To be annoyed nobody mentioned who started the war

You mean it is current?

The details of the kings, battles, movement of peoples are not made up even if you do not believe in the prophets.

The bible isn’t history

There seems to be a step missing in this analysis. It goes from Hamas has genocidal intent, that there has been widespread denial about how horrific Oct 7 was to calling Oct 7 genocidal would be helpful. It seems to miss out how it finds that Oct 7 was intended to destroy a substantial part of the Jewish race rather than the horrific attack on civilians designed to provoke an enemy.

The danger here is in undermining the words needed to describe actions that have the real outcome of destroying a race or ethnic group. This includes the Nazi’s genocidal actions towards the Jews in the Holocaust. If the brutal murder of a thousand civilians as a provocation becomes ‘genocide’ then what are we left with when there is a systematic attempt to wipe a race that has a hugely significant impact on the number of people left of that race and their culture threatening the survival of that race itself?

People like to use ‘genocide’ because it is so awful and they reach for the worst words they can think of to describe their terrible suffering. But the meanings of these words must be kept.

I agree and it's also imperative the term is applied correctly. Sadly this paper has had little attention unsurprisingly, but it is well researched.

Hamas’ October 7th Genocide: Legal Analysis and the Weaponisation of Reverse Accusations – A Study in Modern Genocide Recognition and Denial | Israel Law Review | Cambridge Core

Attacking people of another ethnic geoup
is not enough though, regardless of how vile your attacks are. It has to be the systematic destruction of their race, not intentionally attacking a large group of those you violently object to. Plenty of Palestinians may wish to carry out a genocide of the Jews but their actions at the music festival did not amount to that. Neither did Israel’s actions towards Gaza’s. People like to use ‘genocide’ because it is so awful and they reach for the worst words they can think of to describe their terrible suffering. But the meanings of these words must be kept.

With a few UN related employees thrown in for measure.

‘Genocide’ is thrown around with very little understanding it seems.

Quite. Maybe you should look up the definition. Give you a hint - Intent.

It wasn't only Hamas who carried out the genocide in Israel btw. Thousands of Palestinian civilians joined in.

For those thinking that I[m a name-changer, I[m a Brit living in Switzerland! I[ve travelled to Jordan (Oman, Egypt, Morocco, Tunisia and Libya among many other places)..Israel was siphoning more of the water from the river Jordan, about half of Jordan[s population are of Palestinian origin! Chased out of their homeland by the brave "settlers"!

Or in one case lectured on how lucky they were that the Oxford Union had employed security to stop irate Muslims violently attacking them for saying Islam is not a religion of peace….

carrying out an ACTUAL genocide with hostages

Neither Israel nor Hamas in Gaza carried out genocide in Gaza. ‘Genocide’ is thrown around with very little understanding it seems. Killing 50 or even 5000 hostages is reprehensible but not genocide - unless those 5000 hostages represent the last of those peoples. Equally, killing 20,000 civilians in a war is not genocide unless they were the last of those peoples and you are trying to wipe them out. Genocide doesn’t just mean nasty people killing people, even a lot of people.

Yes the conversation is ever ongoing

But right not, not what the majority want

But the main point is, NI is a sovereign country and one of 4 countries that make up the UK, its not owned, colonised or controlled by the UK, it is the UK

I don't know why right wingers bother to accept invites to Oxford Union. They are either boycotted or disrupted by the new fascists.

Considering the reason for what has happened in Gaza for the last (almost) 3 years was Palestinians invading Israel and carrying out an ACTUAL genocide with hostages, and in Lebanon because Hezbollah attacked Israel in solidarity with the Palestinians, it was extremely disingenuous not to mention this at the Oxford 'debate' yes, but then I've seen other 'debates' at Oxford where it seems the whole premise of inviting the pro-Israel side is to be inflammatory towards them.

That is a very broad statement.

A lot of people from Catholic communities in NI want to reunited with the Republic of Ireland.

Obviously not the British settlers but the Irish community.

Many worry about losing the NHS but that’s probably the deepest worry they have, they know the risk of losing the NHS.

Many in the republic worry about the reaction of the loyalists as they like to burn everything when they’re upset.

United Ireland referendum is not happening soon, Andy Burnham declared the vote "off the table" during his visit to Northern Ireland in August 2026

It is wisely off the table for now due to fears of a “conflict”.

The wages, pensions and benefits, lifestyle is much better in the Republic of Ireland.

The focus for reunification is on the table.

THIS!!!

"this house believes Israel never really wanted peace" ... Israelis certainly want the West Bank .. that's very clear.

Hopefully people remember this going forward, as they should with terrorist states and their proxies including Iran, Russia, etc.

Ah, I’d missed that. It still seems to me that first post was clear (and the second one evasive, therefore).

You are attempting to excuse vile behaviour. It is not oppression in Gaza, it is fear - fear of Hamas.

Why does this conflict receive so much attention despite not even coming close to being among the ten deadliest conflicts of the past 50 years?
I think we all know why

This is her paragraph what did she mean? She didn't mean antisemitism, she clarified that if she meant that should have said that. So whats is the reason that we all supposedly know of?

Is it vague though? She knew what she meant, she expected the reader to know what she meant, and the reader did indeed know what she meant.

But do you see what happens when people are oppressed? It has taken some developing countries time to grow the infrastructure and political systems that we have. Often they were held back, not because they were less than, but because they were colonised and infantilised. The consequences of subjection were pointed to as evidence that nations were inherently backward or bad by those who exploited them. This is a repeating problem and is not unique to Hamas. Oppression and fear breeds radicalism. The immoral acts of radicalism have their roots in how a man felt when he saw his father beaten for nothing, the constant vigilance, the knowledge that something life changing can happen and no one will come to help. It is a death spiral. Playing find the bad guy when it comes to people groups is a waste of time. People are trying to survive and thrive and they will do it by any means necessary. Let's make it easier and fairer and then see where we are.

My heart is with those who were subjected to atrocities on both sides. May they be remembered and may they rest in peace.

When will we learn.

I don't think the phrase is unfair. I think it's stupid and vague. I've no problem with people calling out antisemitism, say it's about Jews, say it's about donuts if that's what you think is happening, but that poster wasn't calling it out. She wasn't saying anything at all really. 'We all know why' do we? Clearly not because she wasn't even talking about antisemitism apparently, just speaking in riddles, stupid, vague riddles. It's off topic so this will be my last post on it, it's just something that irritates me, people having no courage to speak out for what they believe.

Always the evil west and evil Britain.

Do you know the history of that area? How about its geography? Look at a map. This is the crossroads of 3 continents. There have always been many and diverse peoples there. There have been empires fighting there since empires were invented, usually stated as happening with Sargon, or lugal-zage-si. There have always and will always be conflicts. All land is stolen, especially there.

Most recently, in known history, before the evil west and evil Britain, look at the Ottomans. Look at the Turks and Arabs invading the region. It’s pretty disgusting to single out the Jews for having their state created after they’d lived there since the end of the Bronze Age.

I don’t think the phrase is as unfair as you make out.

The crux of the Arab and Muslim objection to Israel is specifically that these are Muslim lands, and Israel is Jewish.

It’s not hidden, nor seen as something to be ashamed of.

Hamas called Oct 7 the Al Aqsa Flood after all. Why does Hamas see Israeli control of the mosque as such an affront, when it doesn’t see Saudi control of Mecca/Medina as an affront? Because Israeli control means Jewish control.

The BBC has a habit of translating yahudi as ‘Israeli’ when it interviews Arabs about the conflict, which I think is infantilising.

The Israelis think it’s about Jews. The Arabs and Muslims (wherever they are in the world) think it’s about Jews.

The Western left finds that embarrassing and insist that a more palatable explanation (to them) must be the real one.

You do some reading.

Israel and the Palestinians: History of the conflict explained https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgr71z0jp4o