Middle East Conflict

[inbetween]

The problem now Israel has gone in is they have to achieve their objectives with Hamas. The alternative is Israel’s future threats of action, that have dominated the balance of power, become a paper tiger. They either show the region there is a limit to their words or they stay the course and show their isn’t. Any weakness will be seized upon by Iran and her allies.

The Israeli people need to be prepared to see a lot of body bags as this is urban/gorilla warfare and it’s going to take a lot of sacrifice to succeed in the military objectives - coupled with a limit for how long action can go on for before this spills out regionally. My own opinion is Israel have fallen for Iran’s trap and this is going to blow up in the region.

I just hope it doesn’t and Israel has real plan for a decent and peaceful life for all once this is over - otherwise it’s going to be a futile exercise that will kill thousands (10’s of thousands) and they’ll have not inched a step closer to preventing further terrorist atrocities like we saw 3 weeks ago.

It's easy to forget that Israel is under attack from 3 fronts, north, east and south. The axis of Iran, Russia and China are powerful and arguably more powerful than the combined west. If that axis turns nasty in support of their own geopolitical aims then we potentially have WW3 and that won't end well for anyone let alone Israel.

This is an existential threat for Israel but also potentially the world, it goes beyond the whole question of Palestine and that kind of thing. A peaceful future will only come through dialogue and not violence. That violence could escalate into the worst kind imaginable and that's why all parties need to think twice about their next actions.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Israel is a democratic country, it can be held to account however it can't be held to account whilst under attack. It has declared a unitary government, war and state of emergency. Nothing except further violence is going to happen whilst this situation continues.

The violence has to stop on both sides, a humanitarian ceasefire is critical and Hamas must be part of that unless you're asking for a double standard where Israel accepts a ceasefire which only applies to itself? And seriously why would any country ever agree to that?

Both should bilaterally declare a ceasefire now so that electricity, aid, water and critical supplies can be brought into Gaza. The political battles must then be fought around tables where they should be. If that is refused for violence then I would totally agree that Israel, Hamas or anyone else must be held to account for its actions.

The ceasefire was called by for by Palestinian allies at the UN. It's unlikely Hamas isn't going to comply with it if it happens. It's a bit far fetched to expect them to stop when Israel is still attacking them.

 

[Bradley82]

Exactly.

That's a question for the terrorism apologists and military experts on here.

I served in the British army and I can tell you that they are targeting civilians with those strikes too there is no way on earth there are anywhere near enough Positively Identifiable Hamas targets for the amount of ordnance being used. Perhaps if they concentrated on legitimate targets alone they could neutralise the rocket threat. If not then conduct intelligence led SF raids along side that. Of course seeking dialogue with Hamas is the best option. It suited Mr Netanyahu in the past when it served a purpose for him.

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

The ceasefire was called by for by Palestinian allies at the UN. It's unlikely Hamas isn't going to comply with it if it happens. It's a bit far fetched to expect them to stop when Israel is still attacking them.

The Hamas political wing were apparently completely in the dark about Oct 7th. What makes you think they would have any sway over their military arm if they negotiated a truce or ceasefire?

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

The Hamas political wing were apparently completely in the dark about Oct 7th. What makes you think they would have any sway over their military arm if they negotiated a truce or ceasefire?

Have the military wing willingly released hostages?

Doesn't that prove that they are willing to obey by agreements when concessions are achieved?

Why would they continue to attack Israel when a ceasefire and humanitarian assistance was agreed? Especially when that results in them being wiped out.

 

[inbetween]

The ceasefire was called by for by Palestinian allies at the UN. It's unlikely Hamas isn't going to comply with it if it happens. It's a bit far fetched to expect them to stop when Israel is still attacking them.

Jesus christ.

Israel is attacking Hamas because on the 7th October Hamas terrorists walked into Israel and murdered over 1000 people, they still hold 100's of hostages right this second now.

And you're arguing that Hamas will stop if Israel stops and you're expecting for Hamas to abide by international law and UN resolutions.

I'm not sure what you've smoked but I definitely don't want any of it....

 

[Ducado]

Not responsible but actively supported.
Google Grand Mufti Haj Amin el Husseini and his association with Hitler.
Hamas aren’t the first Palestinians that supported killing all the Jews.

To be fair you could say the same about a number of countries, occupied France for example, the police rounded up Jews with relish, and let’s not forget our new best buddies the Ukrainians, who wholeheartedly went along with the mass murder of 100s of thousands of Jews and many were very enthusiastic to say the least, as well as the Baltics and Poland, but do we really want get into the sins of our fathers game?

People in the past did alsorts of things, The Romans in Dacia the first recorded genocide, the Normans with the harrowing of the north a genocide in itself

Hatred springs up in theses conflicts, it shouldn’t surprise anyone, but hatred can be turned into peaceful coexistence, but by killing thousands of innocent civilians you tend to encourage it

 

[arbabarshad]

They've been a terrorist state from the beginning. Israel doesn't respect laws and norms of international law or the boundaries of other countries.

The only reason Israel does not respect international law is because they know they can get away with being a terrorist state.

If Israel thought they'd lose a civilian for every civilian they killed, they'd never commit the terrorist acts they are committing.

 

[Eebo]

If they wipe Hamas out, or their ability to carry out acts of terror, then their security situation will have improved significantly.

I'm staggered (although maybe I shouldn't be) that a number of posters would seemingly prefer a terror group to retain its capacity to inflict deaths and injury on a democratic nation, rather than have that ability removed from them. It's almost like logic gets turned on its head when Jews are involved.

I'm sorry PB, maybe it is borne out of frustration and emotion, but that is a very poor post by your standard.

The Hamas atrocity that started this cost 2,000 innocent Israel lives and is terrorism at its most brutal.

The Israeli retaliation may have killed a number of Hamas fighters or militants, but it has also cost many thousands of Palestinian lives, and is just as brutal. Just because it is a bomb fired from distance by a democratic country doesn't mean it is not an act of terror

Once you start killing innocent people/civilians on this scale you lose the moral high ground and public sympathy for the original act of terror you suffered.

You say Israel will be more secure if it wipes out Hamas, but how many civilian lives in Gaza will that cost?

We are at 7,000 already so the number is going to be enormous. The implication above is that you have completely discounted this cost of Palestinian civilian lives as a price well worth paying for Israeli security.

Given that the 2,000 deaths from the Hamas atrocity is the biggest loss of life ever suffered by Israel from Hamas activities, the cost in civilian lives to achieve the result you want is going to be many times what we have already seen, and seems completely disproportionate to what Hamas are able to inflict on Israel.

Hamas may say it wants to wipe out Israel, but if it does not have the capability to do it then it is just talk. Do you really believe that Hamas can wipe Israel out? If so why has it not done more than it has? Israel actually has the capability to wipe out every civilian in Gaza, and at the moment it looks like it is quite prepared to do that.

And, if it involves killing say 50,000 or 100,000 or more Gazan civilians, would wiping out Hamas actually make Israel more secure? There are more powerful players than Hamas in the Middle East and a bloodbath like that could unleash a different level of threat.

People have to be free to question what Israel is doing without being accused of being against Jews.

 

[Mon Autre]

I have not said once that Israel has a right to kill thousands of people, I repeat that Israel must stop bombing Gaza.

However look at the chain of events, Israel is bombing Gaza because Israel was attacked by Hamas and remains under attack from Hamas. If Hamas stops then Israel will stop too and the war ends. I want both to stop, you just want one side to stop.

I'm not going to bother answering your reasoning around Iron Dome and the rocket attacks which threaten Israeli's daily, it's actually moronic.

Hamas or no Hamas, Netanyahu will never end the apartheid that Palestinian people are currently subjected to and he will never stop bulldozing Palestinian villages. He continually breaks international law with impunity. He also doesn't want to see a group representing the Palestinian people who are focused on peaceful negotiation as that might actually bring us closer to having a Palestinian state. He wants Hamas there and he has actively propped up their existence as he knows that so long as they're in charge, the advancement of a Palestinian state is impossible. That's his highest context.