Middle east crisis.

[Alikado]

[QUOTE=Hamble;6887586]

Attachment 229552 Andrew Neil and Layla Moran, MP on BBC's Question Time “I’m trying to point to the realpolitik of the situation,” Neil said heatedly. …and what is "realpolitik" in this context? It is Western governments, most notably the U.S. and UK governments continually giving Israel diplomatic cover and (for the U.S.) massive financial support while Israel continues to ignore UN resolutions and international urging to restrain West Bank settlement activity which undermines any prospect of a viable Palestinian state. Why is that?

[/QUOTE

More acceptable than Iran funding Hamas and other Palestinian Terrorists.

Israel is defending her border against attacks from Palestine,The West Bank,Lebanon,Syria and Yemen.

Israel and USA are under attack from Iran backed militia.

https://www.defense.gov/News/News-St...n-middle-east/

Defending a border of occupied territory, when they retire to the pre 1967 boundaries they can then make that claim.

[Hamble]

[QUOTE=Alikado;6887600]

Defending a border of occupied territory, when they retire to the pre 1967 boundaries they can then make that claim.

Quote
......"The Green Line, (pre-)1967 border, or 1949 Armistice border[1] is the demarcation line set out in the 1949 Armistice Agreements between the armies of Israel and those of its neighbors (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria) after the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. It served as the de facto borders of the State of Israel from 1949 until the Six-Day War in 1967, and continues to represent Israel’s internationally recognized borders with the two Palestinian territories: the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.[2][3]

The Green Line was intended as a demarcation line rather than a permanent border. The 1949 Armistice Agreements were clear (at Arab insistence)[4] that they were not creating permanent borders. The Egyptian–Israeli agreement, for example, stated that "the Armistice Demarcation Line is not to be construed in any sense as a political or territorial boundary, and is delineated without prejudice to rights, claims and positions of either Party to the Armistice as regards ultimate settlement of the Palestine question."[5] Similar provisions are contained in the Armistice Agreements with Jordan and Syria. The Agreement with Lebanon contained no such provisions, and was treated as the international border between Israel and Lebanon, stipulating only that forces would be withdrawn to the Israel–Lebanon border.".......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Line_(Israel)

[sandGroundZero]

Andrew Neil and Layla Moran, MP on BBC's Question Time “I’m trying to point to the realpolitik of the situation,” Neil said heatedly. …and what is "realpolitik" in this context? Realpolitik acknowledges that Zionism, as an ideology is enormously successful. Effectively, Zionism pervades the international policy sphere of the United States, the UK and more-or-less all Western countries, plus countries not necessarily invariably in the 'Western camp'. And how has that come to be? From the outset, Zionism had an active diplomatic program. Long before the creation of Israel, Zionists cultivated the support of influential individuals outside and inside of governments. Christian Zionists, Jewish Zionists and the religiously noncommittal Zionists outweigh the advocates of a more nuanced and balanced attitude to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people! In the United Kingdom there were Christian Zionists before Theodor Herzl ever thought to convene the first Zionist Congress. 19th century British life was saturated by Church and Chapel; the youthful Lloyd George was predisposed to think in terms of the Israelites return to Zion. C. P. Scott was an early enthusiast for the Zionist project. Contemporary Israel devotes considerable resources to its public diplomacy for very good reason. Engaging Western public opinion in all the countries that matter — most notably of course, the United States — has given Israel an invaluable means by which it influences international political policy. When people like Andrew Neil speak of realpolitik in this context, they are acknowledging the fact that in the UK, U.S. and many other countries politicians are well aware of the political blowback they will experience, if they press Israel to make concessions with respect of the obstacles Israel creates to the formation of a Palestinian state. Even when politicians are mindful of disparity, they must tread cautiously. [In the UK, they have the example of Jeremy Corbyn!] In comparison, the Palestinians' leaders from the Mandatory period onward, were utterly in the dark about the utility of courting Western public opinion. Contemporary Palestinian civic thought leaders who have come to realize this are up against both their own rigidly stupid political leadership and a thoroughly embedded disposition to favour Israel in the United States, the UK and elsewhere. To this extent, Andrew Neil cannot be gainsaid. There is an impasse in the conflict between Israel's uncompromising Zionists and the Palestinian peoples' aspiration for a state.

[Hamble]

Attachment 229552 Andrew Neil and Layla Moran, MP on BBC's Question Time “I’m trying to point to the realpolitik of the situation,” Neil said heatedly. …and what is "realpolitik" in this context? Realpolitik acknowledges that Zionism, as an ideology is enormously successful. Effectively, Zionism pervades the international policy sphere of the United States, the UK and more-or-less all Western countries, plus countries not necessarily invariably in the 'Western camp'. And how has that come to be? From the outset, Zionism had an active diplomatic program. Long before the creation of Israel, Zionists cultivated the support of influential individuals outside and inside of governments. Christian Zionists, Jewish Zionists and the religiously noncommittal Zionists outweigh the advocates of a more nuanced and balanced attitude to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian people! In the United Kingdom there were Christian Zionists before Theodor Herzl ever thought to convene the first Zionist Congress. 19th century British life was saturated by Church and Chapel; the youthful Lloyd George was predisposed to think in terms of the Israelites return to Zion. C. P. Scott was an early enthusiast for the Zionist project. Contemporary Israel devotes considerable resources to its public diplomacy for very good reason. Engaging Western public opinion in all the countries that matter — most notably of course, the United States — has given Israel an invaluable means by which it influences international political policy. When people like Andrew Neil speak of realpolitik in this context, they are acknowledging the fact that in the UK, U.S. and many other countries politicians are well aware of the political blowback they will experience, if they press Israel to make concessions with respect of the obstacles Israel creates to the formation of a Palestinian state. Even when politicians are mindful of disparity, they must tread cautiously. [In the UK, they have the example of Jeremy Corbyn!] In comparison, the Palestinians' leaders from the Mandatory period onward, were utterly in the dark about the utility of courting Western public opinion. Contemporary Palestinian civic thought leaders who have come to realize this are up against both their own rigidly stupid political leadership and a thoroughly embedded disposition to favour Israel in the United States, the UK and elsewhere. To this extent, Andrew Neil cannot be gainsaid. There is an impasse in the conflict between Israel's uncompromising Zionists and the Palestinian peoples' aspiration for a state.

You are missing a very important point.

Judaism does not seek converts in fact it actively discourages it.

Not so Islam.

As a religion Islam excels itself on converting anyone.

[Toodles McGinty]

There is an impasse in the conflict between Israel's uncompromising Zionists and the Palestinian peoples' aspiration for a state.

No, there is an impasse between a country that has every right to defend itself, and subhuman rapists and murderers determined to wipe the country off the map.

You're obsessed with 'Zionists', as though Israel just popped up a few decades ago on the whim of the British, and millions of foreign Jews (Zionists, obvs) just upped and set up camp in the 'country of Palestine'.

Not once in that entire post did you mention the rapists and child killers that Israel is up against. On all borders. The terrorist scum knife-raping innocent women to death. The monsters that have vowed to repeat October 7th over and over. It's just 'Palestinian leaders were a bit naive, didn't understand how anything works, now they are up against Israel's bigger, nasty pals, poor mites'.

And those Hamas supporters here, terrifying the British Jewish population? What are they? Misunderstood? Naive? Don't know what terror they are striking into the hearts of British people, poor loves? Just anti-Zionist, so nobody can blame them?

See, I understand people defending the people of Palestine, those who have no support for Hamas, but are caught up in a war they want no part of. I understand how the loss of every innocent person is felt. I understand anyone wanting Palestine to be a country in its own right.

But this 'Palestine was basically a simple bunch who didn't understand anything at all, and now the poor mites are up against a country with harder mates' is bollocks. Particularly given Israel is entirely surrounded by the Arab world in every direction for 1000+km. When they are fighting off missiles on every border from any number of Islamist cranks. When Iran is funding any terrorist group willing to lob a rock into Israel.

But I don't understand how there is little empathy for innocent Israelis. Maybe they are all Zionists: Jewish Zionists, Christian Zionists, Pigmy Zionists, Buddhist Zionists, Scottish National Party Zionists, Trans Zionists, Scouse Zionists, Mongolian Zionists, Labradoodle Zionists and Freemason Zionists. Right?

[sandGroundZero]

There's no military answer. There's no political answer. As far as I can see, [Andrew Neil is] right. Neil said 'sometimes there's no solution, you just have to watch the horrors play out'. … No, there is an impasse between a country that has every right to defend itself, and subhuman rapists and murderers determined to wipe the country off the map. … So, is there an impasse? Neil was full of sh¡t to suggest "The two state solution is dead: it died on October 7th." Putting the sins of Hamas: "subhuman rapists and murderers" on the entire Palestinian polity? The 'realpolitik ' is as I noted in post #1578. Is that too difficult for you to respond? You insist on deflecting away from scrutiny of the antecedents of the conflict. You would rather conflate the atrocious behaviour of Hamas with the hopes and expectations of the Palestinian people, generally.

[Hector]

You are missing a very important point.

Judaism does not seek converts in fact it actively discourages it.

Not so Islam.

As a religion Islam excels itself on converting anyone.

Yes, the fact that Judaeism is non-proselytising is something that many are unaware of.

[Hamble]

So, is there an impasse? Neil was full of sh¡t to suggest "The two state solution is dead: it died on October 7th." Putting the sins of Hamas: "subhuman rapists and murderers" on the entire Palestinian polity? The 'realpolitik ' is as I noted in post #1578. Is that too difficult for you to respond? You insist on deflecting away from scrutiny of the antecedents of the conflict. You would rather conflate the atrocious behaviour of Hamas with the hopes and expectations of the Palestinian people, generally.

Gaza Synogogue

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_synagogue

Fascinating.
This mosaic has the name David in Hebrew at the top right of the first photo.

Reading from right to left the letters are; d'v D no vowels in ancient times.

[Toodles McGinty]

You would rather conflate the atrocious behaviour of Hamas with the hopes and expectations of the Palestinian people, generally.

Sure, that's why I wrote:

See, I understand people defending the people of Palestine, those who have no support for Hamas, but are caught up in a war they want no part of. I understand how the loss of every innocent person is felt. I understand anyone wanting Palestine to be a country in its own right.

Or is that invisible?

[sandGroundZero]

Sure, that's why I wrote: See, I understand people defending the people of Palestine, those who have no support for Hamas, but are caught up in a war they want no part of. I understand how the loss of every innocent person is felt. I understand anyone wanting Palestine to be a country in its own right. Or is that invisible? No; not invisible. That is your get out of jail free card. You have repeatedly chosen to conflate Hamas' atrocities with the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people. Those are NOT the same.

[sandGroundZero]

Hamble's post #1583 Gaza Synogogue Fascinating. This mosaic has the name David in Hebrew at the top right of the first photo. Reading from right to left the letters are; d'v D no vowels in ancient times. The ancient synagogue of Gaza was built in 508 CE during the Byzantine period … …but how is that relevant?

[Toodles McGinty]

No; not invisible. That is your get out of jail free card. You have repeatedly chosen to conflate Hamas' atrocities with the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people. Those are NOT the same.

Citations please.

I have never said any atrocities have been committed by the innocent people of Palestine. I have expressed huge sympathy for those caught up in the response by Israel. If by 'hopes and aspirations' you mean a state apart, I have repeatedly stated that Palestine should be separate country from Israel.

I have criticised the current Israeli government. Over and over.

What I haven't done is basically called previous Palestinian authorities naive idiots without a clue about international relations. I haven't called the current Palestinian leadership 'rigidly stupid'. I'll assume you mean the PA, not Hamas. How do you measure the intellect of complete strangers thousands of miles away, who are also living under the threat of subhuman terrorists in their midst?

And why the hell would I need a 'get out of jail free' card? Who do you think you are?

I'll express my opinion as I see fit. If you don't like them, you are perfectly at liberty not to respond.

[sandGroundZero]

… I have never said any atrocities have been committed by the innocent people of Palestine. I have expressed huge sympathy for those caught up in the response by Israel. If by 'hopes and aspirations' you mean a state apart, I have repeatedly stated that Palestine should be separate country from Israel. … It's implicit in the reply With Quote you choose to include. Plus of course, it is not a question of Hamas' atrocities. You repeatedly deflect from general points to your preferred, narrow line of argument which incidently, I DO NOT refute. & … And why the hell would I need a 'get out of jail free' card? Who do you think you are? I'll express my opinion as I see fit. If you don't like them, you are perfectly at liberty not to respond. Fig leaf, if you prefer.

[Hector]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...stinian-lives/

[Hamble]

No; not invisible. That is your get out of jail free card. You have repeatedly chosen to conflate Hamas' atrocities with the hopes and aspirations of the Palestinian people. Those are NOT the same.

?https://thehill.com/opinion/4273883-...murky-picture/