Nobel peace prize announcement speech.

[reesewithoutaspoon]

It will probably go over trumps head, but that speech felt like a big 'screw you, you will never get it to the tantruming taco'.

At least there's now peace in Gaza, we just need the Ukraine to be next.

I think Trump played a part in peace how much I don't know. We do need a long term plan for Palestine and one that does not involve Hamas. The people of Palestine deserve real freedom and peace not one that's ruled by guns.

I found it so infuriating that she made the little verbal curtsey to Trump.

Sorry, but personally I believe that anyone imagines that there will instantly be peace is dreaming.

By the way, why exactly do Palestinians deserve the attention of the world for their freedom, as opposed to Afghanistan or North Korea? If Palestinians were fine electing terrorists to govern them, isn't that maybe what they deserve?

Sorry, I'm feeling very cross.

Surely the question should be why don't Afghanistan and N Korea get more attention rather than trying to reduce the attention the Palestinians have got?

I'm glad it's on the world news. I'm glad we could all see the poor Palestinians returning home to nothing but rubble. The world should see this. We don't want genocide and attempts to wipe out a chunk of civilisation to go unmarked.

As for your comment about Palestinians electing Hamas you must know that doesn't hold water.

Palestinians deserve peace, they are victims of apartheid. The terrorist you talk about were not elected.

I don't like the word terrorist because these days it's used flippantly. In Antrim we often heard about Gerry Adams in the British media referred to as a terrorist. His voice could not be broad casted in TV. Years later he's a political figure that brought peace to communities North of the border.

In order for peace there has to be reconciliation and. Stop to violence.

Hamas was elected and Gery Adams was a terrorist who became a peacemaker.

Here here.

Look at the facts about Hamas election. It was so long ago and by a small number. We can't hold today's Palestinians to account for it. Was it really worth a genocide?

Whose fault is it that there hasn't been an election since? That's the most ridiculous argument I've ever heard.

Cheers. Still worth fact checking.

Gerry Adams was always a politician....it's the British media that called him that....In Ireland we view things very differently as we do Palestine.

The IRA committed terrorist acts but remember why this all happened....take note of the events. Nothing can justify killing but in order to stop killing you have to meet a half way house. You have to forgive and you have to make peace with your own anger because if you don't you'll never have any control. It's to easy to get stuck into the mindset of all our victory when the cost of it is so dire.

It's called diplomacy and that means first of all stopping killing people. Peace first, discussion on how to resolve the issue, can we get to the point of unilateral disarmament in the interest of Palestinians

Yes I'm well aware of that as is obvious from my post.

...so back to the question

Hurrah that the prize went to María Corina Machado for her "tireless work promoting democratic rights".

It would have been a complete travesty if the prize had gone to D. Trump. He may have forced the parties in the Hamas-Israel war to a ceasefire, and credit to him for that, but this doesn't yet equate to peace sadly and - let's face it - the war would have been over long ago if it wasn't for US political support and $$!!

I think some people just want never ending war, that's until it affects them. The world is full of cheer leaders but when it comes knocking the reality bites.

The British have been very lucky since the second world war. Avoided war on your doorstep but those in the military have seen the Falklands, Bosnia, Kuwait, Iraq and Afghanistan.

The west is lucky in that out military capability far exceeds those that pose a threat. But conflicts abroad bring risks to us.....

'The West' needs to have (a strong) America onside for that to be true. Also needs it's own people to stop being 'anti'west' (suicidal empathists that they are).

China, North Korea, Russia and Iran are courting India, Middle Eastern powers, African nations and a couple of South American countries.
Countries that neighbour Russia and Iran are increasingly uneasy. Russia, China and Iran have expansionist tendencies, Russia seem to prefer somewhat undiplomatic methods (North Korea has already sent many people as cannon fodder to Ukraine), Iran prefers proxy islamists.
I see China and India as a a bit more clever. In a global marketplace they might already have 'the west' by the short and curlies. Their methods of taking over involve less bloodshed...initially.

That's just dribble, I'm more worried about the yanks...... Canada and Denmark being Trumps next target.

Denmark will be fine, Greenland might be tempted. Canada's divided like many other countries.

Actually, when the people needing help in Gaza are people who elected terrorists to govern them and approve of all the attacks on Israel, I think of Afghanistan being more worthy of sympathy.
Yes, they did elect Hamas. They voted Hamas into power in 2006.

Gazans elected Hamas in 2006. They are, first of all, victims of the terrorists they elected, who for years channeled aid funding into plotting against Israel instead of helping their own people.

A small proportion of the current population of Gaza voted for Hamas 20 years ago and you think that justifies genocide?

Most of the current (massively depleted) population weren't even alive or of voting age back then.

Half the seats in Gaza weren't won by Hamas. Seats in the Christian areas of Palestine went to Hamas as a protest vote against Fatah. It's worth looking at the facts if the 2006 vote if you're going to use it to justify genocide against people who were too young to vote.

Ah the old justifying genocide personal attack. She was doing no such thing. There is plenty of evidence that a good proportion of the population have supported Hamas in that time. Obviously in a dictatorship with no elections its not easy to tell for sure. Which is why anyone who cares about Palestinians actually want to free them from Hamas rather than indulge in apologism for Hamas.

As for the population being 'massively depleted' Its obvious that you actually have idea how many people have been killed as the population has not been massively depleted, tragic as the loss of life in the war has been.

My post was far more about the madness of holding the current population to account for an election held before most of them were voting age, and when most of Gaza didn't vote for Hamas. Nothing to say on that?
I'm adding a little screenshot of what depleted means to help you. At least 10 percent of their population has been killed.

The war was not holding a population to account for an election. It was holding the government to account for an act of war. Hamas as the government is responsible for the act of war and not adequately protecting its population.

What is your source for over 10% killed? The Official (Hamas) death toll is 68, 172 which is just over 3% of the pre 7 October population of 2.1 million. We don't know how many of those are Hamas fighters as ways of estimating that vary rather wildly but we know its a significant proportion. That is not a population 'massively' depleted.

I'm not discussing with you any more @SharonEllis you argue with something, get proved wrong and then pretend that wasn't the point you were making and try again.

I wasn't proved wrong about anything, I'm just interrogating where you got a figure of 10% from and whether you really meant slightly depleted, rather than massively depleted.