Why does Palestine bring out such strong feelings?

[Saveusename]

I really don’t want this to become about individuals’ feelings about the conflict. There are plenty of threads for that.

I am interested in why Palestine provokes such a strong feelings about civilian in Britain. We didn’t see weekly marches and such intense, passionate feelings regarding any other conflicts over in, say, the past ten years (Yemen, Syria, Afghanistan, Sudan, Congo, Somalia, and, of course, Ukraine). These all involve thousands of civilian casualties caused by conflict.

What is it about Palestine in particular that causes British people to feel so passionately about it?

Someone said to me today that, for them, it was the most pressing political issue. They have never even mentioned any of the other conflicts above. It got me thinking about it. If you care greatly about what happens in Palestine, why Palestine and not the other conflicts?

Please don’t come on and say you care about them all. It might be true but there is no doubt that the reaction to what’s happening in Palestine in Britain is much greater than the rest, which barely cause a murmur.

Children have been shot by drones. Children have been shot queuing for aid and water. Children have been shot simply because they entered a ‘kill zone’. That’s nothing to do with not being allowed to ‘shelter’ in tunnels.

You can make silly comments but it doesn't change the facts or the law.

No. I'm arguing with your perspective. You are arguing that civilians are of paramount importance in a war and if they are going to be killed, a country cannot attack at all (hence why Hamas use civilians as shields). I'm arguing that there is no such law. And if there were, that would only encourage outfits like Hamas to use human shields to stop any attack.

Civilians are killed in all wars. And in some wars like WW2 they are deliberately targeted. But in this war, they have not been.

The issue is social media (people dont like seeing casualties of war) and the difference in strength between the parties (Hamas declared war on a country that is significantly stronger than it and is losing badly. It would be like us declaring war on China and then when we get flattened, Keir Starmer lining up all the women and children living near an army base to try and stop China from bombing it. That would be immoral on his part and China would be justified in bombing the base anyway. )

You don't need to continue to be pompous and rude to me simply because I disagree with you. It's just Mumsnet.

@Wedonttalkaboutboris it’s called war. It’s estimated that 20,000 Ukrainian children have been abducted and transported to Russia since the invasion.

To be clear:

• Geneva Convention IV, Article 27: civilians must “at all times be humanely treated”.
• Common Article 3: prohibits murder, mutilation, cruel treatment of civilians.
• Additional Protocol I, Article 51(2): civilians cannot be targeted, and acts meant to spread terror are illegal.

So no- civilians are protected by law, even if fighters are nearby. Reckless or punitive attacks are war crimes. Saying otherwise is not just wrong, it’s embarrassing.

Well we shall see if the Israelis have committed any of those offences in due course. It doesn't look like they have overall. Compared to every other war in history they seem to have taken huge steps to avoid civillian casualties.

@Leavesfalling unlike Hamas.

Huge steps to avoid casualties? Do you have any evidence to actually back that wild statement up?

’We shall see’ 🤦‍♀️ The law isn’t really based on your opinion.

70% of those killed have been women and children. Facts on the ground: dropping explosives on densely populated areas, blockading food and medicine, striking hospitals and schools- those are documented civilian harms.

Which court is this that Israel will be judged in? Could it be either the ICJ - aka the clown court - that nobody has ever given a shit about, or the ICC which is now a laughing stock and is routinely ignored?

"We shall see"...meaning neither of us know whether war crimes have been committed in that there have been no findings by an international court against Israel.

You are just assuming things based on your own presumptions and bias. And information reported by a terrorist organisation.

And to assume makes an ass out of you and me...

It will be hard for Israel to get a fair hearing anyway. There are too many quick to judge before knowing what the facts are. And we may never know.

Israel will not be on trial. Individual people will.

Arrest warrants will be issued for individuals. If they are arrested, they will be tried for their own crimes based on the evidence available to the court. They will have a defence team.

I think people in war have done absolutely horrendous things to children in every war and every time. Maybe they used something other than drones and bombs, but I'm not sure a different method makes it less awful. A child maimed by a landmine or a machete isn't better off than a child maimed by a drone or a bomb.

Yes don't worry I know well how these things work. Thank you for your comment nonetheless. Having said that as well as individuals, a state can be held accountable by various mechanisms for certain actions.

It’s a really interesting question OP. I don’t have the answer but I think the left and particularly those on the left who are into activism and protesting are prone to get drawn into a cause, and that in some cases this can become a big part of their identity.

I’m pretty ancient and can remember a generation or so ago when loads of people on the left were all about Free Tibet. They’d all have lots of Free Tibet badges, donate to charities supporting Tibet, and go on marches to support Tibet.

So yeah, I think there’s something about group identity and supporting the causes that lots of people in your group support, as it’s the thing to do at that particular time.

OPs question is ‘Why does Palestine bring out such strong feelings?’

I think to understand this you have to flip the question and ask ‘Why is Israel the only country where it’s deemed acceptable within mainstream discourse to discuss it not existing?’

Many countries have done awful things, committed war crimes, or been founded on colonialism. Yet people don’t seriously argue that Russia shouldn’t exist because of its treatment of Ukraine, or that Australia shouldn’t exist because it was colonised by the British.

I think Israel must be the only country where there is a need to have a special word - anti-Zionism - to describe not wanting the country to exist.

What mechanisms and actions?

Err no. It is because the conflict involves starving babies and the world has always been anti starving babies. We give millions is charitable donations/aid to stop babies in starving.

Well the obvious stuff! Its not rocket science. Sanctions. Being booted out of international bodies. The actions we are taking against Russia.

You can also sue a state for certain actions in a civil court for example.

Do you cry for Sudanes or Congolese babies too? March in the streets for their well being?

If its all or nothing lets stop paying benefits to stop British babies starving.

Probably because it's existed for less than a century and has been in constant conflict since. It's done more harm than good. It's a failed experiment.

It’s obviously not all or nothing. It’s: why have protestors targeted and fixated on Israel for so many years, and nowhere else to anything even remotely like the same extent?

Hmmm. Let me think. Well, Israel is the sole Jewish homeland. That might be a factor. It also has the support of the US. That could be another factor. What a conundrum…