Uk politicians position about the war

[EasterIssland]

I’ve read that in the last few days Starmer is concerned about the Muslim people not voting labour cuz of his position

https://amp.theguardian.com/politics/2024/jan/30/labour-acts-on-fears-muslims-will-not-vote-for-party-over-gaza-stance

do you think this will have an impact on this years general elections ? I guess whatever they do they’ll lose votes

I'm not really sure that the third largest party in the UK (despite only fielding candidates in one nation in the UK) and the current governing party in Scotland counts as 'has-been'.

Also, not sure why you’re against a ceasefire (unless you’re happy with people dying) when even Israel and Hamas are working towards one now

Also interested to see who is saying what they think people want to hear, and who is willing to make a stand for humanity. Although that time really passed a long time ago.

I think everyone knows that any 'Peace Deal' that leaves Hamas still in power is worse than useless.
Hamas has already said that it will repeat 7/10 so any 'deal' just gives them a chance to rearm.
So yet more people would die eventually.
Hamas has set out some ridiculous terms because, I suspect, they don't want peace, just the destruction of Israel and the setting up of an Islamic Caliphate in the Middle East.

@Ladyjanegreysketle What about all the Palestinians Israel killed before October 7th? You acknowledge that Hamas is a danger to Israelis but fail to acknowledge that Israel is a danger to Palestinians.

@Ladyjanegreysketle
If Isreal is going to have peace, it’s going to have to negotiate.

Do you think there are Palestinians that think kindly of Israel after what it has been doing in the WB and Gaza? What of it’s existing neighbours? Do you think Israel’s actions have endeared it to them? Hamas represents an ideology that is not going to go away unless there is meaningful action by Israel to negotiate a 2ss. If it isn’t called Hamas, it will be called something else. It doesn’t even need a name.

Colonisation only prevails by force- can you name me an existing colony still governed by the colonisers? Is this how you envisage Israel existing -continually reliant on its iron dome?

I'm not answering your barrage of questions.

Go and harass someone else.

All very good points. Points @Ladyjanegreysketle doesn’t seem to have any answers to.

I'm not answerable to you or anyone else, so just give it a rest.

go to ask what are you doing on a discussion forum then?
Those were fair questions. Not harassment of any kind.

Probably the same as the rest of us with a few moments free. Learning, occasionally contributing (sometimes with our dis a bit gruntled) then toddling off to the rest of our humdrum lives.

@Ladyjanegreysketle

Let me ask this then @Ladyjanegreysketle - although of course you don’t need to engage in this:

Do you think Israel’s current actions in Gaza and WB are going result in lasting peace with Palestinians and the neighbouring countries or cause increased animosity?

Didn’t mean to harass you. To me, the questions are all inter-related and stem from the above one.

Since the formation of Israel in 1948, the Muslim nations surrounding Israel have hated on it for existing.
At the moment neither side are really willing to trust that a two -state solution is possible.

Palestinians don't want a 2 state state solution because they believe that Israel should not exist at all and that the land is all rightfully theirs. They want "From the river to the sea" entirely free of Israelis. Peace will only happen once Israel's neighbours accept that Israel isn't going anywhere.

Israel's current government don't believe in a 2 state solution because they have zero trust in sharing a border with a nation that has continuously shown that it supports terror attacks like Oct 7th. A 2 state solution means that the Israel/Palestinian borders will be a lot bigger and Israel can only afford to do that if they trust that this border will be safe.

So you ask, will this conflict being resolution and lasting peace? Realistically, most probably not, for a very long time. But hopefully it will at least make another brutal attack like Oct 7th practically not possible for a very long time, by destroying tunnels, weapons explosives etc.

Your post has reinforced my view that a coloniser can only enforce their presence by brutal force.

You speak of the brutality of 7/10 and the need to destroy tunnels and explosives. However- you fail to mention the devastation that Israel has wreaked in Gaza and that their safety comes at the expense of innocent people including thousands of children.

Does it make Israel feel safer to have caused this?

They may have neutralised an immediate threat from Gaza, but look what is happening on it’s northern border. See what’s happening to its trade routes with the Houthis bombing ships on route to Israel. They have agitated many people against their cause. And I do want Israel to exist, but not by inflicting plausible genocide.

So - no, I can’t see that this has made Israel a safer place in the short, medium or long term.

I think Israelis feel the same given concerns about immigration/ emigration from the country.

"I think Israelis feel the same given concerns about immigration/ emigration from the country."

Can you elaborate?

So of my thread, you focus on this?

I will take it you are ok with the rest of what I have written.

Please see attached regarding immigration
https://www.timesofisrael.com/immigration-to-israel-dropped-sharply-following-oct-7-assault-statistics-bureau/amp/

Having to pay more for people to come to Israel

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/israel-beefing-up-immigrant-payouts-by-nis-170-million-to-boost-wartime-immigration/

It is projected that interest in migration to Israel will increase - once war is over, but will need to see when the fighting does stop.

There are figures for net poplulation falling - allegedly from official statistics- but I would understand why you might not trust this source.

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/nearly-half-a-million-people-depart-israel-amid-gaza-war-report/3076116

https://twitter.com/DanReich/status/1740438356620665107

@Polka83
(I asked you to elaborate on that point about migration because I wanted to fully understand your post before responding.)

I agree with you fully that Israel is far from a safer place at this point. Is is far from safe at the minute. In fact since 1930s Israeli's (and all Jews) worldwide have never felt as unsafe and threatened as they feel right now.
But I would hope for Israel that their actions in Gaza will at least serve as a deterrent for other terror groups from attacking.

Do I support the targeted killing of innocent people? Absolutely not. No child or innocent person should be suffering. But I do see that Israel has no choice but to finish their job in killing as many Hamas as they can, destroying their terror infrastructure (Which unfortunately means many many civilised buildings) and rescuing hostages and Hamas have ensured that there is no way for Israel to do that without involving the innocent.

The long term hope is that once Gaza has new leadership they will be given the opportunities and resources to rebuild and form a stable economy and their quality of life will increase drastically without Hamas in power. Terror thrives in fragile times so once stability is restored in the region, terror should decline.

(And I'm still unsure how Israel's migration comes into the conversation? Is it not very expected that in war time people flee?)

I have a question for you @Polka83.
You start off by saying that "Your post has reinforced my view that a coloniser can only enforce their presence by brutal force" but later on state that "you want Israel to exist". These 2 statements are a direct contradiction to each other. If you believe Israel is the coloniser (Which it isn't) than how can you also believe it has a right to exist?

@niceandnew
Israel did have an option in how it responded.

At worst, it chose vengeance rather than targeting Hamas. Saying that all men being killed are Hamas is nonsense- but it’s the only way the Israeli ratios for death of innocent civilians make sense.

At best, the approach of the IDF put a premium on the lives of Israeli soldiers at the clear expense of Gazan children. That’s not brave. They had a choice- and their approach changed as pressure was put on them to save lives of Gazans, according to reports made by IDF soldiers.

And to what end the bombing?

I can see from the footage that the tunnel systems were not destroyed.

And, this will have increased anger against Israel and THIS is what drove creation of Hamas. You can’t kill this anger.

Some compromise will be required- like removing WB settlements and a capital in East Jerusalem for Palestinians - as per this plan:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/us-arab-allies-reportedly-set-to-propose-palestinian-statehood-plan-within-weeks/amp/

There’s nothing contradictory about being against colonisation and realising a pragmatic solution is required to bring peace to the region- which involves a 2SS.

Liberal Israelis were looking at options to leave prior to 7/10 due to Netanyahu’s judicial reforms. I can’t see them rushing back if the country is now more dangerous and is thought to have committed plausible genocide.

https://www.schatz.senate.gov/news/press-releases/schatz-leads-group-of-49-senators-in-announcing-amendment-to-reaffirm-us-support-for-a-two-state-solution#

You can read the conflicting articles on line about whether Israel is a coloniser. However- the Nakba with removal of 700,000 Palestinians and the current actions of settlers and in the WB are clear acts of colonisation that I would be surprised anyone could argue against.

It is arguably also in the framework of “decolonisation” that a 2SS will be introduced. It will not resolved with traditional models of conflict- as also noted in other colonies.

Netanyahu's cabinet has unanimously voted to reject any imposition of a Palestinian state. Such a decision would only ever be negotiated between the two sides, with no international input. That sounds like never to me, since Netanyahu has openly stated he does not want a 2 SS.

The Guardian reports the statement says recognition of a state would be rewarding Oct 7th terrorism. This seems to ignore that calls for recognition of a Palestinian state go back many years, and were not only a demand of Hamas. It also negates the right of Palestinian people to self determination and does not address the status of Palestinians within the OPT. Are they to be made full citizens of Israel? Or are they to live under never ending occupation.

Starmer seems to be against an assault on Rafah and is calling for a ceasefire now. This seems like a radical change for him, I wonder why he is saying this now, but better late than never I suppose.