To think being anti Israel isn't the same as being anti semetic

[JazzAnnNonMouse]

Just like being anti extremist terrorist isn't the same as being anti Muslims.

thefishewife People didn't just get sick of fighting in NI The fighting ended because the side who had been oppressed, the Catholic/Nationalist community, were given equality. The PIRA always knew a United Ireland would not be achieved through an armed struggle. Had the Protestant majority not tried to oppress the Catholic community the 'troubles' would not have happened. If Israel continue to oppress the Palestinian people the violence will continue.

Thefishewife

There is a view that ethnic hatred and violence is overcome with greater brutality or "harshness" and that it the NI problem was exacerbated by insufficient brutality and oppression from the British forces.

It's my opinion that this view in wrong and bordering on insane, but it has been brought to these forums in an attempt to justify Israel's oppression. The person proposing this claims to be an Irish national.

The fighting ended because the side who had been oppressed, the Catholic/Nationalist community, were given equality.

And they were also the side who killed the most people. I am not sure what the moral of that is, tbh.

Pumpkinpositive

no

I did not see from your post that it was a quote.

Piglet I don't know the gist of that other conversation, but it is true that if you're Israel and you're looking around at successful counterinsurgencies in recent decades, the only successes are things like Russia bombing Chechnya back to the stone age and Sri Lanka pummeling the Tamil Tigers in the midst of tens of thousands of civilians. Or, even now, Assad getting away with mass murder in Syria. The lesson does seem to be that ignoring international law and slaughtering civilians is more likely to lead to 'success'.

I think it's a completely immoral argument and I would never advocate a country doing so, I think it's better to adhere to international law even if you lose. But these things don't happen in a vacuum, if it looks like that's the best way to win, Netanyahu will do it. Israel is already an international pariah, he's not going to start caring now what the rest of the world thinks.

An awful lesson

I suppose Israel can carry doing this as long as it has the blind obedience of the US, and as long as no other countries try anything. Turkey got nowhere.

Yes, it is awful

But then again, Russia got away with Chechnya, Sri Lanka got away with mass murder, Assad is getting away with it -- you can't say the US is supporting them.

Israel is also getting away with it because Arab countries like Egypt and Saudi have no love for Hamas.

The lesson is that it's very rare for countries to intervene to stop leaders from killing loads of people -- whatever country is doing the killing. It's extremely rare. So it's a risk one can take.

It's horrible but that is the kind of realpolitik world leaders live in.

abra I'm not sure what your point is. In my view one killing is too many, I abhor violence. History has shown however that oppression perpetuates violence. In this case Israel is the oppressor and they have killed over a thousand people in just a few weeks . Surely the violence will never end whilst the Palestinian people are denied their basic rights by Israel. Re the Israeli blockade on Gaza the UN Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, Valerie Amos, called for the blockadeâ??s immediate lifting, citing the devastating impact it has had on the lives and livelihoods of the Stripsâ?? residents.She said that more than 80 per cent of families in Gaza are dependent on humanitarian aid. In addition, while some steps have been taken to ease the blockadeâ??s impact, Gaza remains subject to severe restrictions on imports, exports and the movement of people, by land, air and sea â?? which amounts to a â??collective punishmentâ?? of all those living in Gaza and is a denial of basic human rights in contravention of international law.

God that's depressing dreamingbohemian but you're right.
I remember Channel 4 had excellent coverage of Sri Lanka but by and large it was barely covered and no-one seemed to give much of a shit.

The fundamental problem is that the leadership on neither side really wants peace.

It's been clear for sometime now that the Israeli strategy is to expand settlements into the West Bank as far as is practically (and defensively) possible, and eventually use these 'facts on the ground' as justification for moving the Israeli border westward in order to create a buffer between the West Bank and the heartlands of Israel. A permanent peace with the Palestinians would require giving up this ambition.

And on the other side, Hamas has no reason for it's existence without the conflict with Israel.

The whole situation seems pretty hopeless to me.

What are people's opinions on the USA's part in this over the years and why they have played it the way they have? And the UK's?

I spent some time in the states and in that time I heard more than once an opinion that the USA backs Israel's actions because a) it is beneficial to keep the Middle East in as destabilised a position as possible and b) there are a lot of powerful right wing Christians that have got the government's ear (Revelations, End Times etc. etc.) What do people think about those opinions?

Someone posted much earlier in the post (in response to someone pointing out that the bombing of Palestinian schools and hospitals is deplorable) that Hamas have directly placed their missile silos in/near such establishments - is this true?

I watched the youtube video linked to earlier - and read the comments underneath it. Is this a balanced abridged version of the issues?

The fighting in NI ended because Sinn Fein/republican paramilitaries achieved their political objectives, or close enough to them to be able to go to their people and tell them they had a good deal. If they hadn't, it would still be going on. Armed insurgencies do tend to get you most of what you wanted in the end.

happytalk13 I think the answer to that will completely depend on who you speak to! Very pro-Israel people will tell you that Hamas is the cause of all of this and rockets etc were hidden in all the targets that were attacked.
I've read enough reports, both from Palestinians as well as journalists, foreign medics etc, to believe that a lot of what was bombed was not being used as weapons stores or launch sites. A few that have received media coverage, for instance, are the bombing of a hospital, a UN school, a center for the disabled and the four boys killed on the beach.
It's true that Hamas does fire rockets from populous areas (although that really is the majority of Gaza - a lot of people in a very confined area). Whether that justifies that degree of civilians deaths in retaliation is again something that you'll get differing answers on depending on the person's viewpoint.

The fighting in NI ended with 9/11, when the US realised that terrism was not funny, the IRA were not jolly leprechauns, but murdering terrorists and withdrew support and funding.

fairphyllis would you like to elaborate on what exactly Sinn Fein got? Other than equality for the Catholic people which one should have expected would have been given without a need to take up arms.

Can I ask, does everyone really think the NI conflict is truly over and won't start up again? I ask because it's often held up as a model for Israel-Palestine, that even really intractable conflicts can be resolved, but I don't know how useful this comparison is. My sense is a lot of people think NI could totally kick off again at some point.

I know it goes against our nature practically to think a conflict can't be resolved but sometimes they really can't, until catastrophe occurs in some form.

caroldecker What are you on??? The ignorance is astounding. 9/11 happened 3 years after The Good Friday Agreement was signed. Read a fucking book carol

I'm Northern Irish. I'm fairly sure things won't go back. Most people hate violence, the only reason the PIRA were more widely supported was because the Catholic community were desperate. Catholics couldn't get jobs or houses and electoral constituencies were gerrymandered to ensure Unionist control. When they tried to march for Civil Rights, inspired by the US movement, they were gunned down in the streets on what has become known as Bloody Sunday. There is now proper equality and full power sharing. No one side can abuse their position to repress the other. It's not perfect there are still issues over past atrocities and flags/parades, but I think most people are relatively happy and appreciate the peace.

caroldecker your post is painfully ignorant.

WTF has 9/11 got to do with NI?!

dreaming there is still conflict (my lovely cousin recently moved into a Protestant area and had her house broken into and they sprayed bigoted crap all over her walls.) but its only perpetrated by a small number of people who want to continue the violence. Thankfully they are in the minority.

"I think it's a completely immoral argument and I would never advocate a country doing so, I think it's better to adhere to international law even if you lose."

See, this is the kind of statement that I think can only come from the west or a safe haven like the UK. So people would adhere to international law as it is moral - even if it meant the death or their children, the destruction of their homes and livelihoods - their lives.

The problem I have with this issue that as much as I can sympathise with the Palestinians and recognise their plight - if I was an Israeli mother living near Gaza trying to educate and keep my young children - I might think differently - I honestly don't know.

Sorry haven't read whole thread but learning a lot from it. Some questions come to mind, apologies if they are stupid.

I'm looking at the situation as an Irish Catholic and trying to understand the history and the current actions. Why are Jews entitled to a state as an ethnic group? My nationality is Irish, my religion is Catholic. Similarly there are Italian Catholics, Spanish Catholics etc. Why can't Jews just be from where they are from? Why does for example, a French Jew need or have a right to live in Israel? Catholics don't necessarily move to Rome.

Also, I don't really get the historic right to the region. The world has changed in the last couple of millennia and I think sometimes you have to accept those changes in order to move on as a society. Going back that far you would say the island of Ireland should be one, but it's not and I think most people are just happy to get on with their lives in peace.

These questions are genuine not meant to be anti-Semitic or anti-Israel or anything, I just feel like Irish and British should have some understanding of this from our history, shouldn't we? Why don't we? Or am I comparing apples and oranges? Is this us 30 years ago? But I can't ever imagine British bombing an area in Northern Ireland in order to hit the IRA.

I just can't get my head around the disproportionality of Israels actions.

Sorry just realised the NI comparison has already come up!

The conflict in NI ended because the republican movement managed to sell a change in their political objectives to their constituency and support base. A united Ireland was very much what they were fighting for, and believed they could achieve, at least up until the mid/late 1980s. Now they've sold it to (most of) their constituency that devolution, cross border bodies and 'parity of esteem' is what it was all about.

I don't think you can completely compare Israel/ Palestine conflict to the NI issue. Israel was a new country surrounded with multiple enemies who wanted to wipe them out and joined up to wage war on them. These same people still feel the same even if they haven't went to war for a few decades. Also bear in mind the Israeli bunker/ siege mentality - a hangover from persecution and the holocaust - they never wants to lie down and be the victim again.

It's not the same issue.