egg

Whataboutery. Other causes deserve attention/action. That they're not doesn't prevent attention/action for this one.

No other cause in recent memory has seen a country (if you can call Gaza that) that carved in two, and the half (where the majority of homes, businesses, schools, university, etc are based) all but completely destroyed. There's also the small fact that the Palestinians have been living under occupation and oppression with the support of the west for years. Lots of people find all of that objectionable. Sure, there are loads of other people who are treated appalling in this world, but the protests in support of Palestine/Gaza are legitimate. What the protests are not is a protest against Jews. The fact that the outrageous behaviour of the Israeli regime is perpetrated by (I'm guessing) exclusively Jewish people, does not remove the Jewish/Israeli distinction. The protests won't make any difference though, but if people want to, that's up to them.

Then why whine about it? The purpose is obvious. The people complaining about the protests seem to be the people quite content to see Israel carry on. People don't have to protest to support that cos it's happening.

You ask the wrong (rhetorical) question. The fact is that people are allowed to protest. It doesn't matter if they can't directly control the cause they are protesting for/against.

I doubt they will again. She won't be a minister by then anyways, and probably won't be come the weekend. You can't turn on the police like she did, use the language she has, and generally stoke the fire, and stay in role.

Little tip, when replying to people on the forum, don't be tarring with them the anti semitic label if your issue is with an MP or someone on the radio. I suspect that you're bright enough to do that.

Thank you. This thread is about Israel, so guess what, Israel and Hamas are the subject. It ain't complicated. What it isn't is a thread about Jews, although we have people who laid into SoG about his inadvertent/lazy labelling of Israeli's as Jews, now deliberately labelling Israeli's as Jews in a desperate attempt to show people as anti-Semitic. Ridiculous behaviour.

Artist

Ha!! Says the most confused man on the forum. Keep your blue and white flag flying pal.

That was arguably the case pre 7/10, but they're firmly in the terrorist category for me now.

There has been no anti Semitism on this thread. Anti Zionism, yes, ditto islamaphobia and plenty of nonsense.

Have they though if Hamas have relocated? They would then be amongst an even more concentrated population in the South.

I think that's very likely. I posed the question before as to what happens in the south (and the people there) once Israel have finished with the north. We don't know whether the tunnels run the length of the strip, but if they do, it's possible that much of Hamas is away from the north.

Caterpillar

Singer

That's true, but Hypo makes a good point. Trump was such a loon that I don't think anyone dared test his patience.. Being crazier than anyone else can be a decent defence tactic.

How on earth have ended up with a comparison of Nazi Germany and Hamas? Seems a desperate way to support what's going on.

North Korea/South Korea? It's possible. The Israel/Palestine thing will never be resolved by war. History tells us that.

It's a terrible analogy. We seem to be back to your belief that only one side have behaved appallingly and need to change. Hamas are scum, but they are not the Nazis. The Israeli government have behaved appallingly, but they are not the Nazis. Any discussion that focuses just on a change of ethos, attitude and behaviour from one side is pointless. Obama nailed that his interview the other day.

Yeah. Clinton got close, but things went downhill quickly thereafter, and have gotten worse since. Trump's last attempts were a shit show, so I think it's Biden or nothing. Personally, I think it's as difficult as can be, but I appreciate Biden's intentions if nothing else.

Apologies for the misunderstanding. I prefer Biden's approach though. Both sides will need assurances as a prerequisite to a deal. That there's been threats, posturing, charters, rockets, wars, etc, is only a barrier to talks if you want it to be. Biden seemingly takes the view that no dispute is incapable of resolution, and that this dispute needs a resolution. He's right on both fronts.

Interesting, and it shows the imbalance in the discussion. I saw a piece on itv news last night. It showed armed Israeli's in the west bank evicting Palestinians from their land. They followed up with an interview with a settler and the journalist put to him that natives were being evicted. His response was that they are not, that it is Israeli land, and that the Israeli's are merely helping the Palestinians to emigrate. That attitude underpins this. We're told that the Palestinians want from the river to the sea, but it gets ignored that the Israeli's want so much more than they have, and are taking it in the name of holy land.

Is it Israel or Hamas/PA that you are implying are akin to 1938 Nazi Germany? Although they're both (well, not PA) cruel and murderous machines, that feels a bit of a stretch.

From Biden: "We believe the time is now to start the conversation for the future. Not tomorrow, not after the war, today." Some sense at last, and addresses the notion that people can't negotiate with people who have harmed them, or want to. His wishes in summary: a. the need for both sides to accept a 2 state solution b. Israel to accept no reduction in the Gaza land, no reoccupation of Gaza after the conflict ends, no attempt to blockade or besiege Gaza c. Palestine not to allow the use of Gaza as a platform for terrorism or violent attacks, and to ensure "no terrorist threats can emanate from the West Bank" Easier said than done, and the devil is in the detail, but it's hard to disagree with those objectives.