[News] Hamas/Gaza/Israel

[armchairclubber]

Our 'left' has no traction with Israel. And it is not in favour of personal gun ownership. As similar to America's left as football is to 'American football'.

I'm not posting Starmer's statement a third time. Tiny nations lining up screaming at Israel to stop is nothing more than gesture politics. Only the UN or the US can tell Israel to stop. But the US has vetoed any attempt by the UN to tell Israel to stop. What do you suggest Starmer do? "When I become prime minister I will take the UK out of the UN, and lead a boycott of American goods, money and influence in the UK, unless they tell Israel to stop".

And if Israel are told to stop, do you think they will? I don't.

If your comment was directed at the actual left (Momentum and chums), well they want to throw Israel into the sea. Fill your boots. My former union has been boycotting Israel for thre last 3 years, and boy are they pleased with themselves. Bollocks to our pay and conditions, we boycott Israel. And what does this boycott look like? The answer is nothing. If I want to go to Israel to give lecture I can't be stopped and my (former) union won't even know unless I tell them. Then what? Nothing.

Politics is the art of the possible. Starmer can do nothing more than privately urge America to think again. Meanwhile Sunk has made it clear that America can do what it likes. Neither stance matters, and people attempting to Weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel is.....a tory or an irritable mad left winger, or and irrelevant liberal.

and people attempting to Weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel is.....a tory or an irritable mad left winger, or and irrelevant liberal.

I could pull you up on many elements of your reply. You do tend to go off on a tangent.

However I'll just pull you up on that in bold if I may.

To slander anyone with your insults who has the opinion that Starmer(a Zionist) should be condemning the Israel State (Zionists) in carrying out a Genocide is insulting in itself.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

and people attempting to Weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel is.....a tory or an irritable mad left winger, or and irrelevant liberal.

I could pull you up on many elements of your reply. You do tend to go off on a tangent.

However I'll just pull you up on that in bold if I may.

To slander anyone with your insults who has the opinion that Starmer(a Zionist) should be condemning the Israel State (Zionists) in carrying out a Genocide is insulting in itself.

Slander, is it?

Crikey.

People are trying to weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel. Who do you imagine these people might be? What's their game?

And, yeah, thanks for ignoring the entire rest of my argument. I want to see a swift end to the conflict and am saddened that I won't.

Arguing the toss about Starmer in this context is pathetic. You will see I haven't criticized Sunk in this context even those I loath him. In this context it is pathetic to use a failure to lead a Stop Israel campaign as a stick to beat a UK political leader. That's my point.

Bashing Starmer is this sort of petty-fogging nit picking that will get the 'ceasefire now!' movement nowhere. You need allies. Weaponizing Starmer's stance against Starmer is not going to encourage me to stand outside the US embassy waving a Palestinian flag.

We have had a lot of sensible discussion on this thread. It's a pity that people want to hijack it to promote their pro- or anti labour/tory bias.

 

[armchairclubber]

Slander, is it?

Crikey.

People are trying to weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel. Who do you imagine these people might be? What's their game?

And, yeah, thanks for ignoring the entire rest of my argument. I want to see a swift end to the conflict and am saddened that I won't.

Arguing the toss about Starmer in this context is pathetic. You will see I haven't criticized Sunk in this context even those I loath him. In this context it is pathetic to use a failure to lead a Stop Israel campaign as a stick to beat a UK political leader. That's my point.

Bashing Starmer is this sort of petty-fogging nit picking that will get the 'ceasefire now!' movement nowhere. You need allies. Weaponizing Starmer's stance against Starmer is not going to encourage me to stand outside the US embassy waving a Palestinian flag.

We have had a lot of sensible discussion on this thread. It's a pity that people want to hijack it to promote their pro- or anti labour/tory bias.

It's a pity that people want to hijack it to promote their pro- or anti labour/tory bias.

This is very much the category I see you in I'm afraid. This is not a Starmer campaign thread, indeed I have found that inappropriate.

There is another one or more for that

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

This is very much the category I see you in I'm afraid. This is not a Starmer campaign thread, indeed I have found that inappropriate.

There is another one or more for that

I was responding to posts on this thread. I didn't start it.

But I'm happy to leave it there. (Edit: at least until it is revived again).

Apologies if I have derailed the thread.

 

[armchairclubber]

Repost. I support this humanitarian strategy with Zara Sultana.

 

[Guinness Boy]

and people attempting to Weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel is.....a tory or an irritable mad left winger, or and irrelevant liberal.

I could pull you up on many elements of your reply. You do tend to go off on a tangent.

However I'll just pull you up on that in bold if I may.

To slander anyone with your insults who has the opinion that Starmer(a Zionist) should be condemning the Israel State (Zionists) in carrying out a Genocide is insulting in itself.

If you get that upset by the word 'mad' I'd sit down and have a nice cup of tea if I were you. NSC might not be the place you want to frequent. Unless it's 'Tory' that you think is an insult?

As for slander I think you've just slandered Starmer there. Let's not do that again please.

Apologies for popping back on to the thread, but I've just read the most frivolous post report ever in the history of the board and it's pissed me off.

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

All this is starting to have global implications with International shipping diverted, this has the potential to be inflationary.

We're already experiencing delays (about 15 days extra) to the materials we buy from China and India.

Going round the Cape is going to mean more fuel and higher costs.

 

[armchairclubber]

If you get that upset by the word 'mad' I'd sit down and have a nice cup of tea if I were you. NSC might not be the place you want to frequent. Unless it's 'Tory' that you think is an insult?

As for slander I think you've just slandered Starmer there. Let's not do that again please.

Apologies for popping back on to the thread, but I've just read the most frivolous post report ever in the history of the board and it's pissed me off.

but I've just read the most frivolous post report ever in the history of the board and it's pissed me off.

No, I've just read it.

Where can I send you're badge? You can PM me

 

[thejackal]

I was wondering this when they talked about the fighting continuing for most of 2024. Even if the goal was to kill everyone, it couldn't take this long.

My impression is that the goal is to kill everyone AND GET AWAY WITH IT, hence the longer time-frame.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Our 'left' has no traction with Israel. And it is not in favour of personal gun ownership. As similar to America's left as football is to 'American football'.

I'm not posting Starmer's statement a third time. Tiny nations lining up screaming at Israel to stop is nothing more than gesture politics. Only the UN or the US can tell Israel to stop.But the US has vetoed any attempt by the UN to tell Israel to stop. What do you suggest Starmer do? "When I become prime minister I will take the UK out of the UN, and lead a boycott of American goods, money and influence in the UK, unless they tell Israel to stop".

And if Israel are told to stop, do you think they will? I don't.

If your comment was directed at the actual left (Momentum and chums), well they want to throw Israel into the sea. Fill your boots. My former union has been boycotting Israel for thre last 3 years, and boy are they pleased with themselves. Bollocks to our pay and conditions, we boycott Israel. And what does this boycott look like? The answer is nothing. If I want to go to Israel to give lecture I can't be stopped and my (former) union won't even know unless I tell them. Then what? Nothing.

Politics is the art of the possible. Starmer can do nothing more than privately urge America to think again. Meanwhile Sunk has made it clear that America can do what it likes. Neither stance matters, and people attempting to Weaponize Starmer's failure to 'condemn' Israel is.....a tory or an irritable mad left winger, or and irrelevant liberal.

 

[thejackal]

That second sentence is just not necessary.

I think it is necessary to point out the hypocrisy of the Israeli position and to spread this truth far and wide.

I saw a short documentary years ago (I think it was on RT) where a bunch of Holocaust survivors were taken into Gaza via one of the military checkpoints, and at least one of them remarked that the treatment of the Palestinians appeared to be WORSE than what they had experienced in Nazi Germany. Not my words, the words of a Holocaust survivor.

One of my oldest friends is a founding member of Jews for Justice for Palestinians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_for_Justice_for_Palestinians). 30 years ago he explained to me that:

Judaism is not Zoinism, and Zionism is not Judaism.

Judaism is a religion.

Zionism is an ideology.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

You're completely correct on this one H. 'Tiny nations lining up screaming at Israel to stop is nothing more than gesture politics.'

Tho you're much less so on this one. 'Only the UN or the US can tell Israel to stop'. The UN is a toothless tiger, when push comes to shove. Every major nation disregards it when it suits their overall aims. Ref the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq in 2003 by The Coalition Of The Willing aka the US, the UK, and that poor arm-twisted Spanish sap who looked like he'd rather be anywhere else than in thaf photo-call.

Israel has always held less than zero respect for the resolutions of the UN, same as any other nation with skin in any geo-political particular game. Only the US can 'strongly advise' Israel to rein things in. And even then with only limited success. Which is as it should be, seeing as how it's Israel's continued existence which is ultimately at stake. The final call has to be Israel's

 

[thejackal]

You're completely correct on this one H. 'Tiny nations lining up screaming at Israel to stop is nothing more than gesture politics.'

Tho you're much less so on this one. 'Only the UN or the US can tell Israel to stop'. The UN is a toothless tiger, when push comes to shove. Every major nation disregards it when it suits their overall aims. Ref the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq in 2003 by The Coalition Of The Willing aka the US, the UK, and that poor arm-twisted Spanish sap who looked like he'd rather be anywhere else than in thaf photo-call.

Israel has always held less than zero respect for the resolutions of the UN, same as any other nation with skin in any geo-political particular game. Only the US can 'strongly advise' Israel to rein things in. And even then with only limited success. Which is as it should be, seeing as how it's Israel's continued existence which is ultimately at stake. The final call has to be Israel's

Yeah I think that's all basically true.

The UN is virtually an arm of the US govt.

The UN was devised by the USA and its headquarters are in New York.

The USA has only 4.3% of the worlds population yet contributes a whopping 28% of the UN's annual income.

Obviously, the US is not doing this for altruistic reasons and uses its veto to nix anything that doesn't align with its objectives.

EDIT: My one caveat to this is your last part. If this were universally true, apartheid South Africa would probably still be going strong.

 

[Zeberdi]

I think it is necessary to point out the hypocrisy of the Israeli position and to spread this truth far and wide.

I saw a short documentary years ago (I think it was on RT) where a bunch of Holocaust survivors were taken into Gaza via one of the military checkpoints, and at least one of them remarked that the treatment of the Palestinians appeared to be WORSE than what they had experienced in Nazi Germany. Not my words, the words of a Holocaust survivor.

One of my oldest friends is a founding member of Jews for Justice for Palestinians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jews_for_Justice_for_Palestinians). 30 years ago he explained to me that:

Judaism is not Zoinism, and Zionism is not Judaism.

Judaism is a religion.

Zionism is an ideology.

A good distinction to make and yes -‘Judaism’ is a religion as distinct from being Jewish - or distinct from ‘Zionism’ that has been pointed out numerous times on this thread but don’t conflate the idea of ‘Zionism’ with what is happening in Gaza either - what Netanyahu is doing is a particular form of Zionism..

Zionism was a secular political movement that was revived in the C19th (that actually was unpopular with Orthodox Jews at the time because it was secular) that posited the concept of a nation state for a peoples that were a nation albeit in Diaspora-it developed into a belief that the ancient land of Palestine was the location whereby these rights and sovereignty would be realised. Once that objective had been achieved in 1948,‘Zionism’ began diversifying into different ideologies including Religious Zionism which maintains an extreme religious belief that all the lands of Ancient Palestine belong to a Greater Israel not just those confined to the 1948 borders or even confined to the borders of the Occupied lands of post-1967. Religious Zionism is a very minority belief and one not confined to Jews in Israel. The majority of Jews in Israel are secular or belong to different and largely more moderate judaistic traditions and are not Religious Zionists.

It is important therefore when bandying around these terms people do so carefully- when referring to ‘Zionism’ be clear what ideology you are meaning - it is important - it can be the difference between an ideology that upholds the right of Israel to exist period or an ideology that upholds the idea that the State of Palestinine never should and might serve as a ‘justification for genocide’.

Netantahu’s Government is propped up by the far right Religious Zionists who hold the balance of power. They are not representative religiously or politically of the majority of Israelis.

What you think you see as hypocrisy of a nation State maybe down to a lack of homogeneity in belief and ethnicity.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

You're completely correct on this one H. 'Tiny nations lining up screaming at Israel to stop is nothing more than gesture politics.'

Tho you're much less so on this one. 'Only the UN or the US can tell Israel to stop'. The UN is a toothless tiger, when push comes to shove. Every major nation disregards it when it suits their overall aims. Ref the illegal and immoral invasion of Iraq in 2003 by The Coalition Of The Willing aka the US, the UK, and that poor arm-twisted Spanish sap who looked like he'd rather be anywhere else than in thaf photo-call.

Israel has always held less than zero respect for the resolutions of the UN, same as any other nation with skin in any geo-political particular game. Only the US can 'strongly advise' Israel to rein things in. And even then with only limited success. Which is as it should be, seeing as how it's Israel's continued existence which is ultimately at stake. The final call has to be Israel's

I think you misunderstood. I agree with you completely. The UN has the authority to tell Israel to stop but it won't - because one of its members, the US, will veto it. Likewise, the US, the former 'world policeman' is the only single nation with the clout to stop Israel. But it won't try.

And Israel won't listen to reason anyway. Which is why a comment I made a few days ago that the only way to stop Israel is for America to invade it was not me being factious. That, incidentally, definitely won't happen either.

However, the all powerful and influential voice of Zarah Sultana has spoken, so we can all line up behind her and the killing will stop overnight. Apparently. Or maybe we can simply feel more virtuous by signalling our approval of her position.

 

[BadFish]

I think we can all agree that the solution to this is unlikely to come from the UN. Israel have been ignoring them and their human rights council for a long time (with the support of the US).

Pressure needs to be placed on the US to pressure Israel. Does anyone expect this to come from the UK? Starmer has been mentioned on this thread but is the actual prime minister doing anything?

Saudi perhaps?

 

[armchairclubber]

I think we can all agree that the solution to this is unlikely to come from the UN. Israel have been ignoring them and their human rights council for a long time (with the support of the US).

Pressure needs to be placed on the US to pressure Israel. Does anyone expect this to come from the UK? Starmer has been mentioned on this thread but is the actual prime minister doing anything?

Saudi perhaps?

How about all three you mention? Or Timbuktu? Or any of our own UK politicians, signalling or not?

 

[Guinness Boy]

How about all three you mention? Or Timbuktu? Or any of our own UK politicians, signalling or not?

Yeah, a small city in Mali pressuring the IDF is bound to work.

 

[armchairclubber]

Yeah, a small city in Mali pressuring the IDF is bound to work.

You're getting a growing fan club

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I think we can all agree that the solution to this is unlikely to come from the UN. Israel have been ignoring them and their human rights council for a long time (with the support of the US).

Pressure needs to be placed on the US to pressure Israel. Does anyone expect this to come from the UK? Starmer has been mentioned on this thread but is the actual prime minister doing anything?

Saudi perhaps?

Who has leverage with the US. Er.....hang on......nobody!

The EU might have some clout......lets engage and....oh.