To be annoyed nobody mentioned who started the war

[Normalized]

Recently on YouTube the Oxford Union Channel released a debate titled this house believes Israel never really wanted peace. I'm not going to go through the arguments back and forth as anyone can watch it, however what's really annoyed me is that's not a single debater, including on the Israel side, mentioned who actually started the war.

There was a lot of talk whether Israel did truly ever want peace or not, but nobody actually spoke of the fact that Israel never started any wars. It was the Arabs and Palestinians who started first the Civil War in 1947, then Israel's war of independence in 1948. I would think the onus for peace is on the party who actually started all the wars.

It's such a weird debate to pull up Israel for 'never truly wanting peace' while completely ignoring the role of the other side who actually started all the wars.

That's us told then.

😂

😆 🤣 😂 😹

I should think so. I doubt you were there!

Does it matter who started what? Surely whats much important is what is happening now. To take the Irish example above, England invaded the country and occupied it for 100s of years. Irish people were driven from their land. Many many rebellions were quashed, atrocities and persecutions were commited, for 100s of years. When the opportunity for seperation arose the UK turned this down and insisted on retaining part of the country and we all know the problems that led to. During the lead up to the GFA UK harped on about trying to secure peace while still occupying NI. The 'who started it' argument was well in the past by then. Both sides were brave enough and mature enough to agree to peace despite their differences, one of those 'differences' being UK continuing to occupy NI. I'm aware I'm simplifying it but for the most part peace was achieved. Would it be OK for some NI Catholics to attack innocent British civilians on the basis that 'your lot started this'? Absolutely not. Would it be OK for Catholics to throw protestants from their home because of what happened years ago? No it wouldn't. Would it be OK for the millions of emigrants to show up and demand to occupy their ancestral homes? No it would not. The only way any group achieves peace is by leaving the past in the past and taking responsibility for what their actions are today. Thwho started the war should not be a factor in adebate

This goes back to the destruction of the First Temple and who took over afterwards. But yes, the declaration of Israel’s independence triggered the war. Independence declared May 14; Palestinian (Arabic) side starts the war on May 15. The Palestinian side considered that Israel was the aggressor by declaring independence the MINUTE the British mandate from the League of Nations ended, and they still do. The Israelis think that was a peaceful act, and the aggressors were the other side who refused to accept it. You’ll never untangle a web that started over 2,000 years ago in one debate anywhere, even Oxbridge.

I’ve read complete books by both “sides.” All arguments are biased by the way you’ve been raised and what you believe. I’ve never seen anyone debate this who didn’t bring their own issues into it. Ever. Even the most lauded experts in the world pretty obviously have a personal bias. But that’s how wars work; all you have to do is encourage tribalism and the war will continue forever. And there’s an AWFUL lot of money to be made in war, off the backs of dead innocents.

@Dontlletmedownbruce

Who started it is important not in terms of historic blame but in order to move forward in the present.

If you declared war on a people who never harmed you, and you're still at that war, surely the first step to peace is to proclaim that as far as you're concerned the war is over. After that, negotiations and talks can commence. But it starts with the one who started and perpetuated the war.

To put the onus for ending the war on Israel is simply immoral. The onus is on the Arabs who declared war, to declare peace.

But yes, the declaration of Israel’s independence triggered the war.

As in the abusive man's 'look what you made me do'?

Israel declaring independence did not need to trigger any war. That was the sole evil decision of the Arabs.

That assumes Hamas want peace, which they don’t. At least not until they have taken over Isreal and got rid of the Jews (and Christians). And then if there is peace in that area they will look to conquer other non-Islamic countries. Peace for them means world domination.

Erm, the UK doesnt occupy NI.

NI is in the UK, its part of it. Dont you know this?

NI wants to be part of the UK, its not a country that wishes to be independent.

For those asking about peace - what do you think Hamas/IRG backed hate marchers are referring to when they shout “from river to sea!”?

They will believe the harmless version.

I love German Xmas markets. Buy a present, drink a glühwein, eat some chocolate, buy another present, drink another glühwein, eat some more chocolate .....

What harmless version?

I don't think anyone in the Gaza strip has the luxury of knowing peace the way you do. It has been a life of oppression. In those circumstances there will always be people wondering how they can change the future for their children by any means possible. I don't think that means they want war. It's just what happens when one people group lacks access to basic amenities. And people will vote for more extreme groups in those circumstances out of desperation because they offer change. That's not because they hate but because they want better lives for their families.

To use the NI example, Catholics were not permitted to do many things they should have been able to do for a very long time. Even within living memory, Belfast was full of checkpoints that only Protestants could pass, preventing some children accessing adequate education. Catholics couldn't call the police and expect protection. Did they want war? No but people will do what they have to do in order to make their wives safe and give their children a future. Oppression begets violence. The best remedy is to end the oppression.

I don't think this thread is helpful because no one has covered themselves in glory here.

And people will vote for more extreme groups in those circumstances out of desperation because they offer change.

Most people in Gaza have never voted. Hamas did away with democracy 20 years ago.

The one that says all will be well when land is returned to Palestinians.

If it is about oppression, what is the excuse for the Muslims massacring hundreds of thousands in Sudan and Nigeria where they hold power? Or the genocide of the Yazidis?

You mean when Israel is destroyed and the Palestinians take over?

You do some reading.

Israel and the Palestinians: History of the conflict explained https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgr71z0jp4o

I don’t think the phrase is as unfair as you make out.

The crux of the Arab and Muslim objection to Israel is specifically that these are Muslim lands, and Israel is Jewish.

It’s not hidden, nor seen as something to be ashamed of.

Hamas called Oct 7 the Al Aqsa Flood after all. Why does Hamas see Israeli control of the mosque as such an affront, when it doesn’t see Saudi control of Mecca/Medina as an affront? Because Israeli control means Jewish control.

The BBC has a habit of translating yahudi as ‘Israeli’ when it interviews Arabs about the conflict, which I think is infantilising.

The Israelis think it’s about Jews. The Arabs and Muslims (wherever they are in the world) think it’s about Jews.

The Western left finds that embarrassing and insist that a more palatable explanation (to them) must be the real one.

Always the evil west and evil Britain.

Do you know the history of that area? How about its geography? Look at a map. This is the crossroads of 3 continents. There have always been many and diverse peoples there. There have been empires fighting there since empires were invented, usually stated as happening with Sargon, or lugal-zage-si. There have always and will always be conflicts. All land is stolen, especially there.

Most recently, in known history, before the evil west and evil Britain, look at the Ottomans. Look at the Turks and Arabs invading the region. It’s pretty disgusting to single out the Jews for having their state created after they’d lived there since the end of the Bronze Age.

I don't think the phrase is unfair. I think it's stupid and vague. I've no problem with people calling out antisemitism, say it's about Jews, say it's about donuts if that's what you think is happening, but that poster wasn't calling it out. She wasn't saying anything at all really. 'We all know why' do we? Clearly not because she wasn't even talking about antisemitism apparently, just speaking in riddles, stupid, vague riddles. It's off topic so this will be my last post on it, it's just something that irritates me, people having no courage to speak out for what they believe.

But do you see what happens when people are oppressed? It has taken some developing countries time to grow the infrastructure and political systems that we have. Often they were held back, not because they were less than, but because they were colonised and infantilised. The consequences of subjection were pointed to as evidence that nations were inherently backward or bad by those who exploited them. This is a repeating problem and is not unique to Hamas. Oppression and fear breeds radicalism. The immoral acts of radicalism have their roots in how a man felt when he saw his father beaten for nothing, the constant vigilance, the knowledge that something life changing can happen and no one will come to help. It is a death spiral. Playing find the bad guy when it comes to people groups is a waste of time. People are trying to survive and thrive and they will do it by any means necessary. Let's make it easier and fairer and then see where we are.

My heart is with those who were subjected to atrocities on both sides. May they be remembered and may they rest in peace.

When will we learn.

Is it vague though? She knew what she meant, she expected the reader to know what she meant, and the reader did indeed know what she meant.