2023 Israel - Hamas / Hezbollah war

[GusB]

The ICC in effect recognises this, as the chief prosecutor requested 5 arrest warrants, two for Israeli leadership (Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant), plus three for Hamas' leadership. However it's now looking more one-sided because the IDF have managed to assassinate 2 out of 3* of Hamas' members wanted by the ICC.

*There's speculation they got the third too, but not confirmed IIRC.

Ach, who cares about international law?

UN mission says Israeli tanks forcibly entered base in southern Lebanon

Unifil seeks explanation from IDF for ‘shocking violations’ while Netanyahu urges peacekeepers to withdraw

www.theguardian.com

The UN peacekeeping mission in Lebanon has said two Israeli tanks destroyed a gate and forcibly entered a base in the south of the country as Israel’s ground operation against Hezbollah moved deeper into Lebanese territory.

The incident in Ramyah on Sunday morning was the latest in a string of violations that Unifil, the UN force deployed since 1978 to southern Lebanon, has blamed on the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).


After the tanks left, shells exploded about 100 metres from the base, and the ensuing smoke left 15 staffers needing medical treatment for unusual symptoms despite the use of gas masks. Unifil also accused the Israeli military of holding up a logistics convoy.

In a statement released late on Sunday, the Israeli military said a Merkava tank had been trying to evacuate injured soldiers and had backed into the Unifil post accidentally.


Five peacekeepers have been injured since Friday as Israeli ground troops have begun to advance farther north in Lebanon after two weeks of intense fighting and airstrikes. The death toll in the small Mediterranean country now stands at more than 1,400 since late September, after intense Israeli airstrikes overnight on the centre of the southern city of Nabatieh.

Unifil said it had requested an explanation from the IDF for what it called “shocking violations”.

In a videoed statement addressed to the UN secretary general, António Guterres, on Sunday, the Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, reiterated Israeli calls for Unifil troops to evacuate.

“The time has come for you to withdraw Unifil from Hezbollah strongholds and from the combat zones,” he said. “The IDF has requested this repeatedly and has met with repeated refusal, which has the effect of providing Hezbollah terrorists with human shields.”

He later said on X: “Israel will make every effort to prevent Unifil casualties and will do what it takes to win the war.”

"Israel will make every effort to prevent Unifil casualties (but we don't really whether or not we commit war crimes)"

There wasn't much effort to prevent casualties in Gaza, so I'm not exactly convinced that they'll be making any efforts in this case. Are the hawkish contributors to this thread still happy for Nutternyahu to continue with his killing spree?

 

[uglymonkey]

It doesn't appear precise targeting ( and rules of warfare) are utmost in their eyes anyway, apart from mission creep, they seem to have advanced targeting systems with a " carpet bombing" option most of the time, collective punishment seems to spring to mind against anyone who isn't Israeli.

 

[nw1]

He is a tyrant, end of.

 

[AM9]

He is a tyrant, end of.

Hopefully when he ceases to be the Prime Minister, the Likud party will also disappear with him. Only then is any sort of negotiation on a Two-State solution likely to happen.

 

[nw1]

Hopefully when he ceases to be the Prime Minister, the Likud party will also disappear with him. Only then is any sort of negotiation on a Two-State solution likely to happen.

Indeed, Likud is a menace. In contrast, Israeli Labour prime ministers have worked actively for peace.

 

[AM9]

Indeed, Likud is a menace. In contrast, Israeli Labour prime ministers have worked actively for peace.

How can the right be so wrong?

 

[Ediswan]

Indeed, Likud is a menace. In contrast, Israeli Labour prime ministers have worked actively for peace.

Unfortunately, the Israeli Labour Party no longer attracts the electoral support it once did. (That is the very short version.)

 

[gg1]

Unfortunately, the Israeli Labour Party no longer attracts the electoral support it once did. (That is the very short version.)

Technically they no longer exist, they merged with another left of centre party earlier this year. The combined vote of the two constituent parties at the last Israeli general election was around 7% with right wing parties collectively accounting for around 60% of the vote.

 

[AM9]

Technically they no longer exist, they merged with another left of centre party earlier this year. The combined vote of the two constituent parties at the last Israeli general election was around 7% with right wing parties collectively accounting for around 60% of the vote.

Which means the electorate of Israel get's the Government it deserves.

 

[brad465]

Netanyahu has fired Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, the latter was a notable voice of criticism to some of the regime's actions during the war since October 2023.

Protests erupt in Israel after Netanyahu fires defence minister

Benjamin Netanyahu says there is a "crisis of trust" between him and Yoav Gallant, and replaces him with Israel Katz.

www.bbc.co.uk

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has fired defence minister Yoav Gallant, saying there is a "crisis of trust" between them.
Netanyahu said in a statement that his trust in Gallant had "eroded" in recent months.
Foreign Minister Israel Katz will replace Gallant, Netanyahu added.
Gallant posted on social media that the "security of the state of Israel was and will always remain the mission of my life".
In a statement, Netanyahu said: "In the midst of a war, more than ever, full trust is required between the prime minister and the minister of defence.
"Unfortunately, although in the first months of the campaign there was such trust and there was very fruitful work, during the last months this trust cracked between me and the minister of defense."
Netanyahu said that "significant gaps were discovered between me and Gallant in the management of the campaign".
"These gaps were accompanied by statements and actions that contradict the decisions of the government and the decisions of the cabinet," he added.
Netanyahu said he "made many attempts to bridge these gaps, but they kept getting wider", adding that "our enemies enjoyed it and derived a lot of benefit from it".
Gallant only posted a short message on X, stating that the security of Israel "was and will always remain the mission of my life".
Katz will succeed Gallant as defence minister, while Gideon Sa'ar becomes the new foreign minister, Netanyahu said.
Netanyahu and Gallant have had a fractious relationship at times.
Netanyahu first fired Gallant in March of last year following their disagreement over controversial plans to overhaul the justice system.
But he was forced to retract the sacking following massive public protests in several cities in Israel.
In May this year, Gallant voiced open frustration at the government’s failure to address the question of a post-war plan for Gaza. Gallant wanted Netanyahu to declare publicly that Israel has no plans to take over civilian and military rule in Gaza.
It was a rare public sign over the divisions within Israel's war cabinet over the direction of the military campaign.
“Since October, I have been raising this issue consistently in the cabinet,” Gallant said, “and have received no response".
Netanyahu responded by saying that he was "not ready to exchange Hamastan for Fatahstan," in reference to rival Palestinian groups Hamas and Fatah.

​

 

[nw1]

Netanyahu has fired Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, the latter was a notable voice of criticism to some of the regime's actions during the war since October 2023.

Protests erupt in Israel after Netanyahu fires defence minister

Benjamin Netanyahu says there is a "crisis of trust" between him and Yoav Gallant, and replaces him with Israel Katz.

www.bbc.co.uk

Just makes Netanyahu look even more like an autocratic, tinpot tyrant who will not tolerate voices of reason in his Government.

The sooner Israel gets a new and saner PM, the better.

 

[sjpowermac]

Just makes Netanyahu look even more like an autocratic, tinpot tyrant who will not tolerate voices of reason in his Government.

The sooner Israel gets a new and saner PM, the better.

Or perhaps it simply confirms that Prime Minister Netanyahu is a strong and decisive leader.

Out of genuine interest, how would you rate the leadership in Iran?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Nov 2024 ==

Netanyahu has fired Defence Minister Yoav Gallant, the latter was a notable voice of criticism to some of the regime's actions during the war since October 2023.

Protests erupt in Israel after Netanyahu fires defence minister

Benjamin Netanyahu says there is a "crisis of trust" between him and Yoav Gallant, and replaces him with Israel Katz.

www.bbc.co.uk

Why do you use the word ‘regime’ in reference to the Israeli government? In what particular context can you justify this slur?

 

[nw1]

Or perhaps it simply confirms that Prime Minister Netanyahu is a strong and decisive leader.

If you think a love of war and bombing and mass murder are good traits, of course. I despise warmongers, I am afraid.

Out of genuine interest, how would you rate the leadership in Iran?

Irrelevant whataboutery. "Netanyahu isn't as bad as the Iranian government, so he isn't worthy of criticism".

 

[brad465]

Why do you use the word ‘regime’ in reference to the Israeli government? In what particular context can you justify this slur?

I used it mainly to distinguish them from the Israeli population as a whole, it has more than one meaning. The fact you seem to be offended by the use of that word says more about you than anything I've implied.

 

[nw1]

Why do you use the word ‘regime’ in reference to the Israeli government? In what particular context can you justify this slur?

Why are you so keen to defend them?

 

[DerekC]

Oh dear - this thread seems to be carrying on exactly where it left off when it was (apparently) suspended. Please can we have some sensible discussion about the real issues, not just personal slanging.

 

[sjpowermac]

If you think a love of war and bombing and mass murder are good traits, of course. I despise warmongers, I am afraid.

Irrelevant whataboutery. "Netanyahu isn't as bad as the Iranian government, so he isn't worthy of criticism".

I disagree with your description of Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Regarding ‘whataboutery’, not as all, I regard Netanyahu as a strong leader. There seems to be an awful lot of criticism of Israel, but very little about the forces that they are fighting.

I most certainly stand with Israel and their right to defend themselves.

I also stand with the ordinary Palestinian people and regard the high number of civilian deaths as a huge tragedy. I think where we differ though is that I believe Hamas has a lot of responsibility for this.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Nov 2024 ==

I used it mainly to distinguish them from the Israeli population as a whole, it has more than one meaning. The fact you seem to be offended by the use of that word says more about you than anything I've implied.

Thank you for confirming why you used the term ‘regime’ in reference to the Israeli government.

I would respectfully suggest that you could have easily distinguished the Israeli government from the Israeli people by using the term ‘Israeli government.’

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Nov 2024 ==

Oh dear - this thread seems to be carrying on exactly where it left off when it was (apparently) suspended. Please can we have some sensible discussion about the real issues, not just personal slanging.

Agreed.

 

[brad465]

Thank you for confirming why you used the term ‘regime’ in reference to the Israeli government.

I would respectfully suggest that you could have easily distinguished the Israeli government from the Israeli people by using the term ‘Israeli government.’

I hope you don't lecture everyone else in your life this way, this sort of arrogance is (or should be) highly frowned upon, regardless of subject and/or who is being talked to.

 

[sjpowermac]

Spot on. The problem is that both sides are being led by the religious zealots and the main protagonists (Israel and Iran) are states where religion is part of the founding ethos. And for a zealot, religion is vastly more important than human rights even for their own believers, and all others are (at best) third class. Is there any possibility of breaking out of this apparently never ending cycle of war?

Before Netanyahu there was some hope on the Israeli side, because there are very many Israelis and Jewish people around the world who are not zealots and understand that peace will only ever come through co-operation and negotiation. Netanyahu, in pursuing his own political survival, has made that enormously more difficult and through a process of incompetence and provocation got the Middle East exactly where he wants it - on the brink of a war with Iran in which the US will be drawn in on Israel's side, and with the extra bonus of improving Trump's chances of getting re-elected.

On the Iranian side there is a bit more hope - there is a faint flicker of light in that the religious regime has now failed in every possible way, people are fed up with it, and religion seems to be less deeply embedded than in Israel. Can there be a secular revolution? I don't know but there are some who seem to think so. However even if that happens, it won't solve the problem because the Palestinians (understandably) are never going to give up their demand for a homeland - so Netanyahu has to go too and be replaced by an Israeli moderate with enough popular backing to kick the settlers out - or at least some of them.

Will it happen one day? I still hope so, but I don't expect to see it in what remains of my lifetime.

This is such a thoughtful and balanced post, that raises so many excellent points. I’m sorry that I missed it when you posted it.

I agree with you that we do seem to be inexorably on the path to an all out war between Israel and Iran. I would question though if this would necessarily be any different choose who was in power in Israel. I could be wrong, but I would be surprised if an Israeli government of any hue would stand by and watch Iran gain a nuclear bomb.

I agree with you too about the situation in Iran, though sadly the attempts at uprisings so far have, of course, been brutally suppressed. I hope for the sake of the Iranian people that you are right and that there is a successful, secular uprising.

I do wonder though if in the event of change in Iran if it would retain its current borders. Around 50% of the population is formed of minority groups, who might well seek their own states, particularly the Kurdish.

If there were to be a change in leadership in Iran, that would be likely to spell the end of Iran’s support for the groups operating in Gaza/Southern Lebanon. In turn I wonder if this would then lead to Western governments putting greater pressure on Israel to settle the question of a Palestinian homeland? At the moment it is all too easy for Israel to point to Gaza and say ‘they had a go at statehood and look what happened.’

Regarding removing settlers, Israel did remove Jewish settlements from Gaza prior to their withdrawal in 2006, so it isn’t without precedent. Whilst I don’t disagree with you about the West Bank, it would be much harder there, the map of settlements looks like Swiss cheese!

The Abrahamic Accords do represent at least some progress in the Middle East, progress that would have seemed spectacularly unlikely even 15 years ago.

In the short term though, I have to say that I’m not overly hopeful and there’s sadly lots of scope for things to go (even more) spectacularly wrong than they already have.

Thank you again for your post, you made me reconsider some of the issues, which I think is what a good debate should be about on all sides.

 

[GusB]

I disagree with your description of Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Regarding ‘whataboutery’, not as all, I regard Netanyahu as a strong leader. There seems to be an awful lot of criticism of Israel, but very little about the forces that they are fighting.

Saddam Hussein was a strong leader too, along with countless others I could mention. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're good leaders.

Criticism of Netanyahu is not an endorsement of the forces that they're fighting.

I most certainly stand with Israel and their right to defend themselves.

I also stand with the ordinary Palestinian people and regard the high number of civilian deaths as a huge tragedy. I think where we differ though is that I believe Hamas has a lot of responsibility for this.

I have a great deal of sympathy for those moderate Israeli people who simply want to get on with their lives and peacefully co-exist with their Palestinian neighbours.

However, to simply blame Hamas is ignoring the fact that the Israeli oppression of Palestinian people has been going on for decades. If Israel was to halt the ongoing settlement of land that it has no right to (despite UN resolutions prohibiting it), there might be a starting point for some form of negotiation. Unfortunately, there's a section of the Israeli population that believes it has a right to all the land and the current regime is doing nothing to stop it. I have no time nor sympathy for them.

While I agree that a country has a right to defend itself, let's not forget that Palestinians also have the right to resist.

This conflict is not as black-and-white as you make it out to be and it's not helpful when you ask people to "rate the leadership in Iran"; it's not a case of picking sides.

 

[sjpowermac]

Saddam Hussein was a strong leader too, along with countless others I could mention. It doesn't necessarily mean that they're good leaders.

Criticism of Netanyahu is not an endorsement of the forces that they're fighting.

I have a great deal of sympathy for those moderate Israeli people who simply want to get on with their lives and peacefully co-exist with their Palestinian neighbours.

However, to simply blame Hamas is ignoring the fact that the Israeli oppression of Palestinian people has been going on for decades. If Israel was to halt the ongoing settlement of land that it has no right to (despite UN resolutions prohibiting it), there might be a starting point for some form of negotiation. Unfortunately, there's a section of the Israeli population that believes it has a right to all the land and the current regime is doing nothing to stop it. I have no time nor sympathy for them.

While I agree that a country has a right to defend itself, let's not forget that Palestinians also have the right to resist.

This conflict is not as black-and-white as you make it out to be and it's not helpful when you ask people to "rate the leadership in Iran"; it's not a case of picking sides.

It might surprise you, but I actually agree with some of what you have written there.

I agree, there are a great number of faults on the Israeli side, I will happily acknowledge that, particularly the settlements in Judea and Samaria which are contrary to international agreements.

Where I think we differ though is that you don’t seem to accept that both Iran and Hamas have a stated aim to wipe the state of Israel off the face of the earth. It is stated clearly in the founding charter of Hamas and has been repeated numerous times by Iran.

At no point have I suggested that the conflict is ‘black and white’ or all one sided.

I do think though that the Jewish people should have their own state, which several posters have argued against, though in fairness, I have not seen you express this view.

Where I think the thread is unbalanced is the continual criticism of Israel, without any real mention of Iran.

I think that the Palestinian people deserve far better than Hamas. It is worth remembering the brutality of Hamas towards the citizens of Gaza, even prior to them using them as human shields in the war.

And for the avoidance of doubt, I think the number of civilian casualties in Gaza is beyond tragic.

 

[GusB]

I agree, there are a great number of faults on the Israeli side, I will happily acknowledge that, particularly the settlements in Judea and Samaria which are contrary to international agreements.

Where I think we differ though is that you don’t seem to accept that both Iran and Hamas have a stated aim to wipe the state of Israel off the face of the earth. It is stated clearly in the founding charter of Hamas and has been repeated numerous times by Iran.

Well, let's talk about "founding charters". Here's Likud's:

Original Party Platform of the Likud Party

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)​

a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

b. A plan which relinquishes parts of western Eretz Israel, undermines our right to the country, unavoidably leads to the establishment of a "Palestinian State," jeopardizes the security of the Jewish population, endangers the existence of the State of Israel. and frustrates any prospect of peace.​

An outright declaration that nobody other than the Jewish people should have authority over the land "between the Sea and the Jordan". I seem to recall that using "between the river and the sea" was seen by some as such an antisemitic statement. It also denounces the idea of a Palestinian State; there's a red line right there.

At no point have I suggested that the conflict is ‘black and white’ or all one sided.

That's not how I interpret your posts, I'm afraid.

I do think though that the Jewish people should have their own state, which several posters have argued against, though in fairness, I have not seen you express this view.

I'm about to express that view.

Taking this to its logical conclusion, should all Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc. have their own states? It wasn't so long ago that the idea of an Islamic state was seen as something horrendous to be avoided at all costs. I'd hate the idea of a Christian state; as someone who is LGBQTI (and whatever letters I've forgotten) I abhor the idea of living in a country where one religion dominates and the zealots get to determine how I live my life. That view also applies to Judaism, I'm afraid. I don't see why any one religious group should have sole access to a given parcel of land and either force all other religious groups out, or treat them like second-class citizens because they don't conform.

I totally understand that Jewish people have been persecuted and there is a desire for a safe space, but this should not happen at the expense of those who already live in that space and don't subscribe to those beliefs. So, no - Jewish people have no right to their own state. I believe that they have the right to exist peacefully wherever they live in the world, without fear from hate or discrimination, but that it's a right that should be extended to everyone.

Where I think the thread is unbalanced is the continual criticism of Israel, without any real mention of Iran.

Why do we need to mention Iran when we're discussing the barbaric actions of Israel? This really is whataboutery. I will re-iterate that criticism of one regime is not necessarily an endorsement of another.

I think that the Palestinian people deserve far better than Hamas. It is worth remembering the brutality of Hamas towards the citizens of Gaza, even prior to them using them as human shields in the war.

I simply don't believe the "human shields" garbage that's being trotted out. The Israeli regime tried this trick with a Lebanese hospital a few weeks ago, suggesting that it was a stronghold for Hezbollah gold.

BBC tours hospital Israel says sits above Hezbollah gold

The BBC’s Orla Guerin is taken on a tour of Al Sahel Hospital in Beirut.

www.bbc.co.uk

The BBC’s Orla Guerin has been taken on a tour of Al Sahel Hospital in Beirut where Israel claims millions of dollars in cash and gold are kept in a hidden Hezbollah bunker underneath.

Doctors denied the allegation and took the BBC through the building, including to the first and second level below ground. They insisted there is nothing underneath.

On Monday night the hospital had to evacuate around 50 staff and 15 patients - none of them critical - when Israel made its claim.

Hospital officials have insisted that Al Sahel has no connection with any organisation, or group, or faction.

So, just another excuse to bomb infrastructure that's essential to human life. It seems to be a common theme with the IDF, as is blaming innocent civilians because there happens to be a few wrong-uns among them. Israel doesn't have the same control over Lebanon as it does with Gaza, so fortunately it is possible to de-bunk some of its silly claims.

And for the avoidance of doubt, I think the number of civilian casualties in Gaza is beyond tragic.

Indeed. Beyond tragic, but completely avoidable. Israel is supposed to have some of the most effective intelligence agencies in the world and it's more than capable of taking people out "surgically" if it so desired.

 

[Russel]

With Trump looking likley to win, what direction do we think the current Israel/Hamas/Hezbolla/Iran conflict will take?

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Difficult to predict. Trump is basically anti-war.

 

[sjpowermac]

Well, let's talk about "founding charters". Here's Likud's:

Original Party Platform of the Likud Party

Encyclopedia of Jewish and Israeli history, politics and culture, with biographies, statistics, articles and documents on topics from anti-Semitism to Zionism.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org

An outright declaration that nobody other than the Jewish people should have authority over the land "between the Sea and the Jordan". I seem to recall that using "between the river and the sea" was seen by some as such an antisemitic statement. It also denounces the idea of a Palestinian State; there's a red line right there.


That's not how I interpret your posts, I'm afraid.


I'm about to express that view.

Taking this to its logical conclusion, should all Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc. have their own states? It wasn't so long ago that the idea of an Islamic state was seen as something horrendous to be avoided at all costs. I'd hate the idea of a Christian state; as someone who is LGBQTI (and whatever letters I've forgotten) I abhor the idea of living in a country where one religion dominates and the zealots get to determine how I live my life. That view also applies to Judaism, I'm afraid. I don't see why any one religious group should have sole access to a given parcel of land and either force all other religious groups out, or treat them like second-class citizens because they don't conform.

I totally understand that Jewish people have been persecuted and there is a desire for a safe space, but this should not happen at the expense of those who already live in that space and don't subscribe to those beliefs. So, no - Jewish people have no right to their own state. I believe that they have the right to exist peacefully wherever they live in the world, without fear from hate or discrimination, but that it's a right that should be extended to everyone.


Why do we need to mention Iran when we're discussing the barbaric actions of Israel? This really is whataboutery. I will re-iterate that criticism of one regime is not necessarily an endorsement of another.


I simply don't believe the "human shields" garbage that's being trotted out. The Israeli regime tried this trick with a Lebanese hospital a few weeks ago, suggesting that it was a stronghold for Hezbollah gold.

BBC tours hospital Israel says sits above Hezbollah gold

The BBC’s Orla Guerin is taken on a tour of Al Sahel Hospital in Beirut.

www.bbc.co.uk

So, just another excuse to bomb infrastructure that's essential to human life. It seems to be a common theme with the IDF, as is blaming innocent civilians because there happens to be a few wrong-uns among them. Israel doesn't have the same control over Lebanon as it does with Gaza, so fortunately it is possible to de-bunk some of its silly claims.


Indeed. Beyond tragic, but completely avoidable. Israel is supposed to have some of the most effective intelligence agencies in the world and it's more than capable of taking people out "surgically" if it so desired.

So far as I’m aware, same sex relationships have been legal in Israel since the late 1980s and the previous laws were ignored long before that. I fail to see how LGBTQIA+ rights in Israel compare unfavourably with any other country in the Middle East and indeed most of the world.

Without their own state, I really don’t think that the Jewish people would exist for long in the Middle East. I’m struggling to think of any country there that has a strong record on religious freedom, or indeed freedom of any sort.

I’m genuinely interested to know how you see Israel developing under your proposed plan and how you would protect the Jewish people.

Regarding my mentioning of Iran, the thread title is ‘2023 Israel-Hamas/Hezbollah war,’ and so it’s entirely appropriate that Iran be mentioned in the thread.

Regarding seeing the conflict in terms of ‘black and white’, I think it’s reasonable to say that the thread is almost entirely against Israel and it seems quite a number of posters, including yourself, are against the existence of a Jewish state.

I have been consistent in saying that I believe the Palestinians deserve much better than the brutality of Hamas.

I sees both sides of the story and at no point have I said there’s an easy solution.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Nov 2024 ==

Difficult to predict. Trump is basically anti-war.

Yes indeed, I think Trump will want a ‘deal’ rather than a war. I do think though that he would be extremely tough on Iran.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Agreed. Trump will be tough on Iran but surprisingly harder on Israel

 

[sjpowermac]

Agreed. Trump will be tough on Iran but surprisingly harder on Israel

Yes, again agreed regarding Trump and Israel. I do fear though what would happen in the time prior to Trump taking office.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Yes, again agreed regarding Trump and Israel. I do fear though what would happen in the time prior to Trump taking office.

Exactly. You would have the lame duck situation with Biden having a legacy to protect or make and basically using his office with presidential decrees.

 

[GusB]

So far as I’m aware, same sex relationships have been legal in Israel since the late 1980s and the previous laws were ignored long before that. I fail to see how LGBTQIA+ rights in Israel compare unfavourably with any other country in the Middle East and indeed most of the world.

I wasn't specifically referring to Israel in this case, but many religions are quite homophobic and tolerance is not quite the same as acceptance. Oh, and considering that the middle east is largely Muslim, it's not difficult for Israel to compare favourably with other countries in the region!

Without their own state, I really don’t think that the Jewish people would exist for long in the Middle East.

Rubbish. Jewish people have lived side-by-side in the middle east for centuries. They would still be able to co-exist peacefully if it wasn't for the nutcases who insist they have a god-given right to everything, according to a book that was written a few thousand years ago.

I’m struggling to think of any country there that has a strong record on religious freedom, or indeed freedom of any sort.

Ah, so that explains why Palestinians are hemmed in by walls and can't go about their daily business without having to go through checkpoints, hoping that the goons at the gate will let them through in order to put food on the table. Sorry, but your definition of freedom is well off the mark compared to mine.

I’m genuinely interested to know how you see Israel developing under your proposed plan and how you would protect the Jewish people.

What proposed plan do you refer to? If you'd properly quoted my post, I might have some clue as to what you're talking about. As far as protecting Jewish people is concerned, they wouldn't need protecting if your beloved Israeli regime had acted like a good neighbour.

Regarding my mentioning of Iran, the thread title is ‘2023 Israel-Hamas/Hezbollah war,’ and so it’s entirely appropriate that Iran be mentioned in the thread.

Being entirely pedantic, there is no mention of the word "Iran" in the thread title.

Regarding seeing the conflict in terms of ‘black and white’, I think it’s reasonable to say that the thread is almost entirely against Israel and it seems quite a number of posters, including yourself, are against the existence of a Jewish state.

I am against the existence of a Jewish state. I am against the existence of a Christian state, a Muslim state, etc. There should be no need for a state that exists solely for one religion or another, especially when the creation and maintenance of that state requires the cleansing or subjugation of a population that does not subscribe to those ideals.

The thread isn't entirely "against Israel"; I'd suggest that many contributors have some empathy with the general Israeli population, and that includes myself. However, you cannot whine about other nations wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the earth while Israel continues its indiscriminate bombing and the nutcases in charge bang on about Palestinians being "human animals".

So yes, I still maintain that you're still applying a very black-and-white view to what is an incredibly complex situation.

 

[eldomtom2]

Agreed. Trump will be tough on Iran but surprisingly harder on Israel

Where is the evidence for this, when he ran an extremely pro-Israel administration last time?