Israel And The Palestinians (now with added Iran)

[Zetterlund]

3 hours ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

It was a serious question, I didn't think they had kit that would merit that type of deterrent. I acknowledge an anti tank missile will work fairly well on an old Fiat Uno full of 

All those billions of American taxpayer dollars launched at Toyota Hiluxes in the desert since 2001 maybe taught them something after all.

[Dunning1874]

ICJ has decided that it does have jurisdiction to rule on South Africa's case and that some of their claims of genocide are plausible, although still years away from actually making a ruling on that. They've placed provisional measures on Israel which essentially amount to 'don't commit genocide' - don't deliberately kill or harm civilians, prevent and punish statements of genocidal intent, allow humanitarian aid to enter - and they're required to submit a report to the court in a month demonstrating how they're complying with that.

In practice Israel can simply ignore this, but the hope is it ramps up political pressure on the US and European allies of Israel to stop supporting them. Biden could still end this with one phone call.

[MazzyStar]

10 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

ICJ has decided that it does have jurisdiction to rule on South Africa's case and that some of their claims of genocide are plausible, although still years away from actually making a ruling on that. They've placed provisional measures on Israel which essentially amount to 'don't commit genocide' - don't deliberately kill or harm civilians, prevent and punish statements of genocidal intent, allow humanitarian aid to enter - and they're required to submit a report to the court in a month demonstrating how they're complying with that.

In practice Israel can simply ignore this, but the hope is it ramps up political pressure on the US and European allies of Israel to stop supporting them. Biden could still end this with one phone call.

I honestly think that it’s past this point. 

[BFTD]

Yeah, this is feeling a death cult now, run by old men who want their view of the world confirmed. I don't know if an end to US support would make much difference.

If somehow Israel ended up politically isolated and in danger of invasion purely to stop the government committing genocide, people like Netanyahu would declare it confirmation of global antisemitism and demand Israelis fought to the death; no quarter given. His final act would likely be to fire off those nuclear weapons that they don't have.

It's obviously not helped by the fact that they have neighbours who'd genuinely wipe them off the map if they could.

[Freedom Farter]

4 minutes ago, BFTD said:

It's obviously not helped by the fact that they have neighbours who'd genuinely wipe them off the map if they could.

I'd check you're not being influenced there by US propaganda based on a fabrication: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html

(I don't mean to be condescending in pointing that out. I'm always having to update my knowledge on issues surrounding this conflict and having to rethink on things I was once confident about. Also if you were alluding to something else, ignore the above).

[effeffsee_the2nd]

31 minutes ago, BFTD said:

Yeah, this is feeling a death cult now, run by old men who want their view of the world confirmed. I don't know if an end to US support would make much difference.

If somehow Israel ended up politically isolated and in danger of invasion purely to stop the government committing genocide, people like Netanyahu would declare it confirmation of global antisemitism and demand Israelis fought to the death; no quarter given. His final act would likely be to fire off those nuclear weapons that they don't have.

It's obviously not helped by the fact that they have neighbours who'd genuinely wipe them off the map if they could.

If the USA called and said cut it out now or we’ll isolate you like we did to south Africa in the 80s. Things would probably pan out much the same way as what happened there. They would try to keep going on their own but would likely find it difficult in the long run

[BFTD]

22 minutes ago, Freedom Farter said:

I'd check you're not being influenced there by US propaganda based on a fabrication: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html

(I don't mean to be condescending in pointing that out. I'm always having to update my knowledge on issues surrounding this conflict and having to rethink on things I was once confident about. Also if you were alluding to something else, ignore the above).

No, I was more thinking about events like the Yom Kippur war, which might seem like ancient history, but is the crucible in which men like Netanyahu were formed. Invasion might be off the table now for obvious reasons, but countries like Egypt surely wouldn't be shedding any tears if Israel were to collapse, other than the military headache it would give them. They're certainly getting some of the other problems anyway, like refugees on their border.

Incidentally, I saw part of World War Z again recently - there can't be many works of fiction that have aged so poorly as the fall of Jerusalem. I appreciate Max Brooks' optimism, but there's no denying that this government would just bomb the shit out of Gaza and the West Bank if there was a zombie outbreak.

[BFTD]

43 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

If the USA called and said cut it out now or we’ll isolate you like we did to south Africa in the 80s. Things would probably pan out much the same way as what happened there. They would try to keep going on their own but would likely find it difficult in the long run

You might be right - doesn't look like we're going to find out though. I get the impression it would just make the current mob double down; they've whipped themselves up into such a frenzy that there's a real end-times feel to what they're willing to say publicly, never mind in private.

Best case scenario would be that economic sanctions would result in a change of government...but we're assuming that Netanyahu and co will allow that to happen.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

21 hours ago, BFTD said:

You might be right - doesn't look like we're going to find out though. I get the impression it would just make the current mob double down; they've whipped themselves up into such a frenzy that there's a real end-times feel to what they're willing to say publicly, never mind in private.

Best case scenario would be that economic sanctions would result in a change of government...but we're assuming that Netanyahu and co will allow that to happen.

Pretty much agree.  As far as they are concerned, there are plenty other arab countries that the palestinians can go live in, they are the only Jewish one and they should have it all.
 The arabs never agreed with the creation of Isreal and went to war with them more than once, with that in mind they want to keep them at arms length least their core population areas be left extremely vulnerable to attack. Thats the real reason they dont want a two state solution. The whole area is very small,  If A genuinely independent Palestinian state were ever established, planes flying into Israel's two main airports could be targeted by shoulder mounted weapons from inside its borders, they simply have no intention of giving up military control of any of that territory.

 

[Shadow Play]

Top story on Sky News.  UK suspends aid to UNRWA.

Israel has alleged that 12 members of the UN's Gaza aid group participated in Hamas' 7 October attack. The UK's decision comes after the US, Italy, Australia and Canada all also suspended additional funding for the UN aid agency.

[Mark Connolly]

23 minutes ago, Shadow Play said:

Top story on Sky News.  UK suspends aid to UNRWA.

Israel has alleged that 12 members of the UN's Gaza aid group participated in Hamas' 7 October attack. The UK's decision comes after the US, Italy, Australia and Canada all also suspended additional funding for the UN aid agency.

Interesting that these allegations have come out after yesterday's ICJ ruling

[GHF-23]

6 hours ago, Mark Connolly said:

Interesting that these allegations have come out after yesterday's ICJ ruling

Really quite sickening to see this circling of the wagons in real time

[Freedom Farter]

On 26/01/2024 at 17:03, BFTD said:

No, I was more thinking about events like the Yom Kippur war, which might seem like ancient history, but is the crucible in which men like Netanyahu were formed. Invasion might be off the table now for obvious reasons, but countries like Egypt surely wouldn't be shedding any tears if Israel were to collapse, other than the military headache it would give them. They're certainly getting some of the other problems anyway, like refugees on their border.

Aye, the '67 war and then the '73 (Yom Kippur) war are necessary knowledge for folk wanting to understand things. Egypt was key, as you say. Here's a ramble on that history and how it relates to now: 

In late '66, Israel invaded West Bank, they destroyed Palestinian homes - to drive out the inhabitants, creating room for later Israeli expansion - and they killed Jordanian soldiers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samu_incident). There were Jordanian soldiers there because at that time West Bank was part of Jordan. Palestinian refugees in West Bank didn't do well from that. If they tried to cross back into what had since become the state of Israel, perhaps to visit the town they'd recently been driven out of, or to visit their grandmother in a nearby town, they were often killed at the border. Both Israeli and Jordanian soldiers killed them but more often Jordanian soldiers. That shows how right from the early days, no Arab state has aided the Palestinians. They've always been on their own.

Having attacked Jordan, Israel then turned to Syria. It shot down a bunch of Syrian military jets in early '67 and made multiple ground incursions into Syrian territory.

Having seen Jordan and Syria attacked, Egypt shat themselves they'd be next (a correct presumption, it turned out), and mobilised their military closer to their border with Israel in the Sinai. Having successfully baited the Egyptian military out into the desert, Israel promptly destroyed it and annexed the Sinai. That was the beginning of the phase which gets called the actual war. Next Israel went back to West Bank and just took it all off Jordan, expelling a quarter of a million Palestinian civilians. They then went back to Syria and took the Golan Heights.

The Yom Kippur War in '73 was Syria and Egypt trying to regain those territories taken from them by Israel six years prior. Its mad how that war is still framed by US and UK media as an "attack on Israel". That's like calling Ukraine's current actions trying to retake its territories as an "attack on Russia". Egypt went nowhere near Israel. Their aim was to get Israel out of Egypt not to get Egypt into Israel. Similarly, Syria was attempting to reclaim its Israeli-occupied territory.

This popular framing that Israel has always been besieged is the biggest lie going. Israel initially enjoyed the patronage of the Soviet Union then later USA took over. It has been backed by a superpower for its entire existence. There is zero threat to Israel and there never has been. The only thing that has ever been under threat is Israeli expansion as that can't continue without external backing. 

[Newbornbairn]

Interesting re-interpretation.

 

I seem to recall a chap called Nasser uniting Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq in 1967, mobilising their armies on the borders of Israel  and declaring "The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel". 

 

I agree there's no particular bond between the Arabs and the Palestinians though. The initial Arab desire to destroy Israel was more based upon religious intolerance and Arab machismo being offended at Jews taking Muslim land. Over time money talks though and endless wars are expensive if you don't have the deep pockets of the Russians or Americans to help and I think that's what's led the gradual rapprochement between the Arab nations and Israel - purportedly one of the reasons for the Hamas attack that kicked off the latest round of atrocities.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not cheerleading for Israel. Their thieving land in the West Bank is abhorrent and disgusting and, dare I say, kinda emphasises the negative tropes about Jews. Their siege mentality has been created over multiple generations now and I can't see how the xenophobic hatred they have for everyone around them can be tackled. 

[Freedom Farter]

7 hours ago, Newbornbairn said:

Interesting re-interpretation.

 

I seem to recall a chap called Nasser uniting Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Iraq in 1967, mobilising their armies on the borders of Israel  and declaring "The battle will be a general one and our basic objective will be to destroy Israel". 

The defence pact was Syria and Jordan seeking Egypt's protection. It was only created after the Israeli incursions into their territories mentioned above. Then regarding Egypt's intentions, Lyndon Johnson wrote this in 1971:

Quote

During the evening of May 26 I met with Israel's Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, who had just flown to Washington. Our conversation was direct and frank. Eban said that according to Israeli intelligence the United Arab Republic was preparing an all‐out attack. 1 asked Secretary McNamara, who was present, to give Mr. Eban a summary of our findings. Three separate intelligence groups had looked carefully into the matter, McNamara said, and it was our best judgment that a U.A.R. attack was not imminent.

(https://www.nytimes.com/1971/10/23/archives/by-lyndon-b-johnson-crisis-and-war-in-the-mideast-in-1967-the-hot.html#:~:text=Three separate intelligence groups had,attack was not imminent.).

 

The interpretation I gave above could well be wrong, though, affected as it will be by my biases. Also, I agree that the '48 war was a very different case.

Edited January 28 by Freedom Farter

[Dunning1874]

Truly abhorrent to see the North American and European upholders of the precious Rules Based International Order falling over themselves to stop aid to Gaza in response to allegations of individual employees of an aid organisation taking part in an act of terror when the need for humanitarian assistance could not be greater. We're well beyond the point where some of those who aren't being killed by bombs or bullets are dying of starvation, and the ICJ has just restated the necessity of allowing humanitarian aid to enter.

Meanwhile, ceasing to actively arm and aid Israel as its government openly boasts of ethnic cleansing is not even on the agenda. Even disregarding the extremely curious coincidence of these allegations only emerging right at the point where Israel has been ordered to allow humanitarian aid to enter in order to comply with the genocide convention, if the principle of withdrawal of funding on the basis of allegations alone before an investigation is carried out was to be applied universally then you'd think the part where the Israeli state has literally been up in court having been accused of genocide might have had some effect, but it's never been about principle for any of these racist scumbag nations. We're not witnessing apologism for genocide at this point, it's active participation in it.

Edited January 28 by Dunning1874

[Shadow Play]

It would appear the value of the aid being withheld is very significant.  In 2022 USA, Germany, EU and Sweden contributed 61% of UNRWA’s funding total of $1.2 billion.  

There were no figures in the article regarding how much some of the other richest nations, such as Australia, China, Japan, Russia and the oil states contribute.  Will they pick up the slack in the meantime?

Edited January 28 by Shadow Play

[Wee Bully]

10 hours ago, Freedom Farter said:

The defence pact was Syria and Jordan seeking Egypt's protection. It was only created after the Israeli incursions into their territories mentioned above. Then regarding Egypt's intentions, Lyndon Johnson wrote this in 1971:

(https://www.nytimes.com/1971/10/23/archives/by-lyndon-b-johnson-crisis-and-war-in-the-mideast-in-1967-the-hot.html#:~:text=Three separate intelligence groups had,attack was not imminent.).

 

The interpretation I gave above could well be wrong, though, affected as it will be by my biases. Also, I agree that the '48 war was a very different case.

It is massively wrong, affected as you say by your biases. 

Edited January 28 by Wee Bully

[beefybake]

1 hour ago, Wee Bully said:

It is massively wrong, affected as you say by your biases. 

Well then, let's hear your take, backed up by respected source material.

[Wee Bully]

17 minutes ago, beefybake said:

Well then, let's hear your take, backed up by respected source material.

Why, it won’t change the minds of anyone on here?  It would be like screaming into the void.