Rafah bombings (Edited by Mumsnet)

I spoke to a family trying to flee Gaza, they were trying raise funds. They needed minimum £5k per person to evacuate. They didn’t have enough funds when I last spoke to them. I can’t stop thinking about them and the children.

The problem many families were having is that they had some funds but not enough to evacuate everyone. Men are only allowed to cross the boarder with families. Some families made the difficult decision to let the women and children go to Egypt while the men are left behind.

Crossing to Egypt was costing quite a lot of money according to a testimony I heard of, now I cannot remember where it was newspapers or youtube.
It is heartbreaking to think about it.
But the truth of the matter is that leaving Gaza is not the real solution (not feasible). Getting peace for the Palestinians in their land is.
Let them see that in those negotiating tables.
Not that any of those sitting on them today will be the ones to get peace done for good, because they have proven that they are unable.

@Newbutoldfather I think the COIN approach may fail in Gaza for the same reasons it failed in Afghanistan.

I believe it is an operational error to be planning for Israeli military to be the primary means by which security would be achieved instead of attempting to work by, with, and through local sources of power, security, and legitimacy.

Do you really think what is happening to Gaza is worse than what happened in Japan in 1945?
Once again comparing suffering. Suffering is suffering. What do you think of the treatment of the Chinese by the Japanese in unit 731? What are your feelings about the way they treated POWs?
They are one of our staunchest allies now.
This article is a few months old but an interesting read. I wouldn't they are Israel's staunchest allies.
Between Israel and Palestine, Japan practices a discreet balancing act (lemonde.fr)

Was Hamas justified in doing what it did on 7th October.
No of course not.
How do you think Israel should have responded?
By using their modern precision weapons, Mossad's ability to find anybody and everybody anywhere and by remembering that "Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.”

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C6q8iiRNB_S/?igsh=dWdlZzlqanRsZDh0

Here's a plea from the UN which shows their opinion of how Israel is behaving.

I'll look at your link later. I don't have time now.

@ConnieCounter ,

Thank you for your considered reply.

I do think that there is a popular myth that countries have an almost unlimited supply of smart weapons. This is partially because they like to show them off ever since the videos of bombs going down chimneys in the first gulf war. In reality, smart munitions use the most modern chips and are really expensive and in short supply. That is why most countries resort to ‘dumb’ weaponry (look at Russia and Ukraine).

There is an article I link to below, which I broadly agree with. It is in an Israeli publication but I nonetheless hope you take the time to read it. It is written by General Petraeus who enjoyed great success in Iraq in winning over the civilian population.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/with-iraq-on-his-mind-us-savior-general-points-at-the-way-to-victory-in-gaza/

Netanyahu clearly stated in 1978 that Palestinians should not have their own State, as they already have one, Jordan.

Japan tortured, raped and killed millions of Chinese people. I think around 20million? I think they committed atrocities in other parts of Asia as well. The use of the atomic bomb was terrible, and I think the west still struggles with the fact that it was done, but after millions dead, tortured, raped and numerous crimes against humanity, you can see the arguments for it being a last resort.

I strongly believe it is a genocide. That's why it's being looked at in the international courts.

I am not an expert on war, no, but I do know about genocide and this unfortunately meets the threshold.

Are you one of those who thinks an entire country or people has to be wiped out for it to count as genocide? You should look up the relevant Geneva conventions.

Sorry if you think I'm being impolite. I find it hard to keep my cool when people justify, defend and deny a genocide that we're all observing in real time. I find it very upsetting in fact.

Obviously Hamas wasn't justified in doing what it did. I absolutely condemn it in the strongest terms and have done several times on here. I'm amazed you have to ask me that, when I've made it so unbelievably clear that I think that killing innocent people is wrong and disgusting. I don't hold different opinions on the murdering of innocent people based on their religion or cultural background. In fact, every poster I've seen on mumsnet who shares my beliefs on the situation has said the same. Unfortunately that attitude often doesn't go both ways and it's difficult to hear people, yourself included, minimising the crimes against humanity we've seen in the aftermath of the Hamas atrocity.

Israel should have done what they're pretending they're doing (and which you seem to believe)- there are targeted ways of fighting guerilla terrorist groups. Their AI strategies and use of dumb bombs are wiping out families. They're deliberately killing aid workers and journalists, and the families of journalists. They have displaced and starved millions of people. These are all war crimes and should not be happening. Many other countries manage to fight terrorist groups without resorting to genocide. Indiscriminate bombing of highly populated areas will never be acceptable to me.

@ConnieCounter ,

It’s not a genocide.

Do you really think what is happening to Gaza is worse than what happened in Japan in 1945? They are one of our staunchest allies now.

Do you know how war works at all?

You have asked me my views on many things and I have answered as honestly and fully as I can.

So, a question for you. Was Hamas justified in doing what it did on 7th October. How do you think Israel should have responded?

Well, that’s two questions but I have answered at least 10 of yours, however impolitely phrased.

Netanyahu said in the 1970s that Palestinians did not need their own land at all- as they had Jordan!

In 1976 I believe. He has wanted to take over the whole of Palestine, bit by bit, since then- and now to finally take the whole lot. With many queueing on the border waiting to go in :(

There were so many families raising funds to leave. I am truly heartbroken for them. Some were so close to having enough money to leave to Egypt.

"Sorry we blew your house up, killed your family and left you an amputee. We're cool now though, right?"

I think you're demonstrating an enormous lack of understanding about how Gazans are going to feel towards the Israeli state and army after seven months of utter terror.

I wouldn't expect the victims of any genocide to accept those who committed the genocide ruling over them afterwards. The entire concept it absurd.

@ConnieCounter ,

I don’t see why they shouldn’t. It would be hard but not impossible and I don’t think Netanyahu is the man to do it.

How do you think Europe and Japan made a permanent peace with their occupiers after WW2, especially Japan after Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

You speak as if it is impossible to ever reach a peace after a brutal war. Thankfully that is not the case.

And, no, I am not saying that Israel will do it right, only that I hope they will.

And one of the main crossing through which they are getting the aid delivered.
Now, on full control of IDF. And Israel does not have a good track records on allowing aid in.
Plus they have moved people further north, where we know aid has been more difficult to get to and distribute.
Bring that peace forward.

I wonder how hearts and minds can be won over in this situation... And whether that winning over will extend to those of us who have lost people and who have witnessed these atrocities through humanitarian work, for example. Or will we just be told we're not to say anything...

@Scirocco Not sure if you saw, but @Newbutoldfather stated a personal view that Israel should return to '48borders, settlements should be removed and Jerusalem should be shared.

I posted about the hearts and minds bit yesterday and mumsnet deleted my post for being "inflammatory" so I was trying to avoid a repeat of that.

But I still think it's an absolutely terrible idea, and the fact that you think Israel could possibly win over hearts and minds after what they've done to Gaza is pretty mind blowing.

The language used does suggest less than full support for a two state solution.

I think I agree with you on Jerusalem. '48 borders do provide a larger area for Palestine, and a narrow connecting point for continuity of a Palestinian state. I think this is a fair and magnanimous view, and I'm glad you clarified your opinion on this.

@ConnieCounter ,

‘That poster wants Israel to take over Gaza, temporarily at least, after the destruction of Gaza is complete. So I would be interested in hearing his answer to this question too.’

That is the obligation of any winner of a war. They need to administer the territory they have won for the benefit of the population. This happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and in Europe after WW2.

If there is a better solution available then I would be happy to see that too.

Of course, you quoted me incompletely and out of context. I said Israel should run it, win over hearts and minds and prepare for a democratic election. Naturally you missed that out.

That poster wants Israel to take over Gaza, temporarily at least, after the destruction of Gaza is complete. So I would be interested in hearing his answer to this question too.

'The aim, surely, for all civilised people is a prosperous peaceful Israel living next door to prosperous peaceful areas inhabited by Palestinians'

'The aim, surely, for all civilised people is a prosperous peaceful Palestine living next door to prosperous peaceful areas inhabited by Israelis'

I'm not sure how equitable this is.

@stormy4319trevor ,

‘The proposed Palestinian state on '67 borders would mean West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem. I personally think it's rather unworkable without a way to connect it as a continuous piece of land, but it seems to be the most common proposal. I have not heard of any 2 state proposal that involves taking over part of Israel.’

That is why I phrased it the way I did. It isn’t a contiguous piece of land.

Personally I think Israel should go back pretty much to the ‘48 borders, with the possible exception of the Golan Heights (due to its military significance), and that giving up the settlements in the occupied territories needs to be a part of that. Ideally Jerusalem needs to be shared. Religiously it is of immense importance to all three of the Abrahamic religions and should maybe be run by the U.N.

But Israel must gain a lasting internationally guarantees peace in return.