To wish those in Israel safety in these coming times

[mids2019]

Israel is a country at war and I know many will have links or family in that country so I think it appropriate to wish them safety in the coming days.

That is not respecting different opinions.
Where did I say different opinions were being respected?

So because extremists threaten Israel, that gives it the right to level entire neighbourhoods, kill thousands of civilians, and displace over a million people? That is not self-defence, that is collective punishment on a massive scale. If any other country did this, you would call it a war crime. But when Israel does it, suddenly all basic standards go out the window.

So would you prefer Israel sit back and let the extremists have at it?

If Israel rolled over, it would be destroyed. You're never going to believe that, so it is pointless engaging further.

The basic facts I think many struggle to engage with are these: Israel’s military actions have caused massive civilian casualties and displacement in Gaza. The scale of destruction goes beyond what is reasonable for self-defence. Also, the historical context of occupation and blockade that shapes this conflict is often ignored or minimised. I’m happy to discuss any specific points you think I’ve missed or misunderstood.

Thankyou.

100% fully agree that Israels actions have caused massive civilian casualties and displacement. Agree its a fact.

The scale of destruction goes beyond self defence. This isn't a fact. Its your opinion. My opinion is that you or I dont decide what's too far. Hamas is still around, threatening to slaughter Jews. Although they've offered to take a 5 year break on slaughtering Jews. I guess that's unacceptable to BN... I think that's a reasonable stance to take. I'd ask you genuinely- why dont Hamas just take the initiative here, take control of their people's future and surrender, return hostages, admit Israels right to exist and let someone else start the negotiations?

The historical state of occupation and blockade is a direct result of the choices Palestinian leadership has always made, ie to try to further their political goals by attempting to kill Israeli citizens. I agree the history of the region is often minimized, what's more troubling is when people dont seem aware of the history at all. For example, when you said the Palestinians had no support? Or when you said they were made stateless? These both are just not true. They never had a state, they were not made stateless. They didn't take the opportunity to declare a state. I'd like to know why you think that is, and do you think its Israels fault Palestinians didn't declare a state? Who's fault is it?

How do you think Israel should deal with a nation on their doorstep that openly wants to murder their civilians?

I’m not saying Israel should do nothing. Every country has the right to defend its people. But defense must be carried out while upholding international law and respecting the lives of civilians. How can deliberately starving 2 million people be called self-defense? There have to be limits, especially when tens of thousands of civilians die and entire communities are destroyed. True security comes not just from military action but also from using sanctions and negotiations, engaging in political discourse, and seeking peaceful solutions. Collective punishment and disproportionate force only fuel more hatred and violence in the long run.

I agree with purpletablet, above.

So do I. You can't starve two million people and call it self defence. You can't flatten entire residential blocks because you think you spotted a Hamas fighter there. You can't kill thousands of babies and children thinking this will bring you safety.

Israel has committed genocide in Gaza and history won't treat them and their enablers kindly for it.

You’re right that we may differ on whether the scale of Israel’s response qualifies as self-defence, but there are international standards for that. The laws of war exist for a reason, and one key principle is proportionality. Flattening entire neighbourhoods and cutting off food, water, and electricity to 2 million people goes far beyond what most legal and humanitarian experts would call proportionate or lawful.

You ask how Israel should deal with a threat on its doorstep but we also have to ask: how should Palestinians deal with a state that has killed far more of them, displaced millions, and placed them under military occupation for decades?

On the question of a Palestinian state, it’s not as simple as “they chose not to.” Statehood requires recognition, stability, and control over borders, none of which Palestinians have been allowed. Displacement in 1948, occupation since 1967, and repeated setbacks to peace efforts have made state-building almost impossible.

Israel’s security concerns are real, but they don’t justify massive civilian casualties.

I think proportionality is decided by how important the target is. If the target is an important Hamasnik hiding in a tunnel under the European Hospital then I think most military observers would say the hospital then becomes a military target. Its utterly unpalatable to us, but it is how war works. I'm so very glad I dont have these decisions on my conscience.

I would say Palestinians should deal with Israel by first allowing for its legitimacy to exist. Then by electing a government truly commited to a peace process, seeing that peace process through, and eventually building their own state. I'd say their leadership needs to renounce all violence towards civilians in future. I would say Israel needs to do the same for the Palestinians.

I do think it is fair to say- They chose not to. They had leadership. That leadership chose war, backed by other states with their own self interests. Thats where all this started. Both people's have historical roots to the land. Both deserve to be there. Only 1 side chose war at birth, rather than nation building. And that side has paid the price ever since. They could have had all the things you mentioned, borders, international backing, they chose instability and war. They chose that because they firmly believed they'd win the war. Back then, Israel was the underdog. Its fought from where it was back then to the nation it is now. In lots of ways I admire it.

I think its easy for you or I to sit back in our homes, with our safe, well fed kids, and say the civilian casualties aren't justified. No one likes to see dismembered children. But let's not forget who started this war, knowing exactly what could happen. Calling their own women and children 'necessary sacrifices'. Hamas should stop this right now. They have agency. They make choices too.

You say proportionality is judged by the importance of the target, but international law doesn’t stop there. The principle of proportionality also requires weighing the anticipated military advantage against the expected civilian harm. Even if a target is considered legitimate, attacking it becomes unlawful if the civilian cost is excessive in relation to that gain. When entire neighborhoods are reduced to rubble, hospitals and schools are bombed, and thousands of civilians are killed, it’s hard to argue that those strikes meet that standard. Simply saying “Hamas was there” doesn’t make the destruction lawful or morally acceptable. The laws of war are not just technicalities. They exist to protect civilians in exactly these kinds of situations.

On the question of Palestinian choices, it’s misleading to suggest they had the same opportunities as Israel. Statehood is not something you simply declare into existence. It requires recognition, control over territory, economic stability, and the freedom to govern without military interference. Palestinians have had none of that. From the displacement in 1948, to the occupation that began in 1967, to the blockade on Gaza, their ability to build a functioning state has been severely restricted at every stage. Yes, there have been serious failures by Palestinian leadership, but that does not mean Israel bears no responsibility for the current situation. It also doesn’t justify ongoing collective punishment of a civilian population.

You also mention that Hamas started this war, but history didn’t begin on October 7. That day was horrific and indefensible, but it didn’t come out of nowhere. For decades, Palestinians have lived under military occupation, been subjected to violence, restricted movement, home demolitions, and a blockade that has created a humanitarian crisis. These conditions didn’t excuse Hamas’s actions, but they are part of the reality that shapes this conflict.

Finally, if we’re going to talk about who wants to destroy whom, we should acknowledge that Israel has far more military power and has killed far more Palestinians than the other way around. That’s not speculation, it’s just fact. If Palestinians are expected to accept Israel’s right to exist and renounce violence, then Israel must also be held to the same standard. It must stop using overwhelming military force against civilians, respect international law, and engage seriously with efforts toward peace.

To your first paragraph, I was under the impression that if a senior member of the opposing side is believed to be there, then that building does indeed become a legitimate military target. Thats why this war is so awful, Hamas could literally be hiding anywhere in Gaza, and this is by their design. All of Gaza therefore becomes a target, and Israel has plausible deniabilty. Again, by Hamas design. But as for the reports of children being shot in the head, Hind Rajab, and the recent shit show of aid distribution, I admit things are less clear. I hope those found to be committing war crimes can be held to account, on both sides. I do still think if you open the Pandoras box of war, then these things will happen, any humans at war commit atrocities.

I don't see why its misleading to say Palestinians less opportunities than Israel. Statehood was literally something both sides could have declared into existence. The UN proposed a division of land for the 2 groups. Israel accepted and declared statehood. Palestinians didn't. All those things you keep mentioning, why do you keep saying they couldn't have had those? They could, just by saying, yes we are Palestine, these are our borders, this is our flag etc. Then they would have been recognized, as Israel was. Why do you think they couldn't have done this?
All that has happened since is as a consequence of Palestinian refusal to accept Israel as a state on the land. They've prioritized getting rid of israel over their own economic stability. They've launched violent attacks targeted at Israeli citizens instead of building industry. They've voted for political parties that pledge to destroy zionists rather than having any plan at all for a stable future for their children.

I agree with your statement that Israel has killed more than vv. But I think that's because of the huge investment Israel as a nation has made in its own defense. The Iron Dome. Safe rooms. National Service. Israel takes care of its own. If Hamas had the firepower Israel does, what do you think it would have done with it? How many civilians would have been killed by rockets from enemies sent towards Israeli citizens in peacetime?

I think atrocities have been commited by both sides. War crimes too. I am just pushing back at what I see as the constant victimization of Palestinians on here. Their piss poor leadership has constantly been their downfall. I don't agree with the often simplistic Israel = oppressor, Palestinians = victims narrative. It's not as simple as that.

Except Hamas don't want peace - they want the extermination of all Jews.

Forgot to say that bit.

"Except Hamas don't want peace - they want the extermination of all Jews." @Dangermoo

Well, they better prepare themselves for disappointment, because there are no more than 30,000 of them and about 15 million of us, almost half of whom live in the US and are therefore probably quite well trained in the use of firearms.

This idea that they're out to get us all and that they present a realistic existential threat to Judaism is a myth.

I do think that the people who were violently murdered on 7 October with 'Kill the Jewish dogs' ringing in their ears might disagree on whether Hamas pose an existential threat to them.

Or should they have been comforted in their final moments knowing that Hamas are not an existential threat to each and every Jew, merely the ones who were in the wrong place wrong time?

Oh right. You will be telling me next what the real meaning of from the river to the sea is. You know the harmless one. Well if you're in the US, you're not in the thick of it, in Israel. Except you are in the thick of it, because this extremism is being seen in both the UK and the US, amongst other places.

Well of the Israeli citizens I have seen being interviewed on television all, bar one lady, think any Israeli deaths are a price worth paying. I am not exactly sure what they think they are dying for ? One man said because Iran would have a nuclear bomb in two weeks and kill them. The whole situation is so tragic and I hope they are all safe. Sad to see the Jewish Israelis who cheered the Iranian bomb landing on their fellow non Jewish Israeli citizens.

Yep. Cutting the soundbites and buzzwords and just facts.

Do you also wish the poor people in gaza safey, the poor civillians in Iran? regardless of the fact that Isreal started it? and is pushing forward regardless of the persistent hitting of civilian targets?

What happened on October 7 was horrific, and there is no justification for the deliberate killing of civilians. But that horror does not mean we should accept exaggerated claims that Hamas poses an existential threat to Jews as a people.

Hamas does not target Israelis because they are Jewish. People often deliberately misinterpret this, in order to cover up for the fact that the real reason for the anger and violence is the brutal occupation Palestinians live under at the hands of Israel. That does not excuse their violence, but it does explain the motivation, which is political and territorial rather than religious or racial. Framing it as antisemitism allows people to ignore the political and territorial reality, and avoids confronting the consequences of decades of blockade, displacement, and military control.

Israel is not a helpless victim in this. It is a powerful, nuclear-armed state with one of the most advanced militaries in the world. Hamas, in contrast, is a non-state actor operating in a besieged and impoverished territory. It has no air force, no navy, and no realistic ability to destroy Israel, let alone Jews everywhere.

We can condemn Hamas’s actions without distorting reality or using fear as a reason to justify the collective punishment of millions.

Apologies, did you just say Hamas are not antisemitic?

So the attackers who phoned their mums do brag about how many Jews they'd killed, was that just a slip of the tongue? The Hamas founding charter is just misunderstood?