Middle East Conflict

[inbetween]

It wasn’t a post or opinion by John Simpson it was an article stating BBC policy as facts. If they broke that policy once report it, if you don’t like the policy then thats something for somebody to try and change but the policy is the policy .
The BBC can describe an attack as Manchester a terrorist attack, without describing an organisation as a terrorist organisation.Subtle difference.

And yet the UK government makes that distinction as does most of the rest of the world (and most normal, sane people). I was under the impression that the BBC reported facts but clearly not if their guidelines prevent such a thing from happening.

I can however understand the ambiguity, I mean this is the definition of a terrorist which obviously makes it extremely difficult.

Terrorist - a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Maybe we should call Hamas an organisation of terrorist persons instead? The BBC would have to be okay with that.

 

[Palerider]

In previous conflicts there comes a tipping point where the collective will of world comes down on Israel to halt the chain of violence, the problem for Israel is they quickly lose the sympathy of the world with the massive disproportionate responses, governments start getting a bit tetchy

Hamas needs to be dealt with of course, but by going in over the top it’s just acting as a recruiting Sargent

Some kind of face saving climb down is needed to save both sides from destroying themselves

How could the Israelis possibly trust a Palestine with Hamas as their leaders? Who do Israel and indeed the world negotiate with on the Palestinian side?

 

[Ducado]

How could the Israelis possibly trust a Palestine with Hamas as their leaders? Who do Israel and indeed the world negotiate with on the Palestinian side?

“Anyone who wants to foil the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the strengthening of Hamas and the transfer of funds to Hamas.” (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a Likud faction meeting in March 2019, as quoted in Haaretz)

 

[trueblue1972]

“Anyone who wants to foil the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the strengthening of Hamas and the transfer of funds to Hamas.” (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a Likud faction meeting in March 2019, as quoted in Haaretz)

I can guarantee those won't be his words now

 

[Palerider]

“Anyone who wants to foil the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the strengthening of Hamas and the transfer of funds to Hamas.” (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a Likud faction meeting in March 2019, as quoted in Haaretz)

Irrelevant after last Saturday's massacre. Things have changed. Chamberlain waved a peace message from Hitler assuring the peace. Events change opinions.

 

[inbetween]

“Anyone who wants to foil the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the strengthening of Hamas and the transfer of funds to Hamas.” (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a Likud faction meeting in March 2019, as quoted in Haaretz)

And yet here we are, Israel are eliminating Hamas?

 

[Ducado]

Irrelevant after last Saturday's massacre. Things have changed. Chamberlain waved a peace message from Hitler assuring the peace. Events change opinions.

Well as the Americans found out monsters have a habit of turning on their creators, it’s a mess of a situation, that’s not going to solved by more killing I can guarantee that

The route problem needs to be sorted out first, a strong democratic and reasonably prosperous Palestinian state could deal with its Islamists, in the way normal states do

 

[mexico1970]

"Judean Peoples Front..."

It's the People's Front of Judea!

Get a room you big nosed buggers.

 

[mexico1970]

And yet the UK government makes that distinction as does most of the rest of the world (and most normal, sane people). I was under the impression that the BBC reported facts but clearly not if their guidelines prevent such a thing from happening.

I can however understand the ambiguity, I mean this is the definition of a terrorist which obviously makes it extremely difficult.

Terrorist - a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

Maybe we should call Hamas an organisation of terrorist persons instead? The BBC would have to be okay with that.

I'd hate to believe that some broadcasters in this country don't consider Hamas a terrorist organisation, even worse that a small section might even support them.

 

[inbetween]

Well as the Americans found out monsters have a habit of turning on their creators, it’s a mess of a situation, that’s not going to solved by more killing I can guarantee that

The route problem needs to be sorted out first, a strong democratic and reasonably prosperous Palestinian state could deal with its Islamists, in the way normal states do

Israel are currently fighting attacks on 3 fronts, if they don't respond then what do you want them to do? Relinquish their country? This is what Hamas wanted. It has resulted in an uprising and energisation of people against Israel.

It has also energised the Israeli people against Hamas and obviously they will want Israel to defend itself.

I really do worry that this will turn ugly. The forces against Israel cannot fight Israel alone and that could result in a larger scale conflict because otherwise it will only go one way, it's why the Americans are moving military assets into the region.

Let's also not forget that Israel is a nuclear armed country.