Middle East Crisis

[Rayvin 5236]

8 minutes ago, Renton said:

 

I mean, ultimately its all tribal in one way or another. But what I am keen to point out here is that in this case it is very much about religion. Why? Because there is almost no other instrument that can brainwash people to undertake such acts of barbarism and self destruction. You won't get me to die for my country. There are millions of arabs who will die for their religion, and some crave it. 

 

Again though, I think Russia's ability to compel people to invade and brutalise another country (very similar acts of aggression) - and indeed Ukraine's ability to compel people to defend their country rather than just flee - suggest that religion is not at all the only thing that could produce these outcomes. There are all sorts of narratives that we might accept to push us to do this. 

 

I'm tempted to say the issue is more about a widespread lack of critical thinking skills than it is about anything else. Or maybe it's just baked into our social DNA, that we build group bonds around abstract concepts that then come to define our identity, and treat attacks on those identities with serious hostility.

 

I appreciate that this is adjacent to the main topic at hand here although I have tried to keep my posts on it somewhat relevant to the matter at hand, but this probably isn't the place for a philosophical conversation on religion in the end.

[Renton 21731]

5 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Again though, I think Russia's ability to compel people to invade and brutalise another country (very similar acts of aggression) - and indeed Ukraine's ability to compel people to defend their country rather than just flee - suggest that religion is not at all the only thing that could produce these outcomes

 

Russian soldiers are/were either professionals, mercenaries, conscripts, or criminals with a promise of release on service. Ukrainian male adults were not allowed to leave the country. Many of these soldiers are incredibly brave, especially on the Ukrainian side, I salute them. None of them will entertain suicide though. 

[Rayvin 5236]

So just looking at the current status of things this morning, Israel have announced this:

 

 

Which in the context of the war away from moral concerns makes total sense strategically. Hamas of course won't relent either, so I'm wondering how many Palestinian lives are vulnerable here.

[Dr Gloom 22010]

12 minutes ago, NJS said:

Gloom you keep using "carved out the land" as if it was empty and ready to be allocated - Palestinians/Muslims had lived their for centuries and then were politely expected to move to Egypt, Jordan or Lebanon leaving their homes and lives behind. Those who stayed lost those anyway. 

 

To me making a homeland for Jews (based on divine right-ism) was no different to New South Wales being gifted to the Aborigines or the mid-west US states being gifted to native Americans - all very noble but too late and completely erasing "nartural" occupation and immigration. 

 

that's exactly what happened in this case, yes. and history tells us land has been carved up countless times all over the world, when wars are won and the victors sit around a table with a map and some pencils, deciding on how to divvy up the spoils: from the iron curtain to colonies on all corners of the globe. 

 

as i explained earlier, the creation of israel wasn't only about religion, or divine right-ism as you put it, though many a zionist would make the religious claim.

 

it was also about establishing a jewish homeland - somewhere they could be safe after the nazis almost wiped them off the face of the earth.

 

mandate palestine was majority populated by arabs, but palestinan arabs have never governed the land. and jewish people have always lived there, albeit in smaller numbers in the centuries leading up to the creation of the state of israel. the international community sought to provide a home for jewish people after centuries of persecution and it wasn't an illogical place to establish one. 

[Dazzler 9826]

26 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

So just looking at the current status of things this morning, Israel have announced this:

 

 

Which in the context of the war away from moral concerns makes total sense strategically. Hamas of course won't relent either, so I'm wondering how many Palestinian lives are vulnerable here.

 

Aye strategically it makes complete sense, but morally it's a bit of a tit for tat. At least by announcing this Israel have backed themselves into a corner to honour it if and when the hostages are returned. I think they are hoping that the Palestinian people will rise up and demand Hamas do the right thing for the good of Palestine, but I doubt Hamas will give a shit.

[Rayvin 5236]

2 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

 

Aye strategically it makes complete sense, but morally it's a bit of a tit for tat. At least by announcing this Israel have backed themselves into a corner to honour it if and when the hostages are returned. I think they are hoping that the Palestinian people will rise up and demand Hamas do the right thing for the good of Palestine, but I doubt Hamas will give a shit.

 

Was thinking to myself earlier though, why Hamas have even taken hostages to start with - googled it and apparently the official reason is to force Israel to give warning ahead of attacks on residential areas in Gaza so that people can flee. If any part of that is true then Hamas clearly want to avoid as much collateral damage as they can on their side too. I guess it's tempting to think that they're indifferent to the suffering of their own people in this too but they may simply just believe, horrifyingly, that this is worth the deaths of their own people - as much as they might like to avoid them.

 

I suspect beyond that though, Israel has demonstrated in the past how highly they value their own people (definitely in comparison to Palestinian lives) so taking and spreading out these hostages and securing them in areas where Hamas is directing attacks or operating forces Israel to choose between killing their own people in air strikes, or sending in troops to extract them at a probable far higher cost in Israeli lives in the end.

 

Taking the hostages means Israel has to be at least somewhat more restrained than it would be if it was just dealing with Palestinian lives. But that point aside, what on earth is even the end game for Hamas in this? They can't possibly think that this is going to take them anywhere near to the dismantling of Israel. Just a reminder that they're there and that they're still mad? Or maybe it's to damage morale in Israel?

 

In the end, the only thing that really makes sense to me as a cause is the Saudi line. That this had to happen to prevent Saudi from normalising with Israel. I just don't understand what else can possibly be achieved here by Hamas other than that one thing.

[Dazzler 9826]

4 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Was thinking to myself earlier though, why Hamas have even taken hostages to start with - googled it and apparently the official reason is to force Israel to give warning ahead of attacks on residential areas in Gaza so that people can flee. If any part of that is true then Hamas clearly want to avoid as much collateral damage as they can on their side too. I guess it's tempting to think that they're indifferent to the suffering of their own people in this too but they may simply just believe, horrifyingly, that this is worth the deaths of their own people - as much as they might like to avoid them.

 

I suspect beyond that though, Israel has demonstrated in the past how highly they value their own people (definitely in comparison to Palestinian lives) so taking and spreading out these hostages and securing them in areas where Hamas is directing attacks or operating forces Israel to choose between killing their own people in air strikes, or sending in troops to extract them at a probable far higher cost in Israeli lives in the end.

 

Taking the hostages means Israel has to be at least somewhat more restrained than it would be if it was just dealing with Palestinian lives. But that point aside, what on earth is even the end game for Hamas in this? They can't possibly think that this is going to take them anywhere near to the dismantling of Israel. Just a reminder that they're there and that they're still mad? Or maybe it's to damage morale in Israel?

 

In the end, the only thing that really makes sense to me as a cause is the Saudi line. That this had to happen to prevent Saudi from normalising with Israel. I just don't understand what else can possibly be achieved here by Hamas other than that one thing.

 

Surely this could be counter-productive to Hamas though, as it's hardly going to make Israel look like the aggressors in the conflict - and so far they have been very restrained compared to historical conflicts (partly due to the hostages, but perhaps due to ongoing discussions with KSA too?). If both KSA and Israel are serious about normalisation then it could end up working against Hamas, as it's effectively driving them into each others arms. KSA will surely condemn the actions of Hamas, and could even align itself with Israel in the conflict which weakens Hamas even further.

[Dr Gloom 22010]

7 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Was thinking to myself earlier though, why Hamas have even taken hostages to start with - googled it and apparently the official reason is to force Israel to give warning ahead of attacks on residential areas in Gaza so that people can flee. If any part of that is true then Hamas clearly want to avoid as much collateral damage as they can on their side too. I guess it's tempting to think that they're indifferent to the suffering of their own people in this too but they may simply just believe, horrifyingly, that this is worth the deaths of their own people - as much as they might like to avoid them.

 

I suspect beyond that though, Israel has demonstrated in the past how highly they value their own people (definitely in comparison to Palestinian lives) so taking and spreading out these hostages and securing them in areas where Hamas is directing attacks or operating forces Israel to choose between killing their own people in air strikes, or sending in troops to extract them at a probable far higher cost in Israeli lives in the end.

 

Taking the hostages means Israel has to be at least somewhat more restrained than it would be if it was just dealing with Palestinian lives. But that point aside, what on earth is even the end game for Hamas in this? They can't possibly think that this is going to take them anywhere near to the dismantling of Israel. Just a reminder that they're there and that they're still mad? Or maybe it's to damage morale in Israel?

 

In the end, the only thing that really makes sense to me as a cause is the Saudi line. That this had to happen to prevent Saudi from normalising with Israel. I just don't understand what else can possibly be achieved here by Hamas other than that one thing.

 

hamas don't care about palestinian civilians. they are driven by hatred of jews - their goal is the destruction of the state of israel.

 

as i said in the other thread, it's a proxy war financed by Iran (Saudi's sworn enemies). Iran has been financing Hamas and Hizbollah/. It wants Israel to respond with overwhelming force, which it will, further damaging its reputation with its Arab neighbours and preventing normalisation of relations between Israel and Saudi - that's what this is all about. 

 

[Rayvin 5236]

4 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

 

Surely this could be counter-productive to Hamas though, as it's hardly going to make Israel look like the aggressors in the conflict - and so far they have been very restrained compared to historical conflicts (partly due to the hostages, but perhaps due to ongoing discussions with KSA too?). If both KSA and Israel are serious about normalisation then it could end up working against Hamas, as it's effectively driving them into each others arms. KSA will surely condemn the actions of Hamas, and could even align itself with Israel in the conflict which weakens Hamas even further.

 

Yeah but they might consider that the unifying notion of opposing Israel across all Arab nations is diminishing either way as the world moves on, and so this is a bid to put some emotional information into the mix to try to influence that - it could speed it up sure, but equally it might be the only thing that puts the brakes on it. They've presumably been hanging their hat on the ongoing development and growing power of Middle Eastern nations to eventually counterbalance and then eliminate Israel, but if globalisation drives diplomacy and interdependency then that's far less likely to happen. In the end, religion isn't going to matter as much as profit and power.

[Dr Gloom 22010]

hamas are just pawns in this. it's about the big boys  - iran, israel and saudi

[Rayvin 5236]

3 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

hamas are just pawns in this. it's about the big boys  - iran, israel and saudi

 

If that context is true, then for all the horror of this specific moment I would say that the wider moment we are in is actually a potentially promising turning point for the future. If KSA does normalise with Israel it might encourage other similar actions from surrounding regional players, and push Iran into a position of greater isolation and, dare I say it, may force them to soften over the long term too. If they do this, if globalism wins, then this whole conflict may eventually just run out of steam - and once it does, it might mean that Israel is able to properly create a state in which Palestinians aren't treated as second class citizens as a security precaution. That in turn may eventually lead to the opportunity for everyone to forgive and heal.

 

Maybe I'm being naive and delusional, I am after all a huge believer in interdependency being the great peacemaker of the modern age, but I feel like there may be a path there.

[Dazzler 9826]

30 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

 

hamas don't care about palestinian civilians. they are driven by hatred of jews - their goal is the destruction of the state of israel.

 

as i said in the other thread, it's a proxy war financed by Iran (Saudi's sworn enemies). Iran has been financing Hamas and Hizbollah/. It wants Israel to respond with overwhelming force, which it will, further damaging its reputation with its Arab neighbours and preventing normalisation of relations between Israel and Saudi - that's what this is all about. 

 

 

If Iran are funding Hamas though, and that intelligence is readily available to the Saudi government/military then surely this attack does nothing more than drive KSA and Israel closer to normalisation? If anything, what they have done is further increase the prospect of peace in the middle east with this attack, as mad as that sounds given everything that's happened over the last few days. Israel have been unusually restrained in their response so far (cutting off utilities is far less severe than carpetbombing Gaza) possibly due to the ongoing hostage situation, but perhaps it is politically motivated too.

[PaddockLad 17339]

28 minutes ago, Dr Gloom said:

hamas are just pawns in this. it's about the big boys  - iran, israel and saudi

 

 

[Rayvin 5236]

It does feel like we're sort of creeping closer to a global conflict in some senses.

 

I agree with everything in that view on Iran - a lovely people ruled by total lunatics.

[Dazzler 9826]

8 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

It does feel like we're sort of creeping closer to a global conflict in some senses.

 

I agree with everything in that view on Iran - a lovely people ruled by total lunatics.

 

I still find photos of Iran from the 60s/70s before the revolution absolutely mind-blowing. It's somehow culturally regressed by hundreds of years in the 40 years since the nutters took power.

[Dr Gloom 22010]

29 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

 

If Iran are funding Hamas though, and that intelligence is readily available to the Saudi government/military then surely this attack does nothing more than drive KSA and Israel closer to normalisation? If anything, what they have done is further increase the prospect of peace in the middle east with this attack, as mad as that sounds given everything that's happened over the last few days. Israel have been unusually restrained in their response so far (cutting off utilities is far less severe than carpetbombing Gaza) possibly due to the ongoing hostage situation, but perhaps it is politically motivated too.

 

it depends on how it all unfolds. israel isn't known for restraint. 

[Rayvin 5236]

Just now, Dr Gloom said:

 

it depends on how it all unfolds. israel isn't known for restraint. 

 

It's not but it does so far at least appear that they are being somewhat restrained. Whether due to hostages or KSA, I'm not sure - but starving Gaza permits time for conversations to develop.

 

Of course it's also possible that they were so unprepared for this that they need to buy themselves time to mobilise.

[PaddockLad 17339]

31 minutes ago, Dazzler said:

 

If Iran are funding Hamas though, and that intelligence is readily available to the Saudi government/military then surely this attack does nothing more than drive KSA and Israel closer to normalisation? If anything, what they have done is further increase the prospect of peace in the middle east with this attack, as mad as that sounds given everything that's happened over the last few days. Israel have been unusually restrained in their response so far (cutting off utilities is far less severe than carpetbombing Gaza) possibly due to the ongoing hostage situation, but perhaps it is politically motivated too.

Some have been saying the weekend attacks were partly carried out to put a massive spanner in Israeli/KSA plans to normalise their relationship 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Renton 21731]

40 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

It does feel like we're sort of creeping closer to a global conflict in some senses.

 

I agree with everything in that view on Iran - a lovely people ruled by total lunatics.

 

It's like inception. Layers of power seperated from direct conflict through proxy wars. 

United states/EU/NATO > Ukraine/Israel

China > Russia > Iran > Hamas/Hezbollah/Houthi Etc. 

 

Or maybe this is Parky bullshit and things are a bit simpler. Hamas has its own agency. Funded by Iran yes, but independent. They acted more like ISIS than anything else. 

[Renton 21731]

23 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

It's not but it does so far at least appear that they are being somewhat restrained. Whether due to hostages or KSA, I'm not sure - but starving Gaza permits time for conversations to develop.

 

Of course it's also possible that they were so unprepared for this that they need to buy themselves time to mobilise.

 

Very possible the second point like. How quickly can any country mobilise hundreds of thousands of tropos and make a planned land invasion the likes of which hasn't been seen since Stalingrad? Also prolonging the siege buys time and weakens Hamas. 

Although I still do remember with a salty tear in my eye the day we mobilsed the task force to free the Falklands.  

[Ginolaandtonic 169]

4 hours ago, Dazzler said:

 

I still find photos of Iran from the 60s/70s before the revolution absolutely mind-blowing. It's somehow culturally regressed by hundreds of years in the 40 years since the nutters took power.

The stricter Islamic leader that took over from the liberal regime was due to America interfering if I remember correctly

[The Fish 10892]

12 hours ago, Alex said:

I think it’s easy to forget that when something like this happens Jewish people all over the world, including here in the UK, come under a far greater threat of attacks on their person, property, places of worship, graveyards etc. Just another depressing aspect to all this

Was in London with work today, while we were out for lunch near Paddington my Jewish boss saw some violently antisemitic graffiti. Not anti-israel, not anti-zionist, antisemitic. Really upset her.

 

Really worried for the very few Jewish people I know. 

 

 

[Kid Dynamite 7064]

I'm not massively in the know about the situation, but at its base level, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Murdering innocent Palestinians because terrorists murdered a bunch of innocent Israeli's will never make sense to me. Even less so that the UK and US governments are publicly supporting the retaliation 

 

Weird fucking flex

 

Edited October 12, 2023 by Kid Dynamite

[Rayvin 5236]

1 hour ago, The Fish said:

Was in London with work today, while we were out for lunch near Paddington my Jewish boss saw some violently antisemitic graffiti. Not anti-israel, not anti-zionist, antisemitic. Really upset her.

 

Really worried for the very few Jewish people I know. 

 

 

 

Honestly am a bit taken aback by the the response from UK based Palestinians. Its not like British Jewish people have anything to do with this - they'd be better off going for the Britain itself in terms of culpability.

[Dr Gloom 22010]

1 hour ago, Kid Dynamite said:

I'm not massively in the know about the situation, but at its base level, 2 wrongs don't make a right. Murdering innocent Palestinians because terrorists murdered a bunch of innocent Israeli's will never make sense to me. Even less so that the UK and US governments are publicly supporting the retaliation 

 

Weird fucking flex

 

I don’t think it’s weird. It’s exactly like after 9/11 when America’s allies supported its retaliation in Afghanistan.
 

Israel just came under an unprecedented terrorist attack. The bombing of civilians in Gaza is deplorable but I’d be more surprised if Israel’s strategic allies didn’t stand shoulder to shoulder with it now.