that seamlessly blends into the dense civilian populace. How on earth do you expect to root them out?

The annoying part is how the West (as usual) has bought their stated objectives, hook line and sinker. I'm sure they've been more critical of Ukraine, a country fighting a completely legitimate war.
 
Raoul said:
It obviously is working given that they already control a large swath of northern Gaza in just a few weeks on the ground.
Click to expand...
The US controlled large swathes of Iraq and Afghanistan almost immediately as well, and indeed took over the country, the body bags still piled up and we now see one is a vassal state of Iran, and the other had the "baddies" from 2001 take over the country within a 18 months of the commencement of their withdrawal.

The political and military leadership of Hamas is still intact and they're still active in the fight, so their aim of militarily eradicating Hamas is quite evidently not going well.
 
adexkola said:
I agree it's not their real strategy, you're fighting an enemy that seamlessly blends into the dense civilian populace. How on earth do you expect to root them out?

The annoying part is how the West (as usual) has bought their stated objectives, hook line and sinker. I'm sure they've been more critical of Ukraine, a country fighting a completely legitimate war.
Click to expand...
I don't think the West are that naive, I'd wager they knew exactly what the objective was from the get go and have been happy for it to play out, hiding under the guise of it being a righteous act of self-defence and exclusively siphoning all condemnation and culpability towards Hamas.

Decades from now we'll see the tracking back and revisionism, just like with Mandela and the ANC.
 
adexkola said:
The annoying part is how the West (as usual) has bought their stated objectives, hook line and sinker. I'm sure they've been more critical of Ukraine, a country fighting a completely legitimate war.
Click to expand...

I doubt western governments share your view on what is and is not legitimate. It's an interesting question how far the Israelis will be allowed to go before America completely stops supporting them.

My reading is that (1) as long as Hamas do not release the hostages they are giving Israel an excuse to continue their assault and (2) Hamas wanted all this to happen - they knew full well what the consequences of their attack would be because it has happened before and Israel's stated policy is to massively over retaliate.

Why do Hamas want it? They want to give Iran and Hezbollah no choice but to get involved. They thought it would trigger regional conflict. I don't think that's going to work either. They have over estimated how much Tehran actually cares about them and read too many of their own press releases. Faced with the USS Gerald Ford sitting in the Med, Iran has left them in the lurch. Of course if the Americans left then it would be a whole different story.
 
Raoul said:
It obviously is working given that they already control a large swath of northern Gaza in just a few weeks on the ground.
Click to expand...
You really don't want to understand that kind of war isn't won by "controlling" territories and/or getting the body count on your side. Have the last +70 years of asymmetric warfare in all parts of the globe truly taught you nothing?
 
That_Bloke said:
You really don't want to understand that kind of war isn't won by "controlling" territories and/or getting the body count on your side. Have the last +70 years of asymmetric warfare in all parts of the globe truly taught you nothing?
Click to expand...

They are only about 3 weeks into a war that will probably take a few months and control a lot of territory. If you extrapolate this over time they will control a vast majority of above ground Gaza at some point very soon. Tunnel entrance and exit points will be closed in the process, which will make it very difficult for Hamas to survive. What happens to a post Hamas Gaza after the war is another question.
 
Kaos said:
I mean it would help if the US didn't veto every UNSC resolution that condemns the settlements, but this is a start I suppose.
Click to expand...
If this turns out to be true, it's a massive deal.

It would mean that the US are ready, for the first time since 1948, to stop unconditionally supporting Israel, and actually do something.

It would also mean and confirm that the US is slowly coming around the fact that the current Israel policy is leading nowhere, Netanyahu is definitely a goner and not part of the US plans anymore and something has to give.
 
glazed said:
I doubt western governments share your view on what is and is not legitimate. It's an interesting question how far the Israelis will be allowed to go before America completely stops supporting them.

My reading is that (1) as long as Hamas do not release the hostages they are giving Israel an excuse to continue their assault and (2) Hamas wanted all this to happen - they knew full well what the consequences of their attack would be because it has happened before and Israel's stated policy is to massively over retaliate.

Why do Hamas want it? They want to give Iran and Hezbollah no choice but to get involved. They thought it would trigger regional conflict. I don't think that's going to work either. They have over estimated how much Tehran actually cares about them and read too many of their own press releases. Faced with the USS Gerald Ford sitting in the Med, Iran has left them in the lurch. Of course if the Americans left then it would be a whole different story.
Click to expand...

Given that they planned the 10-7 attack for at least a year or two, they were probably banking on a regional conflict that never materialized, leaving them instead to fend for themselves against an Israel that is now committed to removing them from Gaza. An epic and fatal miscalculation that is impossible to undo at this stage.
 
Sir Matt said:


Should sanction all settlers.
Click to expand...


Would be a safe political move for Biden. Maintain the pressure on Hamas in Gaza while throwing a bone to domestic unrest about his Israel policy by going after WB settlers, who are unpopular in most political circles.
 
That_Bloke said:
If this turns out to be true, it's a massive deal.

It would mean that the US are ready, for the first time since 1948, to stop unconditionally supporting Israel, and actually do something.

It would also mean and confirm that the US is slowly coming around the fact that the current Israel policy is leading nowhere, Netanyahu is definitely a goner and not part of the US plans anymore and something has to give.
Click to expand...
I wish I shared your optimism but I'd have to disagree. The US is finally coming under the crosshairs of the international community for their complicity in Israel's crimes, so I'm seeing their slight maneuvering as a means to weather that storm, feigning the impression that they're concerned about the human cost of this conflict. When it comes to anything remotely tangible though they'll revert to form - vetoing any resolution that condemns Israel, passing legislation that makes boycotting illegal, and widening the threshold that blurs the lines between condemnation of Israel and antisemitism. These gestures don't exactly convince me of there being a paradigm shift just yet. For that to happen, congressmen and women will have to start losing their jobs via the ballot box on account of their stance, and it becomes politically (and financially) untenable for politicians and organisations to hold a ironclad and zealous commitment towards Israel.
 
Kaos said:
I wish I shared your optimism but I'd have to disagree. The US is finally coming under the crosshairs of the international community for their complicity in Israel's crimes, so I'm seeing their slight maneuvering as a means to weather that storm, feigning the impression that they're concerned about the human cost of this conflict. When it comes to anything remotely tangible though they'll revert to form - vetoing any resolution that condemns Israel, passing legislation that makes boycotting illegal, and widening the threshold that blurs the lines between condemnation of Israel and antisemitism. These gestures don't exactly convince me of there being a paradigm shift just yet.
Click to expand...

The democratic international community (as in Europe and North America) are largely in sync with the US on the Israeli response to the attacks. The only consideration for Biden is domestic as it relates to 2024, so any policy decisions he makes will be in accordance with that.
 
Saudis turning to China first in an attempt to stop the carnage:


Saudi FM Announces Launch of Work of Committee Tasked with Mobilizing Int’l Action to Stop War on Gaza


“Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan bin Abdullah announced on Saturday the launch of the work of the ministerial committee tasked with mobilizing international action to end the war on Gaza.​
​
The committee will kick off its work from China.​
​
The committee was formed at the Arab-Islamic summit that was held in Riyadh last week and that focused on the conflict in Gaza.”​

https://english.aawsat.com/gulf/467...e-tasked-mobilizing-int’l-action-stop-war-gaza
 
Raoul said:
The democratic international community (as in Europe and North America) are largely in sync with the US in the Israeli response. The only consideration for Biden is domestic as it relates to 2024, so any policy decisions he makes will be in accordance with that.
Click to expand...
From an official diplomatic stance then yes, the governments of Western nations are indeed largely in sync regarding the response. However their populations not so much, and its clear the narrative regarding the conflict has shifted somewhat within the populace of these countries, suggesting it may eventually be unsustainable for these countries to continue downplaying the human cost of this conflict. Macron was essentially forced into a mini-condemnation of sorts after seismic pressure from his country's citizens, and the British labour party (which will likely be in no 10 come the next election) are also facing a small crisis of their own following the vote for the ceasefire amendment. If we've learned anything from South Africa is that government sponsored oppression isn't sustainable and there comes a time where even the most reactionary of democracies that endorse or enable this oppression will have to buckle in their stance.

From a governmental level, you already have an unprecedented number of nations cutting off ties or recall their ambassadors - not just the usual suspects, but even nations with historically close ties to the US like Colombia. And then of course there's more traditionally muted nations like Indonesia who weren't shy of making their discontent with the situation known, even publicly as Biden recently found out.
 
Raoul said:
They are only about 3 weeks into a war that will probably take a few months and control a lot of territory. If you extrapolate this over time they will control a vast majority of above ground Gaza at some point very soon. Tunnel entrance and exit points will be closed in the process, which will make it very difficult for Hamas to survive. What happens to a post Hamas Gaza after the war is another question.
Click to expand...

IDF: Hamas knows it lost the battle for the tunnels
Southern Command officer says the Gaza terror groups will likely redirect resources to other endeavors, such as rocket production or naval activity, after the offensive tunnel project has come to naught with Israeli underground border wall and detection technologies making tunnels less effective.
Yossi Yehoshua|Published: 01.20.18 , 15:27

From 2017:

In tandem with the new technology, the IDF has been working on the new underground obstacle, which costs NIS 4 billion, and does almost of the work to neutralize tunnels.

First, it physically blocks tunnels using a thick concrete wall that penetrates deep below ground while identifying when they are being dug with sensitive detectors. After identifying the tunnels’ weak points and cavities it automatically destroys the enemy tunnel by pumping them with liquid cement.
 
Raoul said:
Given that they planned the 10-7 attack for at least a year or two, they were probably banking on a regional conflict that never materialized, leaving them instead to fend for themselves against an Israel that is now committed to removing them from Gaza. An epic and fatal miscalculation that is impossible to undo at this stage.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Except Israel will take the opportunity to ethnically cleanse as much of Gaza as it can. By demonising Israel as an entity for existing at all, it's easy to overlook that the current government is far more extreme than its predecessors who actually were interested in some kind of coexistence. Hamas make Netanyahu's point for him and vice-versa.
 
glazed said:
Yeah. Except Israel will take the opportunity to ethnically cleanse as much of Gaza as it can. By demonising Israel as an entity for existing at all, it's easy to overlook that the current government is far more extreme than its predecessors who actually were interested in some kind of coexistence. Hamas make Netanyahu's point for him and vice-versa.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is a bit of a self-reinforcing problem with Hamas and Netanyahu in the mix. Hopefully neither will be players anymore in the near future.
 
Kaos said:
From an official diplomatic stance then yes, the governments of Western nations are indeed largely in sync regarding the response. However their populations not so much, and its clear the narrative regarding the conflict has shifted somewhat within the populace of these countries, suggesting it may eventually be unsustainable for these countries to continue downplaying the human cost of this conflict. Macron was essentially forced into a mini-condemnation of sorts after seismic pressure from his country's citizens, and the British labour party (which will likely be in no 10 come the next election) are also facing a small crisis of their own following the vote for the ceasefire amendment. If we've learned anything from South Africa is that government sponsored oppression isn't sustainable and there comes a time where even the most reactionary of democracies that endorse or enable this oppression will have to buckle in their stance.

From a governmental level, you already have an unprecedented number of nations cutting off ties or recall their ambassadors - not just the usual suspects, but even nations with historically close ties to the US like Colombia. And then of course there's more traditionally muted nations like Indonesia who weren't shy of making their discontent with the situation known, even publicly as Biden recently found out.
Click to expand...

Some of these democratic countries with large demonstrations will have to address them domestically in the next election cycle. I don’t think they will influence their country’s policy in any meaningful way in the present since Israel is a very small consideration among the vastly more important domestic issues, mostly economic, that politicians have to deal with.
 
Raoul said:
Yes, it is a bit of a self-reinforcing problem with Hamas and Netanyahu in the mix. Hopefully neither will be players anymore in the near future.
Click to expand...

I think this conflict has permanently radicalised both sides. The Israelis won't rest till the only place left to live in Gaza is tents. And they will never give the Gazans water or food or power again since they are under no obligation to do so. So if Egypt doesn't step in or unless the sea blockade is lifted, then there will be a long running humanitarian catastrophe and the place will empty out.

Raoul said:
Some of these democratic countries with large demonstrations will have to address them domestically in the next election cycle. I don’t think they will influence their country’s policy in any meaningful way in the present since Israel is a very small consideration among the vastly more important domestic issues, mostly economic, that politicians have to deal with.
Click to expand...

I doubt Gaza will be an issue in any western election. A few Labour seats may go Libdem but that's about it. They will have a majority of 150 instead of 160. The much bigger issue will be how Europe accommodates 2 million displaced radicalised Gazans. Half that many Syrian refugees arriving in Europe caused political mayhem and arguably triggered Brexit if you recall.
 
Last edited:
Kaos said:
I don't think the West are that naive, I'd wager they knew exactly what the objective was from the get go and have been happy for it to play out, hiding under the guise of it being a righteous act of self-defence and exclusively siphoning all condemnation and culpability towards Hamas.

Decades from now we'll see the tracking back and revisionism, just like with Mandela and the ANC.
Click to expand...

That's plausible

Regarding the bolded, if I'm alive then I'll be sure to scoff. If Gaza is ever free I'm sure the pro-Israel folk will find some way to rewrite history.

glazed said:
I doubt western governments share your view on what is and is not legitimate.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree with that. I think that objectively Ukraine are the wronged party, and have the clear moral upper hand in the war, in a way Israel does not. There is no indication that openly or behind closed doors, Israel is being asked hard questions in the way Ukraine is, regarding the purpose and feasibility of the war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.