He certainly is allowing himself to be perceived as such. For a man who is usually very good on hugging the middle I don’t know how Starmer went so far off…
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Keir Starmer
- Thread starter urban genie
- Start date
He certainly is allowing himself to be perceived as such. For a man who is usually very good on hugging the middle I don’t know how Starmer went so far off…
Honestly, after never seeing you call out the absolute shambles of the party you support after month after month of one Tory or another embarrassing the country it doesn’t surprise me at all that you would take this stance.I think it’s more subtle than that and it feels like one of those damned if you do, damned if you don’t situations for him so I have a bit of sympathy here.
He’s going to be terrified of anti-semitism accusations resurfacing against the Labour Party. If he says anything remotely hostile towards Israeli actions the Tory press is going to round on Labour and him, pushing that door more and more. Maybe it will stick, maybe it won’t.
It’s hard to see how any other response would have ended any better for him, and party HQ would have war gamed different responses - deciding it’s better to piss off parts of the Labour Party (who they can say are legacy anti-Semitics if needs must) rather than the Tory press. I’m sure they’ve also “war gamed” voters won’t be swayed if Labour and Tories are following the same path.
Now if I was war gaming this in Tory HQ I’d be telling my side to double down on our support for Israel and look to goad labour in to breaking cover….and it’s working at a very low level based on some councillors resigning.
Politics is a dirty business.
He certainly is allowing himself to be perceived as such. For a man who is usually very good on hugging the middle I don’t know how Starmer went so far off…
What has he said that is Islamaphobic?
What has he said that is Islamaphobic?
His comments made about Israel’s right to defend themselves has been perceived to include the green light to kill civilians in Gaza.
His comments made about Israel’s right to defend themselves has been perceived to include the green light to kill civilians in Gaza.
Other than someone with an agenda, I have literally zero idea how anyone could reach that conclusion.
hilts
Well-Known Member
His comments made about Israel’s right to defend themselves has been perceived to include the green light to kill civilians in Gaza.
To paraphrase he was asked several times were Israel right in depriving Palenstinians of water food fuel etc..
Eventually he said yes they were. He mustn't have understood the question everytime it was asked or very likely he was thinking how do I not cock up my poll lead.
To paraphrase he was asked several times were Israel right in depriving Palenstinians of water food fuel etc..
Eventually he said yes they were. He mustn't have understood the question everytime it was asked or very likely he was thinking how do I not cock up my poll lead.
Other than someone with an agenda, I have literally zero idea how anyone could reach that conclusion.
Hopefully Starmer explains that to his concerned constituents and they are alleviated of the misunderstanding, cause at the moment that message has not come across clearly.
EDIT: FYI Keir isn’t the only guilty western leader of this misunderstanding. Many others thought war crimes can be excused under certain contexts.
I suspect given it's a 14 minute interview, half of which was devoted to Israel/Palestine, cut into a 5 second clip, it's not a surprise the subtlety is lost. Even that sentence is cut in half, as he qualifies it immediately by saying it should be done within International law, and he continually talks about Hamas rather than Palestine.I didn't like the original answer. I guess he was reflecting one "just war" view that belligerents are not obliged to feed or supply an enemy (so could cut off access to a well, but couldn't poison the well) but any subtlety was lost and instead it sounded like endorsing a siege.
I'm not sure what he thought was going to happen.
I think a lot of people went one too far one way at the very beginning, simply because the Hamas attack was so horrific, and of course his wife has some family in Israel, which makes the emotional aspect more complex. Certainly Israel's actions since have made it a lot harder to support anything that they've done, despite the awful attack by Hamas.
metalblue
Well-Known Member
Honestly, after never seeing you call out the absolute shambles of the party you support after month after month of one Tory or another embarrassing the country it doesn’t surprise me at all that you would take this stance.
I rarely visit the thread and I don’t really see the point in discussing the Conservative Party, they are bumbling towards a thrashing and Starmer is going to be the next PM. I’m happy enough with that, he’s a Tory.
I don't think it was the right thing to say, but he was asked once, not several times, and his answer was a sentence which specifically said that Israel shouldn't break international law.To paraphrase he was asked several times were Israel right in depriving Palenstinians of water food fuel etc..
Eventually he said yes they were. He mustn't have understood the question everytime it was asked or very likely he was thinking how do I not cock up my poll lead.
He clearly says throughout that Hamas should be targeted, rather than Palestinians, and later on, when talking about the govt cracking down on support for Palestinian says that it's important we don't conflate discussion about Palestine [in the context of demonstrations], with Hamas.