Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be annoyed nobody mentioned who started the war

244 replies

Normalized · 07/09/2026 02:03

Recently on YouTube the Oxford Union Channel released a debate titled this house believes Israel never really wanted peace. I'm not going to go through the arguments back and forth as anyone can watch it, however what's really annoyed me is that's not a single debater, including on the Israel side, mentioned who actually started the war.

There was a lot of talk whether Israel did truly ever want peace or not, but nobody actually spoke of the fact that Israel never started any wars. It was the Arabs and Palestinians who started first the Civil War in 1947, then Israel's war of independence in 1948. I would think the onus for peace is on the party who actually started all the wars.

It's such a weird debate to pull up Israel for 'never truly wanting peace' while completely ignoring the role of the other side who actually started all the wars.

OP posts:
Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 18:26

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 18:23

The one that says all will be well when land is returned to Palestinians.

You mean when Israel is destroyed and the Palestinians take over?

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 18:24

If it is about oppression, what is the excuse for the Muslims massacring hundreds of thousands in Sudan and Nigeria where they hold power? Or the genocide of the Yazidis?

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 18:23

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 17:55

What harmless version?

The one that says all will be well when land is returned to Palestinians.

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 18:22

And people will vote for more extreme groups in those circumstances out of desperation because they offer change.

Most people in Gaza have never voted. Hamas did away with democracy 20 years ago.

Comesround · 07/09/2026 18:13

Normalized · 07/09/2026 15:26

@Dontlletmedownbruce

Who started it is important not in terms of historic blame but in order to move forward in the present.

If you declared war on a people who never harmed you, and you're still at that war, surely the first step to peace is to proclaim that as far as you're concerned the war is over. After that, negotiations and talks can commence. But it starts with the one who started and perpetuated the war.

To put the onus for ending the war on Israel is simply immoral. The onus is on the Arabs who declared war, to declare peace.

I don't think anyone in the Gaza strip has the luxury of knowing peace the way you do. It has been a life of oppression. In those circumstances there will always be people wondering how they can change the future for their children by any means possible. I don't think that means they want war. It's just what happens when one people group lacks access to basic amenities. And people will vote for more extreme groups in those circumstances out of desperation because they offer change. That's not because they hate but because they want better lives for their families.

To use the NI example, Catholics were not permitted to do many things they should have been able to do for a very long time. Even within living memory, Belfast was full of checkpoints that only Protestants could pass, preventing some children accessing adequate education. Catholics couldn't call the police and expect protection. Did they want war? No but people will do what they have to do in order to make their wives safe and give their children a future. Oppression begets violence. The best remedy is to end the oppression.

I don't think this thread is helpful because no one has covered themselves in glory here.

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 17:55

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 16:37

They will believe the harmless version.

What harmless version?

dustabsorber · 07/09/2026 16:40

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I love German Xmas markets. Buy a present, drink a glühwein, eat some chocolate, buy another present, drink another glühwein, eat some more chocolate .....

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 16:37

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 16:24

For those asking about peace - what do you think Hamas/IRG backed hate marchers are referring to when they shout “from river to sea!”?

They will believe the harmless version.

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 16:24

For those asking about peace - what do you think Hamas/IRG backed hate marchers are referring to when they shout “from river to sea!”?

likelysuspect · 07/09/2026 16:15

Dontlletmedownbruce · 07/09/2026 14:58

Does it matter who started what? Surely whats much important is what is happening now. To take the Irish example above, England invaded the country and occupied it for 100s of years. Irish people were driven from their land. Many many rebellions were quashed, atrocities and persecutions were commited, for 100s of years. When the opportunity for seperation arose the UK turned this down and insisted on retaining part of the country and we all know the problems that led to. During the lead up to the GFA UK harped on about trying to secure peace while still occupying NI. The 'who started it' argument was well in the past by then. Both sides were brave enough and mature enough to agree to peace despite their differences, one of those 'differences' being UK continuing to occupy NI. I'm aware I'm simplifying it but for the most part peace was achieved. Would it be OK for some NI Catholics to attack innocent British civilians on the basis that 'your lot started this'? Absolutely not. Would it be OK for Catholics to throw protestants from their home because of what happened years ago? No it wouldn't. Would it be OK for the millions of emigrants to show up and demand to occupy their ancestral homes? No it would not. The only way any group achieves peace is by leaving the past in the past and taking responsibility for what their actions are today. Thwho started the war should not be a factor in adebate

Edited

Erm, the UK doesnt occupy NI.

NI is in the UK, its part of it. Dont you know this?

NI wants to be part of the UK, its not a country that wishes to be independent.

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 16:04

Normalized · 07/09/2026 15:26

@Dontlletmedownbruce

Who started it is important not in terms of historic blame but in order to move forward in the present.

If you declared war on a people who never harmed you, and you're still at that war, surely the first step to peace is to proclaim that as far as you're concerned the war is over. After that, negotiations and talks can commence. But it starts with the one who started and perpetuated the war.

To put the onus for ending the war on Israel is simply immoral. The onus is on the Arabs who declared war, to declare peace.

That assumes Hamas want peace, which they don’t. At least not until they have taken over Isreal and got rid of the Jews (and Christians). And then if there is peace in that area they will look to conquer other non-Islamic countries. Peace for them means world domination.

Normalized · 07/09/2026 15:28

But yes, the declaration of Israel’s independence triggered the war.

As in the abusive man's 'look what you made me do'?

Israel declaring independence did not need to trigger any war. That was the sole evil decision of the Arabs.

OP posts:
Normalized · 07/09/2026 15:26

@Dontlletmedownbruce

Who started it is important not in terms of historic blame but in order to move forward in the present.

If you declared war on a people who never harmed you, and you're still at that war, surely the first step to peace is to proclaim that as far as you're concerned the war is over. After that, negotiations and talks can commence. But it starts with the one who started and perpetuated the war.

To put the onus for ending the war on Israel is simply immoral. The onus is on the Arabs who declared war, to declare peace.

OP posts:
DilettanteRedRagger · 07/09/2026 15:20

OneWiseEagle · 07/09/2026 11:16

Well, what do you think? Plus add a few hundred years into the timelines

This goes back to the destruction of the First Temple and who took over afterwards. But yes, the declaration of Israel’s independence triggered the war. Independence declared May 14; Palestinian (Arabic) side starts the war on May 15. The Palestinian side considered that Israel was the aggressor by declaring independence the MINUTE the British mandate from the League of Nations ended, and they still do. The Israelis think that was a peaceful act, and the aggressors were the other side who refused to accept it. You’ll never untangle a web that started over 2,000 years ago in one debate anywhere, even Oxbridge.

I’ve read complete books by both “sides.” All arguments are biased by the way you’ve been raised and what you believe. I’ve never seen anyone debate this who didn’t bring their own issues into it. Ever. Even the most lauded experts in the world pretty obviously have a personal bias. But that’s how wars work; all you have to do is encourage tribalism and the war will continue forever. And there’s an AWFUL lot of money to be made in war, off the backs of dead innocents.

Dontlletmedownbruce · 07/09/2026 14:58

Does it matter who started what? Surely whats much important is what is happening now. To take the Irish example above, England invaded the country and occupied it for 100s of years. Irish people were driven from their land. Many many rebellions were quashed, atrocities and persecutions were commited, for 100s of years. When the opportunity for seperation arose the UK turned this down and insisted on retaining part of the country and we all know the problems that led to. During the lead up to the GFA UK harped on about trying to secure peace while still occupying NI. The 'who started it' argument was well in the past by then. Both sides were brave enough and mature enough to agree to peace despite their differences, one of those 'differences' being UK continuing to occupy NI. I'm aware I'm simplifying it but for the most part peace was achieved. Would it be OK for some NI Catholics to attack innocent British civilians on the basis that 'your lot started this'? Absolutely not. Would it be OK for Catholics to throw protestants from their home because of what happened years ago? No it wouldn't. Would it be OK for the millions of emigrants to show up and demand to occupy their ancestral homes? No it would not. The only way any group achieves peace is by leaving the past in the past and taking responsibility for what their actions are today. Thwho started the war should not be a factor in adebate

PixieFairySprite · 07/09/2026 14:34

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 14:26

That's us told then.

I should think so. I doubt you were there!

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 14:29

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 14:26

He said it was the fault of Moses?

😆 🤣 😂 😹

Neverstopwondering · 07/09/2026 14:26

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 14:26

He said it was the fault of Moses?

😂

LuckyHazelFox · 07/09/2026 14:26

PixieFairySprite · 07/09/2026 14:20

My Grandfather (involved in the Suez crisis with the Fleet Air Arm) always said this.

That's us told then.

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 14:26

PixieFairySprite · 07/09/2026 14:20

My Grandfather (involved in the Suez crisis with the Fleet Air Arm) always said this.

He said it was the fault of Moses?

PinguMoll · 07/09/2026 14:23

Comesround · 07/09/2026 13:43

Your fears are completely valid. At the same time, the world is the way it is partly because we spent a great deal of time plundering and oppressing it. Nothing that has happened to you comes close to what others have experienced at the hands of the English. It's not a competition but we won't get far unless we acknowledge that everyone is, in some way, a victim. People become radicalised when there is systemic corruption and oppression.

Its not the 1600s. And the sins of our ancestors are not ours!

PixieFairySprite · 07/09/2026 14:20

SpottyPyjama · 07/09/2026 02:17

The entire creation of Israel was starting a war.

My Grandfather (involved in the Suez crisis with the Fleet Air Arm) always said this.

Neverstopwondering · 07/09/2026 14:19

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 14:09

The number of slaves the English bought of Africans is nothing to the number enslaved by Muslims, and who continue to by enslaved by them to this day. The trade to the east outsized the trade to the west, predated it by millennia and outlasted it by hundreds of years. The word ‘slave’ comes from the Muslim enslavement of Slavs. The Islamic caliphates massacred tens of millions - far far outstripping anything in the British Empire.

Those protesters on Westminster Bridge chatting there support for Houthis because they sent missiles at Israel. The same Houthis that have regularly gone to Ethiopia and stolen people to sell in markets. The woman and girls to be workers, wifes or sex slaves. All those stupid idiots praising the Houthis and holding signs up with support for the vile cretins. The Islamic extremists must have been laughing their heads off at the western stupidity.

KTheGrey · 07/09/2026 14:16

Savvysix1984 · 07/09/2026 08:02

It’s very hard for anyone to argue that Israel have ever wanted peace. All their actions show otherwise. They are a war mongering state.

Go and look at the debate - they do a cracking job.

Chrysanthemumsinpots · 07/09/2026 14:14

CurlewKate · 07/09/2026 14:08

Surely the important thing is how we’re going to end it?

Supporting the Persian people to overthrown their colonial oppressors in Iran (who have currently murdered over 100,000 of them) would cut off the much of the money to Hamas and other terrorists.