For people who say I stand with Israel

I am not Jewish but I stand with Israel as it has the right to exist as a nation and as a homeland for the Jews. They are facing an enemy whose aim is to murder all Jews worldwide.

I also stand with Israel as the only fully functioning democracy in the Middle East and the only ME country who gives full and equal rights to women and gay people.

If it was to be a 50:50 fair state Israel would need to give back land

This

It’s very one sided. Everyone seems to ignore what the illegal settlers and IDF have been doing for decades. OF COURSE NONE OF IT IS RIGHT. THATS THE PROBLEM. stop quoting anti semitisn at me. This is about innocent families with children being thrown out of their homes so illegal settlers can take over. It’s gone on far too long. Israel needs to release all the children being held in prisons for the last decades. Men haven’t been able to fix anything for decades

I don’t think the barbaric actions of Hamas can be justified in any way. It can’t just be ‘boiling over’

@HeidiInTheBigCity I don't think anyone's claiming that European antisemitism vanished in 1945. But presumably you knew that. You also know that rates of antisemitism vary widely by country, and therefore the obvious impact that immigration was predicted to have, and has had, on rates of antisemitism in western countries. The problem will only become more and more impossible to evade over time.

I think you totally missed the point I was trying to make. By continually repeating the same thing doesn’t help. I was trying to highlight what the Palestinians have been dealing with for decades and you seem to conveniently ignore that.

This is where people have no idea what a 2 state solution means - it can't be split "down the middle" into 50:50 as that would mean expelling people from Israel and no more expansion. Israel do not mean they want to give up land when they say they want a 2 state solution - currently the Jewish and Palestinian population is more or less equal, I think about 6 million each. However, Israel 'owns' more than 80% of the land. If it was to be a 50:50 fairstate Israel would need to give back land, expell some of its inhabitants and prevent any newcomers. It's not going to happen.

So what should happen then?

This is where people have no idea what a 2 state solution means - it can't be split "down the middle" into 50:50 as that would mean expelling people from Israel and no more expansion. Israel do not mean they want to give up land when they say they want a 2 state solution - currently the Jewish and Palestinian population is more or less equal, I think about 6 million each. However, Israel 'owns' more than 80% of the land. If it was to be a 50:50 fair state Israel would need to give back land, expell some of its inhabitants and prevent any newcomers. It's not going to happen.

Actually, from an international law perspective, I think matters are rather uncontroversial (insane propagandists notwithstanding).

1. No, attacks (by either party!) on civilians are actually never okay.
2. Yes, Israel has a right to defend itself against attacks - within the confines of international law (according to which several things that have already happened - excluding the much debated Al Shifa hospital episode - are clearly illegal).
3. Palestinians do have a right to resist their occupation - including by violent/military means. They, too, however, are bound by international law, e.g., "no deliberate targeting of civilians".
4. In this view, it is arguable that both the Hamas attack and Israeli actions such as large-scale evacuation orders or cutting Gazans off from food, water, electricity are arguably severe violations!

Again, none of this is particularly controversial, if you manage to not let yourself be ideologically blinkered!

Seems like currently, especially on social media, and especially from the young and naive (though not, of course, limited to the young), the idea that some rape, murder and violence is quite justifiable, even admirable, if you personally like the ideal or the cause, is back in vogue.

While I would whole-heartedly agree, I am not sure this is particularly new! I remember (yes, predominantly the young - specifically young MEN!) having some serious "Islamic Jihad fangirl" issues 20 years ago! I used to tear them a new one and tell them I suggested they get into video gaming if they really enjoyed the notion of bloody murder so much!

In the same vein, I am truly astonished at all the staunch allies and true friends the state of Israel seems to have all of a sudden! And how saddened and deeply concerned your friendly neighbourhood rabid racist suddenly seems to be by anti-semitism.

In the German speaking world (I do a lot of business, follow closely) there is a veritable onslaught of outrage over all the anti-semitism - and how bad, bad, bad it is that we have allowed for it to be "imported" ... as though European antisemitism had somehow, magically, vanished in 1945 and we needed to re-import us some.

The irony! It burns!

(For the record, and because it is all such a powder keg: needless to say I am vehemently opposed to both antisemitism and other racism! I am just also despairing at one being misused to express the other!)

It’s six of one half a dozen of the other. The poster is not acting in good faith but ramping up the rhetoric. It’s straight out the Hamas playbook- minimise their own anti semitic genocide while magnifying and embellishing the idf’s defence policy. Because no one can in good conscience deny that Palestine is a place of suffering and violence. But ask yourself why Egypt and Jordan have closed the borders to them too. Ask why there is plenty of money for bombs, but none for social security. Why the population is so young and why Hamas choose to hide weapons and munitions under schools and hospitals. Why they can say what happened on the 7th of October is justified but the consequences they could have predicted aren’t. My heart breaks for the women and children suffering because of this mess. But armchair white saviours whipping up emotion just fuels division and antisemitism. Which is just what Hamas want.

Proven by who? Isreal? Or Canada? Why would I believe intelligence from a country that's purposely breaks international law?

If that’s really what it means, then why haven’t the Palestinians got a state by now? This has been offered over and over again during the last fifty years, as long as the terrorist attacks on Israel stop, and the Palestinians and the Arab world recognises a two-state solution?

What’s your answer for why it hasn’t happened already, if they only want peace and a Palestinian state?

live in an open air prison. Year after year the Palestinians are bombed and attacked. Their land has been reduced and illegally occupied by settlers. Settlers with guns kill unarmed civilians every day. They through Palestinians on to the street and steal their homes. How many children have been imprisoned and no talk of their release

Is this true?

This question from @asterel is basically the core question here. Is anyone from the Free Palestine club going to answer it?

Why wouldn’t it be a million times better for Hamas or the Palestinian Authority to say: we’ll commit to a nonviolent peace process led by the UN right now, because the most important thing is the ordinary Palestinian people

You are so very wrong. Free Palestine means they should be free of the threat of their children being arrested by IDF. It means they should have their own airport. They shouldn’t have to live in an open air prison. Year after year the Palestinians are bombed and attacked. Their land has been reduced and illegally occupied by settlers. Settlers with guns kill unarmed civilians every day. They through Palestinians on to the street and steal their homes. How many children have been imprisoned and no talk of their release. The illegal use of white phosphorus bombs is abhorrent. The list goes on. Israel are openly talking about indiscriminately killing all Palestinians. The only exit into Egypt was bombed several times. The list goes on. The Palestinians have suffered at the hands of IDF and Israelis government for long enough

To add to the pp above — nationalism was definitely not just a Romantic/Enlightenment ideal. We in the U.K., and indeed in the rest of Europe, had it going on since well before the Reformation (any ideas why Henry really wanted to be free of the Church of Rome?) In the Mediterranean, nationalism and imperialism has been in full swing for millennia. (Imperial rule often had a commitment to proto-nationalism at the heart of it.)The ideal of the nation-state was certainly one cemented by the Enlightenment; but any history of Britain makes clear that it very much pre-dates it.

No you didn't merely say it was potentially relevant historical context. You said:

'you could argue that - had we not had the extraordinarily stupid (in hindsight) idea of inventing the concept of nationalism back in the Romanticist era, not only would we not be looking at this particular problem - we could have also averted myriad other bloody conflicts.'

You said nationalist was an extraordinarily stupid idea. And that without it the current conflict would have been averted.

There probably was less conflict under the imperialist religious supremacist system imposed after the Islamic conquest. So technically yes if it had been left in place there might be less conflict now. You can suppress the conflicts caused by multiculturalism through sheer authoritarianism. Or through imposing a strict hierarchical system in which one religion/culture is superior to all others and the rest are suppressed and controlled.

The British and French, in fairness to them, were trying to aim a little higher with their 'stupid' idea of nation-states for everybody. The Arabs were more than happy to take theirs, provided the ex-dhimmi Christians and Jews weren't also getting ones.

They don’t have nothing because of Israel, but because they’d rather spend the aid money they do get on bombs and weapons to attack Israel, rather than infrastructure, water, power, food, jobs and secondary and tertiary industries. Wouldn’t you try to stop people who want to kill you from doing so? Especially if they were so committed to it they’d rather live in squalor just to maybe have one more bomb. Not the leaders though, they live in mansions in Qatar.

Do some research. I watched Gaza on Netflix last night. 2014.

Also, just want to say: someone could steal my “land” and I still wouldn’t go and behead a baby no matter what. Funnily enough, the vast majority of refugees and people in even the most dire poverty don’t, either. So why are terrorist “freedom fighters” so admired for doing so? Why wouldn’t it be a million times better for Hamas or the Palestinian Authority to say: we’ll commit to a nonviolent peace process led by the UN right now, because the most important thing is the ordinary Palestinian people? Ask yourself — why don’t they? They could have done so at any point for decades now.

So do you think it’s okay for men to settle their land disputes and religious obsessions by raping and killing women and children and taking them hostage? Is it fine for Hamas to keep the hostages? Should they just kill them or keep them forever, maybe marry them or keep them as servants or something? Maybe all global conflicts should be solved by some extremist men parachuting in and raping and pillaging some ordinary women? Do that and get your political demands sorted out - sounds great, doesn’t it? I can’t think why we wouldn’t stand with that.

Freedom should never be achieved through terrorism or violence. Only a few decades ago ordinary people spoke with reverence of Gandhi and non-violent resistance and pacifism; nowadays, bloodthirsty violent revolution seems back in fashion. Well, lots of Europeans were also seduced by this romantic idea in the first few decades of the twentieth century: there was no shortage of starry-eyed leftist revolutionaries admiring bloody revolution in Russia or anywhere else. (They were mostly roundly disabused of that idea after the realities of war in Europe. Are we going to get another one before we all decide again that bloody terrorism isn’t romantic freedom-fighting?)

Seems like currently, especially on social media, and especially from the young and naive (though not, of course, limited to the young), the idea that some rape, murder and violence is quite justifiable, even admirable, if you personally like the ideal or the cause, is back in vogue.

So is rampant antisemitism, anti-feminism, quasi-religious beliefs about sex and gender, and a whole shit-tonne of daft and fanciful ideas about nationalism, land, ownership, beautiful causes and the like. Hello 2023; meet 1923 (again)!

Thanks Namechangeagain2023

Hamas are not in the West Bank. They have no control over the West Bank. Why are innocent Palestinians losing their homes and land to illegal settlers. So many innocent Palestinians have been killed in West Bank. Nothing to do with Hamas. This is totally wrong. There would not be peace because illegal settlers keep stealing homes and land.

Everything @Namechangeagain2023 said on page 1.

The frustration and anger has finally boiled over.

Is that how you see the atrocities committed by Hamas?