Uk politicians position about the war

am not on twatter - what I can see of that seems to refer to a report by Robert Peston.
Do you (or anyone else) have a link to it by any chance?
If true I truly despair of Starmer.
I did see Lammy outlining Labour's new stance the other day - speaking - ever......... so............ slowly - gave me the impression that he thought this might make him sound authoratative. Of course it could have been because he hoped to stretch his slot beyond the point where he could be asked questions - or because he was speaking with a gun to his head.

I hope people vote anyway. They can always sit with the SNP. There used to be debates about fielding candidates south of the border.

@PeasfullPerson if you're in Scotland, vote SNP!

How can anyone argue that Palestinians are not being collectively punished.

I hope that all the decent MPs out there vote for the SNP motion and aren’t persuaded to vote for the Labour amendment, now we know more details it appears to be completely useless.

I’m not sure I can support Labour anymore.

@EasterIssland I think the Labour amendment is stating that there should be a ceasefire, but only if those 2 conditions are met. So, if the Israeli public feel assured Oct 7th will never happen again, and if there is no threat of violence from Hamas, there should be a ceasefire. Fine in principle, but difficult to say exactly when the Israeli government will feel satisfied those conditions are met.

@EasterIssland I'm not sure, will com back with more info if I can get any clearer idea.

@EasterIssland I'm not sure. Their amendment states Israel can not be expected to stop fighting if Hamas is still threatening violence, and that the Israeli public have the right to be sure something like Oct 7th will never happen again. At a guess, Labour is calling for a ceasefire contingent on the elimination of any threat from Hamas?

So Starmer calls for a ceasefire after checking the wind the wind, and following the intervention of Micky Mouse?
Weren't some labour politicos condemned/disciplined for calling for a ceasefire?
What happens to them?

I hope he does. I might even consider voting Labour. It may not make much difference now, but it might restore faith in Labour as having some kind of morality and mind of their own. I'm a bit worried that he may come out with prevarications like he wants a ceasefire, but only when the time is right though.

I feel like this is giving me too much hope he might actually vote for a ceasefire. I know it most likely will not change much globally.

Starmer seems to be against an assault on Rafah and is calling for a ceasefire now. This seems like a radical change for him, I wonder why he is saying this now, but better late than never I suppose.

The Guardian reports the statement says recognition of a state would be rewarding Oct 7th terrorism. This seems to ignore that calls for recognition of a Palestinian state go back many years, and were not only a demand of Hamas. It also negates the right of Palestinian people to self determination and does not address the status of Palestinians within the OPT. Are they to be made full citizens of Israel? Or are they to live under never ending occupation.

Netanyahu's cabinet has unanimously voted to reject any imposition of a Palestinian state. Such a decision would only ever be negotiated between the two sides, with no international input. That sounds like never to me, since Netanyahu has openly stated he does not want a 2 SS.

@niceandnew
Israel did have an option in how it responded.

At worst, it chose vengeance rather than targeting Hamas. Saying that all men being killed are Hamas is nonsense- but it’s the only way the Israeli ratios for death of innocent civilians make sense.

At best, the approach of the IDF put a premium on the lives of Israeli soldiers at the clear expense of Gazan children. That’s not brave. They had a choice- and their approach changed as pressure was put on them to save lives of Gazans, according to reports made by IDF soldiers.

And to what end the bombing?

I can see from the footage that the tunnel systems were not destroyed.

And, this will have increased anger against Israel and THIS is what drove creation of Hamas. You can’t kill this anger.

Some compromise will be required- like removing WB settlements and a capital in East Jerusalem for Palestinians - as per this plan:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-arab-allies-reportedly-set-to-propose-palestinian-statehood-plan-within-weeks/amp/

There’s nothing contradictory about being against colonisation and realising a pragmatic solution is required to bring peace to the region- which involves a 2SS.

Liberal Israelis were looking at options to leave prior to 7/10 due to Netanyahu’s judicial reforms. I can’t see them rushing back if the country is now more dangerous and is thought to have committed plausible genocide.

https://www.schatz.senate.gov/news/press-releases/schatz-leads-group-of-49-senators-in-announcing-amendment-to-reaffirm-us-support-for-a-two-state-solution#

You can read the conflicting articles on line about whether Israel is a coloniser. However- the Nakba with removal of 700,000 Palestinians and the current actions of settlers and in the WB are clear acts of colonisation that I would be surprised anyone could argue against.

It is arguably also in the framework of “decolonisation” that a 2SS will be introduced. It will not resolved with traditional models of conflict- as also noted in other colonies.

@Polka83
(I asked you to elaborate on that point about migration because I wanted to fully understand your post before responding.)

I agree with you fully that Israel is far from a safer place at this point. Is is far from safe at the minute. In fact since 1930s Israeli's (and all Jews) worldwide have never felt as unsafe and threatened as they feel right now.
But I would hope for Israel that their actions in Gaza will at least serve as a deterrent for other terror groups from attacking.

Do I support the targeted killing of innocent people? Absolutely not. No child or innocent person should be suffering. But I do see that Israel has no choice but to finish their job in killing as many Hamas as they can, destroying their terror infrastructure (Which unfortunately means many many civilised buildings) and rescuing hostages and Hamas have ensured that there is no way for Israel to do that without involving the innocent.

The long term hope is that once Gaza has new leadership they will be given the opportunities and resources to rebuild and form a stable economy and their quality of life will increase drastically without Hamas in power. Terror thrives in fragile times so once stability is restored in the region, terror should decline.

(And I'm still unsure how Israel's migration comes into the conversation? Is it not very expected that in war time people flee?)

I have a question for you @Polka83.
You start off by saying that "Your post has reinforced my view that a coloniser can only enforce their presence by brutal force" but later on state that "you want Israel to exist". These 2 statements are a direct contradiction to each other. If you believe Israel is the coloniser (Which it isn't) than how can you also believe it has a right to exist?

https://twitter.com/DanReich/status/1740438356620665107

So of my thread, you focus on this?

I will take it you are ok with the rest of what I have written.

Please see attached regarding immigration
https://www.timesofisrael.com/immigration-to-israel-dropped-sharply-following-oct-7-assault-statistics-bureau/amp/

Having to pay more for people to come to Israel

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israel-beefing-up-immigrant-payouts-by-nis-170-million-to-boost-wartime-immigration/

It is projected that interest in migration to Israel will increase - once war is over, but will need to see when the fighting does stop.

There are figures for net poplulation falling - allegedly from official statistics- but I would understand why you might not trust this source.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/nearly-half-a-million-people-depart-israel-amid-gaza-war-report/3076116