When does terrorism become war?

[mids2019]

Looking at the news this morning I think the media are finding it difficult to register Palestinian attacks as a terrorism event or simply an attack of one state against another.

I suppose whether you view 5000 tickets as a terrorist atrocity or a declaration of war is dependent on your views on whether Palestine can ever be a functioning state. We plainly in Europe would describe such events as terrorism in that civilian populations have been targeted but in the eternally challenged middle East the use of such a word has political connurtations.

Is this a terrorist attack on Israel?

I've been reading through a report by NATO Strategic Communications Centre of Excellence (NATO StratCom COE).

In the attachment, they note that Israel's vulnerability is its adherence to international law as well as the Geneva Convention. Hamas constantly tries to exploit that - they abuse protection given to civilians and civilian infrastructure in International Humanitarian Law. That includes using civilians as human shields as well as manipulating minors to attack Israeli Defence Force personnel. Some of you might remember or know the Provisional IRA did a similar thing - they had child "soldiers" in 1974.

This kind of thing makes it pretty much impossible for States avoid civilian deaths. Targeted strikes are all very well, but the terrorist response to that is to surround themselves with MORE civilians. That's one reason why Gaza is densely packed.

For Hamas, it's a win-win in propaganda terms.

Oops! Attachment here.

@DownNative

I agree but I really do think the Israelis are preparing the international community for significant civilian casualties going forward. The warning to all Gaza residents to leave is obviously a warning that the Israelis are intent on a significant incursion that will cost lives.

Maybe a Rubicon has been crossed and the Israelis simply can't afford to adhere to international law as in past conflict. It was noticeable that the residents of Gaza are resigned to some form of operation happening but that feel it is going to be of the same magnitude as previous incursions. To my mind if isn't; the scale is simply going fine different and we are already seeing that in terms of aerial targets currently.

There is plenty of historical precedent that when a state feels there is existential threat they are willing to embark on total war where civilian lives are not protected e.g.the atomic bomb used to stop ww2 in the Pacific or the bombing by the RAF on German cities during that war.

I feel we are in that place now.

Also, I have read, (can't be sure it's correct), that most Israeli Jews today are descendents of Middle Eastern Jews.

The "Palestinians" themselves to some degree will have origins in other parts of the Middle East.

1948 Tantura massacre

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantura_massacre

This is a hard to watch as 2 IDF volunteers talk about the killing and rapes their comrades did to Palestinians. But no one cares about this the bloodied history of the occupation of Palestine.

There is insufficient evidence this happened - you have selectively included quotes from some, and excluded quotes from others who deny it ever happened. It's been the subject of libel lawsuits from people who were there, and there were no founded allegations of rape at all. Nice try though.

No one is claiming Israel is the perfect country who has never done anything wrong. What we do say is that the military respects human rights and lives more than any other military in conflict.

Out of interest, do you say the same to women who are raped? "Oh you're not the perfect victim. Your skirt is too short and your makeup too much, and you had a drink, so you got what you deserved?" No. That would be horrendous. So why are you doing that to Israel?

Why would these 2 Israeli guys lie ? Deir Yassin , King David's Hotel the crimes of the Irgun - they even kidnapped 2 British sergeants and hung them and one of their members Menahem Begin went on to be Israeli PM. For the record all of these barbaric crimes are a crime against humanity and yet most westerners know little or nothing of the bloody origins of Israel and for good reason they are never told. The barbarism, of Hamas for that is what it is doesn't come from a vacuum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sergeants_affair

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Irgun_attacks

Why would the numerous other Israeli guys in the film who refute the allegations lie? Stop being so selective. I don't think you realise how hard it is to keep things like that secret. Even the author of a paper about this 'massacre' had to retract it and admit it was false, he had his degree revoked.

Yes, it is correct. Ashkenzim (European Jews) only make up 30% of the Israeli population. The majority of the population are Middle Eastern Jews - both Jews who were already living in Israel and let's not forget the 1 million Jews ethnically cleansed from Arab countries.

The 'Palestinians' have a range of origins - if you look at their names, it's often a clue as to their origins, which are not ethnically 'Palestinian', and come from all over the Muslim world, e.g. 'El Kurd'.

I fully understand that post Holocaust, European militant Zionists waged a bloody and relentless war in British Palestine against the British and the Arabs and committed numerous atrocious crimes against humanity. That is beyond historical doubt and without them maybe the state of Israel wouldn't have been formed. I can understand why they would do that and why the pain of their own annihilation put ice in their hearts. But these things happened, and every Arab knows their history and hatred burns in theirs. Neither are right, and I abhor violence from anyone without reservation.

Well, this isn't beyond historical doubt, because that's not what happened... conflict over the British Mandate had gone on long before that. There was a peace plan, everyone was on board except the Arabs who started a bloody war. They lost the war, and then started subsequent wars to try and eradicate Jewish people and claim the whole piece of land. They lose every time, just like they will this time.

It's sadly no longer surprising you are blaming Holocaust survivors.

You have posted a number of articles that purport to blame the Israelis - eg one from Haaretz saying it's all Netayahu's fault, one from a 2009 article saying Israel are to blame for encouraging the growth of Hamas (rather, than, say, Iran), and an unlabelled, undated video, which you claim (despite obvious lack of proof) is from Al Aqsa and shows some Jews verbally abusing some Palestinians, claiming that this is to blame for yesterday's attacks. And now you're linking to videos blaming the Israelis for some rapes 80 years ago that may or may not ever have happened, and claiming that this is the cause of yesterday's horrific massacre.

Is there any chance that you might stop victim-blaming the Israelis and actually put the blame on Hamas?? - you know, the mass-murderers who just massacred 600 people, very nearly all civilians, went door to door shooting families at point blank range, setting fire to their houses, committing mass rape, torture, and taking hostages including babies, the elderly and women with children? The lot who committed a load of war crimes, and were so proud of it, they even shared the evidence on video and posted it for all to see? And then celebrated publicly and handed out sweets?

Do you not feel shame shilling for a bunch of avowed genocidal mass murderers?

What is your personal interest and why are you so keen to blame the victims? Seems pretty strange to me.

And while unlike a previous poster you write in full sentences and post links to seemingly plausible sources, your arguments are no less problematic.

On Mumsnet of all sites, victim blaming for male violence is behaviour we recognise well.

So I ask you again, @bollihigh - why are you doing it?

Where did you lose your empathy and your human feeling? How did you manage to watch those videos widely shared and think that those poor girls in some way deserved what happened to them 'because Netanyahu' or 'because Al-Aqsa'?

People lie for all kinds of reasons. In the case of the two Israelis you mention, they may well be disgruntled towards the Israeli Defence Force. I know of someone who was dishonourably discharged from the British Army who went on to join PIRA in retaliation. I know this because he was involved in the murder of a relative of mine.

As for documentaries, if you watched "Death On The Rock" you'd have come away believing the SAS murdered the PIRA 3 in cold blood! One of the witnesses' statement wasn't seen by him but written by a lawyer for Thames TV. IIRC, he's the same witness who admitted on the stand he lied with one of the reasons being the press wouldn't leave him alone until he gave them what they wanted.

A few years after that so-called documentary aired, the ECtHR ruled that the SAS did NOT murder the PIRA 3. The judgement was NO premeditated murder occurred.

But that "Death On The Rock" mockumentary had done its damage by then.....People swallow crap quite easily.

By the way, you're using the Circular Reasoning Fallacy in relation to the two Israelis.

I'm not claiming anything I'm putting out there information from pretty reliable sources that puts the Palestinian perspective on history of the Nakba - the Palestinian catastrophe, why because I have lifelong Palestinian friends who have educated me to their history and suffering. I strongly support that Haaretz editorial and would like to see peace what about you ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba

Unable to tell if you're doing some sort of Baron-Cohen skit by citing 'pretty reliable sources' and then linking Wikipedia.

I've actually lived and worked in Israel and Palestine, volunteered my time with NGOs, been to Gaza, and still own a property in Israel today that my family spend lots of time in. I have a PhD in a relevant field, I work in a relevant field, and I teach in a relevant field at a respected institution. That outranks the biased account you've been given, I'm afraid.

Only seems like yesterday when Israeli and Palestinian commentators were being asked for advice on the Peace Process in Northern Ireland. Because they had made Peace in Oslo. Except they hadn't.

Now people still talk about a 2 state solution. But this is a dead duck. If Israel believed in it the settlers would not be pouring into the West Bank seizing land and killing people, destroying crops etc.

Presumably the long term goal is a 1 state end game with a much smaller Palestinian minority within its borders? But how is this to be encompassed ...that's the tricky bit.

As Golda Meir said to a general ' What am I supposed to do with 3 million Palestinians?'
His reply ' You like the groom but not the dowry!'

No one seems to want to debate the Haaretz article. Fair enough they are brave and courageous and represent the future that Israel could have rather than the one they've got sadly.

I already discussed the Haaretz article.

Predictably - like all Haaretz articles, given it's a left-wing paper, and Netanyahu is right wing, it blames Netanyahu.

A view that I (as I'm also left wing and no fan of Netanyahu) am not unsympathetic to.

I just don't get why you think it says anything significant or novel or that is worth discussing here? It's hardly controversial that Netanyahu's government had a major intelligence failure somewhere - I think you'd be pretty pushed to find anyone, on the right as well as the left, who disagreed.

So tell us - what's your shtick? You have some Palestinian friends? But you're not actually personally involved yourself?

What's with posting all the long and obviously biased articles/links on this thread?? Why do you care?? I care as I'm Jewish and family's and friends' lives are at risk. But you???

Unable to tell if you're doing some sort of Baron-Cohen skit by citing 'pretty reliable sources' and then linking Wikipedia.

😂😂😂

For all those defending this terrorist attack please read the following article from BBC:

'Like a horror movie' - Israel music festival-goers fled in hail of bullets www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67047034

The attackers are being called militants but in reality is there an element of a suicide cult here akin to ISIS?.surely those militants / terrorists that participated in the attacked knew that they were unlikely to return?

Does anyone know of there is much connection between Hamas and international Islamic terrorism i.e. Al Quaeda and ISIS? The only result of the attacked will be to provoke massive regulation from Israel so there seems little to gain for. Hamas unless there is some escalation which will cause more damage to Israel e.g. brining Iran directly into the conflict.

@1dayatatime

interestingly the BBC are referring to militants not terrorists but there is pressure on the BBC to now change their reporting. For example with us 2015 Paris attacks the term terrorist was widely used and it is quite hard to argue the horror perpetrated here is very similar so why the change in termin ology?

personally I feel terrorist is an acceptable terror the attack on the face and we shouldn't be frightened to use it.

@mids2019

"Does anyone know of there is much connection between Hamas and international Islamic terrorism i.e. Al Quaeda and ISIS?"

+++

Yes there is a connection between Hamas and the Islamic terrorist group Ansar Bait al-Maqdis who are aligned with ISIL and are based out of Gaza and supported by Hamas.

They are conducting the Sinai insurgency and are responsible for the beheading of Egyptian civilians and attacks on Egyptian military and police.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinai_insurgency

Al Jazeera is extremely reputable for unbiased news reports. They are well respected in the industry.