Jump to content

Israel And The Palestinians (now with added Iran/Lebanon)


xbl

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Thistle_do_nicely said:

Popped in my yt feed, know its brutal and just never feels like its gonnae end, but it'll hopefully defuse a wee bit of the tension on P&B.

wish there was an obvious, palatable way for the conflict to stop.

I have one. Give Bibi and Ismail Haniyeh a pistol each and put them in an arena. When one is dead, resupply the winner and replace the other with his second in command…continue until the new leaders want to negotiate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Trogdor said:

I see the other thread has been locked.

What is it about this particular conflict that seems to have people in this country foaming at the mouth and having a heads gone? On all sides and none. Why are we so vested in Israel and Palestine?

Celtic v Kilmarnock?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Jaggy McJagface said:

Just saw Emily Thornberry bumbling through an interview with Victoria Derbyshire where she - clearly uncomfortable - squirms away from saying whether she thinks shutting off food and electricity to a civilian population is against international law.

There’s yer mainstream party of the “left” cheering on war crimes. What a world.

Looking forward to these people throwing their hands up in disgust when Russia flies drones at Ukrainian power stations in a couple of months. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Trogdor said:

I see the other thread has been locked.

What is it about this particular conflict that seems to have people in this country foaming at the mouth and having a heads gone? On all sides and none. Why are we so vested in Israel and Palestine?

the Balfour declaration

British troops murdered in Palestine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jaggy McJagface said:

Just saw Emily Thornberry bumbling through an interview with Victoria Derbyshire where she - clearly uncomfortable - squirms away from saying whether she thinks shutting off food and electricity to a civilian population is against international law.

There’s yer mainstream party of the “left” cheering on war crimes. What a world.

This is part of what is so off putting about the media response to all of this. The political message is so disingenuous in that it is so steeped in carefully co-ordinated messaging to say the “right” thing that does the least damage to party and upcoming election prospects. Partly a legacy of the fact a former leader was sympathetic to the Palestine cause (the horror!). 

It just becomes so boring and uninformed watching the news or even social media. Feels like you’re choosing between batshit mental polarised tweets or here’s what labours shadow whatever is broadcasting as a party message. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Ziggy Sobotka said:

 

That's Haaretz had this, an editorial on how Hamas attacks on Israeli civilians are an inevitable consequence of the blockade and occupation, and a piece calling for an investigation into how Netanyahu has pushed to deliberately strengthen Hamas to undermine the PA and general international perception of Palestine.

Some laugh that all these entirely mainstream views in Israel which have been freely published in their biggest newspaper would get you denounced as a raving terrorist loving antisemite in the UK.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Tony Ferrino said:

Stan Collymore making more sense than most journos has racked on a few more seconds.

 

Fair play to Stan Collymore, and I'm glad he mentions 'leaders' as in particular the lazily tedious tendency to equate the Government of Israel with the people of Israel repeatedly denies the prospect of any sort of balanced critique.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Tony Ferrino said:

Stan Collymore making more sense than most journos has racked on a few more seconds.

 

There's some admirable willingness to see both sides there, but the idea that any ethnic or religious group has a right to a homeland is the root cause of the problem. That has no basis in international law.

You could probably make a case for there being some sort of moral right but taking it as a given is "a basic take, if i may say so." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, coprolite said:

There's some admirable willingness to see both sides there, but the idea that any ethnic or religious group has a right to a homeland is the root cause of the problem. That has no basis in international law.

You could probably make a case for there being some sort of moral right but taking it as a given is "a basic take, if i may say so." 

'International law' wasn't dropped down from the sky for everyone to follow. It's just a set of rules established by the great powers of the mid-20th (partly late 19th) century to regulate conflict. It has always been contradicted by political concepts like national self-determination, which requires a territorial state to be exercised in full. We have just muddled through picking and choosing between those ideas since 1945. 

What we are seeing around the world now is the inevitable breakdown of that system under the weight of its contradictions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, virginton said:

'International law' wasn't dropped down from the sky for everyone to follow. It's just a set of rules established by the great powers of the mid-20th (partly late 19th) century to regulate conflict. It has always been contradicted by political concepts like national self-determination, which requires a territorial state to be exercised in full. We have just muddled through picking and choosing between those ideas since 1945. 

What we are seeing around the world now is the inevitable breakdown of that system under the weight of its contradictions. 

You're telling me there are contradictions inherent in the Liberal World Order? Not a chance 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, coprolite said:

There's some admirable willingness to see both sides there, but the idea that any ethnic or religious group has a right to a homeland is the root cause of the problem. That has no basis in international law.

You could probably make a case for there being some sort of moral right but taking it as a given is "a basic take, if i may say so." 

I don’t think adherence to international law is of any interest to the Israeli government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, virginton said:

'International law' wasn't dropped down from the sky for everyone to follow. It's just a set of rules established by the great powers of the mid-20th (partly late 19th) century to regulate conflict. It has always been contradicted by political concepts like national self-determination, which requires a territorial state to be exercised in full. We have just muddled through picking and choosing between those ideas since 1945. 

What we are seeing around the world now is the inevitable breakdown of that system under the weight of its contradictions. 

Quite. The friction between the right to self determination vs the territorial integrity of nation states is a problem which remains in many places today. We need only look at the numerous territorial disputes that the League of Nations had to deal with to see how those principles have always been inconsistently applied.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...