The body of that German girl, Shami Louk, who was attacked at the music festival and paraded on the back of a truck while men abused her has been found. RIP.
She, together with all Israelis, was asking for it, Cyclefree. Get with the narrative.
not funny
I wasn't trying to be.
No you weren't. I realise that.
What makes your comment so sad is that there are far too many people in this country who do think that. They have revealed themselves fully in the last three weeks. It is a horrible sight.
Many people's first reaction to the Twin Towers was that the Americans had it coming. Then when the fog cleared and people were seen falling from buildings the mood changed and it became a human tragedy.
Had the Israelis not been so belligerent and concentrated on the humanitarian side as the Americans did then the anti Israel rhetoric would have been much more muted. Since then it has all been about what pain they can cause to the Gazans and that has alienated even their friends
You clearly see what you want to see. Since 7 October, all my social media feeds have been filled with a combination of the following: - pictures and bios of people currently held hostage in Gaza - stories of those who died on 7 October and those they left behind - appeals for help for the hundreds of thousands of displaced people within Israel, and the work being done with the aid received
I've seen absolutely zero about "what pain they can cause to the Gazans"...
And you too evidently see what you want to see. That is the nature of social media feeds.
I promise you, I don't want to see any of this stuff.
What you see on social media is determined largely by your past choices. Which many of us later regret.
Obviously.
The question is why ultra-pacifist, anti-imperialist, anti-Israel Roger wants to see sadistic outpourings of revenge porn from Israelis, and how those would get into his feed.
I prefer to avoid going down the Roger rabbit hole.
I was in Morocco, at the djemma el fna buying carpets.
I paid by credit card and then called my bank to ask them to watch out for multiple transactions. The bank manager very calmly responded saying yes of course he would look out for erroneous transactions but right at that moment they thought that there were up to 20,000 people dead in the US and they were being evacuated from their offices.
I was actually staying at a riad called, of all things, Les Deux Tours. Everyone there watched TV all afternoon. Morocco, a very friendly and "non-typical" arab country took on a different complexion, even with the King writing on the front page of the paper the next day that Morocco stood against the act.
An outpouring of international sympathy and goodwill, soon thereafter to be squandered.
Indeed. But I think the similarities oughtn't to be overstated.
The cause of 9/11 was, AIUI, the presence of US troops in Saudi. So OBL decided to wreak his vengeance upon them for this egregious crime. US troops in Saudi, they then go and invade Afghan and Iraq and the rest is history. It was at no time an existential war.
Whatever the perceptions of the rights or wrongs of Israel's presence in the Middle East, recent events are being seen by Israel as existential. Israel couldn't care less about international goodwill if they believe their very existence is at stake.
But their very existence isn't at stake is it!
Hamas isn't going to remove them. Israel is vastly more powerful including nuclear weapons. Framing this as an existential war is way OTT and provokes a cynical response.
It's not just Hamas. It's Hezbollah Syria and Iran.
The body of that German girl, Shami Louk, who was attacked at the music festival and paraded on the back of a truck while men abused her has been found. RIP.
She, together with all Israelis, was asking for it, Cyclefree. Get with the narrative.
not funny
I wasn't trying to be.
No you weren't. I realise that.
What makes your comment so sad is that there are far too many people in this country who do think that. They have revealed themselves fully in the last three weeks. It is a horrible sight.
Many people's first reaction to the Twin Towers was that the Americans had it coming. Then when the fog cleared and people were seen falling from buildings the mood changed and it became a human tragedy.
Had the Israelis not been so belligerent and concentrated on the humanitarian side as the Americans did then the anti Israel rhetoric would have been much more muted. Since then it has all been about what pain they can cause to the Gazans and that has alienated even their friends
The world definitely prefers its Jews to be compliant, weak, turn the other cheek types.
As PM of Israel what would you have done on October 7th?
Had I been Bibi on Oct 7th? I would have resigned and turned myself over to the courts to be tried for fraud. It is a disgrace that he is in office.
And as his successor ?
I would kick out of the coalition the National Religious Party — the one whose leader described himself as a fascist (see previous thread) — and seek a coalition of national unity with Lapid and Gantz. I would reinforce the Gaza border. I would seek international cooperation. I would demand the hostages be released. I would halt all West Bank settlements as a gesture of good will to the PLO and try to get them on side against Hamas. I would ask the IDF for military options.
I would then pray for guidance as to what to do tomorrow!
Get yourself over there.
The answer to all questions of how Israel, or the Palestinians, get to a good outcome is… don’t start from here. The job before the Israeli PM or Palestinian leaders is close to impossible. I don’t think there are any pat solutions; I don’t think this one is solved by the PB Brains Trust.
Yes, I went to an American-curriculum school, and there was very little about East European countries, any more than the average Brit could tell you whether Nebraska borders Idaho or not.
A cautious politician would be aware of his lack of knowledge, but that's not exactly Trump's defining characteristic.
I can't think of anyone I knew whose first reaction to the Twin towers was that Americans had it coming. The first reaction was shock, horror and fear.
I was staying with the UK Ambassador to Denmark at the time, and we instantly went into dispassionate analyst mode - how remarkable, must have taken a lot of planning, what will be consequences be for global politics, etc. My then wife who was with us said sharply, "How can you discuss it like that? There are people dying in front of your eyes - shouldn't that be your first concern?" We both felt suitably uncomfortable - one can get so into political strategising that one loses track of human values.
And we were just observers - I wonder if the decision-makers in the higher reaches of politics don't suffer from the same syndrome, writ large.
It is the job of decision makers in power to view things dispassionately and figure out what it means and how best to respond. Of course what matters is people but you don't serve them best by getting caught up in an emotional response. The emoting should be left to other people. Especially as the goal of these attacks is frequently to draw an emotional response and force a policy error.
It comes back to @Stark_Dawning's acute post early on. Hamas has played a blinder.
The reason that 9/11 QT was so interesting is that exactly the same questions were being asked in terms of response being such that sympathy is lost, etc.
And also why people on here are found wanting when it comes to the "what would you have done" question and understandably so.
There are several forces at work right now in Israel/Gaza and as people may have noticed (along with most of the leaders of much of the world), I am in the team which says that Israel believes it has to respond, it believes itself to be at war, and an existential one at that, and that they therefore get a lot of slack in what they do.
Will "civilians" in Gaza die as a result of this action? Yes. Is Israel making efforts to minimise civilian casualties? Yes also, as a brief look at Gaza will attest.
And yes I did put "civilians" in quotation marks because I do not subscribe to the ordinary, decent Gazans minding their own business, loving their Israeli neighbour, when all of a sudden out of nowhere an attack took place, involving many thousands, including many "civilians" also, it seems, conducted by someone they barely knew was the government of where they live.
Has Hamas played a blinder? I would argue not:
1 The hoped-for uprising amongst Middle East populations hasn't happened. So far, the Middle East and North African states are keeping a grip on their populations (laying aside the fact the populations may not be too happy at more conflict at a time when their economies are not great).
2. Diplomatically, it looks more and more like the Saudis have decided to cut the Palestinians loose as the latter risk their long-term plans. The UAE will probably follow suit therefore. Sure, Erdogan has backed them which is a plus but not entirely unexpected and may be more about the Saudi-Turkish fight for being top dog in the Islamic world.
3. Hezbollah has done jack as has Iran, which is increasingly looking like a toothless tiger, making threats but not doing much about it. That may change but, given the two US carrier groups off the Israeli coast, that looks unlikely.
4. Apart from a few outliers like Ireland and Spain, European governments have backed Israel and are likely to continue to do so. Meanwhile, the demonstrations are a boon to populist parties calling for less immigration and those such as Poland (Tusk is no liberal BTW) et al who want less immigration / taking in of refugees.
5. Much has been made of the Israeli actions radicalising the next generation of Gazans but it is equally like that the total and wide devastation of the strip makes the population think the cost is not worth the effort. The expected international pressure on Israel to stop retaliation hasn't come. If anything, Hamas' leaders are under threat if Qatar decides to throw them under the bus if it faces pressure.
That may change but, at the moment, I don't see it.
As Dura himself, he of the recent are we still banging on about Israel/Gaza ponder, noted, Hamas' enemy is as much, arguably more the PA than Israel. In 2006 the people who suffered most from the rise of Hamas in Gaza weren't in the kibbutzes in Israel but were members of the PA. Hamas is showing itself a purveyor, it wants to be the only purveyor of muscular islamism.
I was in Morocco, at the djemma el fna buying carpets.
I paid by credit card and then called my bank to ask them to watch out for multiple transactions. The bank manager very calmly responded saying yes of course he would look out for erroneous transactions but right at that moment they thought that there were up to 20,000 people dead in the US and they were being evacuated from their offices.
I was actually staying at a riad called, of all things, Les Deux Tours. Everyone there watched TV all afternoon. Morocco, a very friendly and "non-typical" arab country took on a different complexion, even with the King writing on the front page of the paper the next day that Morocco stood against the act.
An outpouring of international sympathy and goodwill, soon thereafter to be squandered.
Indeed. But I think the similarities oughtn't to be overstated.
The cause of 9/11 was, AIUI, the presence of US troops in Saudi. So OBL decided to wreak his vengeance upon them for this egregious crime. US troops in Saudi, they then go and invade Afghan and Iraq and the rest is history. It was at no time an existential war.
Whatever the perceptions of the rights or wrongs of Israel's presence in the Middle East, recent events are being seen by Israel as existential. Israel couldn't care less about international goodwill if they believe their very existence is at stake.
But their very existence isn't at stake is it!
Hamas isn't going to remove them. Israel is vastly more powerful including nuclear weapons. Framing this as an existential war is way OTT and provokes a cynical response.
It's not just Hamas. It's Hezbollah Syria and Iran.
Syria is still fighting a civil war. I don’t think they’re much of a threat to Israel.
I was in Morocco, at the djemma el fna buying carpets.
I paid by credit card and then called my bank to ask them to watch out for multiple transactions. The bank manager very calmly responded saying yes of course he would look out for erroneous transactions but right at that moment they thought that there were up to 20,000 people dead in the US and they were being evacuated from their offices.
I was actually staying at a riad called, of all things, Les Deux Tours. Everyone there watched TV all afternoon. Morocco, a very friendly and "non-typical" arab country took on a different complexion, even with the King writing on the front page of the paper the next day that Morocco stood against the act.
An outpouring of international sympathy and goodwill, soon thereafter to be squandered.
Indeed. But I think the similarities oughtn't to be overstated.
The cause of 9/11 was, AIUI, the presence of US troops in Saudi. So OBL decided to wreak his vengeance upon them for this egregious crime. US troops in Saudi, they then go and invade Afghan and Iraq and the rest is history. It was at no time an existential war.
Whatever the perceptions of the rights or wrongs of Israel's presence in the Middle East, recent events are being seen by Israel as existential. Israel couldn't care less about international goodwill if they believe their very existence is at stake.
But their very existence isn't at stake is it!
Hamas isn't going to remove them. Israel is vastly more powerful including nuclear weapons. Framing this as an existential war is way OTT and provokes a cynical response.
It's not just Hamas. It's Hezbollah Syria and Iran.
Israel is a match for all of them.
In a real existential hot war, Iran would stand a greater chance of "ceasing to exist" than Israel - at least the leadership and capacity would. Hezbollah and Syria are gnats.
I can't think of anyone I knew whose first reaction to the Twin towers was that Americans had it coming. The first reaction was shock, horror and fear.
I was staying with the UK Ambassador to Denmark at the time, and we instantly went into dispassionate analyst mode - how remarkable, must have taken a lot of planning, what will be consequences be for global politics, etc. My then wife who was with us said sharply, "How can you discuss it like that? There are people dying in front of your eyes - shouldn't that be your first concern?" We both felt suitably uncomfortable - one can get so into political strategising that one loses track of human values.
And we were just observers - I wonder if the decision-makers in the higher reaches of politics don't suffer from the same syndrome, writ large.
It is the job of decision makers in power to view things dispassionately and figure out what it means and how best to respond. Of course what matters is people but you don't serve them best by getting caught up in an emotional response. The emoting should be left to other people. Especially as the goal of these attacks is frequently to draw an emotional response and force a policy error.
It comes back to @Stark_Dawning's acute post early on. Hamas has played a blinder.
The reason that 9/11 QT was so interesting is that exactly the same questions were being asked in terms of response being such that sympathy is lost, etc.
And also why people on here are found wanting when it comes to the "what would you have done" question and understandably so.
There are several forces at work right now in Israel/Gaza and as people may have noticed (along with most of the leaders of much of the world), I am in the team which says that Israel believes it has to respond, it believes itself to be at war, and an existential one at that, and that they therefore get a lot of slack in what they do.
Will "civilians" in Gaza die as a result of this action? Yes. Is Israel making efforts to minimise civilian casualties? Yes also, as a brief look at Gaza will attest.
And yes I did put "civilians" in quotation marks because I do not subscribe to the ordinary, decent Gazans minding their own business, loving their Israeli neighbour, when all of a sudden out of nowhere an attack took place, involving many thousands, including many "civilians" also, it seems, conducted by someone they barely knew was the government of where they live.
Yes, the Israeli gov have no good options which is why they have chosen the option that suits their understandably bunkered mindset and pretty much no one else.
And the answer to what would I have done is, I wouldn't have painted myself into that particular corner. But I get how they got there.
I don't think any of us would have started from here.
I was in Morocco, at the djemma el fna buying carpets.
I paid by credit card and then called my bank to ask them to watch out for multiple transactions. The bank manager very calmly responded saying yes of course he would look out for erroneous transactions but right at that moment they thought that there were up to 20,000 people dead in the US and they were being evacuated from their offices.
I was actually staying at a riad called, of all things, Les Deux Tours. Everyone there watched TV all afternoon. Morocco, a very friendly and "non-typical" arab country took on a different complexion, even with the King writing on the front page of the paper the next day that Morocco stood against the act.
An outpouring of international sympathy and goodwill, soon thereafter to be squandered.
Indeed. But I think the similarities oughtn't to be overstated.
The cause of 9/11 was, AIUI, the presence of US troops in Saudi. So OBL decided to wreak his vengeance upon them for this egregious crime. US troops in Saudi, they then go and invade Afghan and Iraq and the rest is history. It was at no time an existential war.
Whatever the perceptions of the rights or wrongs of Israel's presence in the Middle East, recent events are being seen by Israel as existential. Israel couldn't care less about international goodwill if they believe their very existence is at stake.
But their very existence isn't at stake is it!
Hamas isn't going to remove them. Israel is vastly more powerful including nuclear weapons. Framing this as an existential war is way OTT and provokes a cynical response.
It's not just Hamas. It's Hezbollah Syria and Iran.
Was about to say this, but you got there first.
Iran has an army of 610,000 and has been pursuing nuclear weapons for years, as well as funding and training Hamas. Hezbollah and Syria to the north also pose an additional threat. Anything less than a decisive response now will only embolden those who seek to destroy not only Israel, but also exterminate all Jewish people, as the recent surge in hate crimes around the world demonstrates.
The body of that German girl, Shami Louk, who was attacked at the music festival and paraded on the back of a truck while men abused her has been found. RIP.
She, together with all Israelis, was asking for it, Cyclefree. Get with the narrative.
not funny
I wasn't trying to be.
No you weren't. I realise that.
What makes your comment so sad is that there are far too many people in this country who do think that. They have revealed themselves fully in the last three weeks. It is a horrible sight.
Many people's first reaction to the Twin Towers was that the Americans had it coming. Then when the fog cleared and people were seen falling from buildings the mood changed and it became a human tragedy.
Had the Israelis not been so belligerent and concentrated on the humanitarian side as the Americans did then the anti Israel rhetoric would have been much more muted. Since then it has all been about what pain they can cause to the Gazans and that has alienated even their friends
The world definitely prefers its Jews to be compliant, weak, turn the other cheek types.
As PM of Israel what would you have done on October 7th?
Had I been Bibi on Oct 7th? I would have resigned and turned myself over to the courts to be tried for fraud. It is a disgrace that he is in office.
And as his successor ?
I would kick out of the coalition the National Religious Party — the one whose leader described himself as a fascist (see previous thread) — and seek a coalition of national unity with Lapid and Gantz. I would reinforce the Gaza border. I would seek international cooperation. I would demand the hostages be released. I would halt all West Bank settlements as a gesture of good will to the PLO and try to get them on side against Hamas. I would ask the IDF for military options.
I would then pray for guidance as to what to do tomorrow!
Day 1: massive attack on Israeli soil by Hamas Day 2: Israel ceases building settlements in the West Bank.
HOW ON EARTH would that be interpreted by many in the region and in particular by Hamas wrt the PLO.
I was in Morocco, at the djemma el fna buying carpets.
I paid by credit card and then called my bank to ask them to watch out for multiple transactions. The bank manager very calmly responded saying yes of course he would look out for erroneous transactions but right at that moment they thought that there were up to 20,000 people dead in the US and they were being evacuated from their offices.
I was actually staying at a riad called, of all things, Les Deux Tours. Everyone there watched TV all afternoon. Morocco, a very friendly and "non-typical" arab country took on a different complexion, even with the King writing on the front page of the paper the next day that Morocco stood against the act.
An outpouring of international sympathy and goodwill, soon thereafter to be squandered.
Indeed. But I think the similarities oughtn't to be overstated.
The cause of 9/11 was, AIUI, the presence of US troops in Saudi. So OBL decided to wreak his vengeance upon them for this egregious crime. US troops in Saudi, they then go and invade Afghan and Iraq and the rest is history. It was at no time an existential war.
Whatever the perceptions of the rights or wrongs of Israel's presence in the Middle East, recent events are being seen by Israel as existential. Israel couldn't care less about international goodwill if they believe their very existence is at stake.
But their very existence isn't at stake is it!
Hamas isn't going to remove them. Israel is vastly more powerful including nuclear weapons. Framing this as an existential war is way OTT and provokes a cynical response.
And I'm sure in SW13 that's exactly the right view. On the ground, however, will you allow them to believe that thousands of armed neighbours marauding at will through your land killing thousands of your citizens is pretty existential-ist.
There are a few things which make it tricky to compare the run-up to next year's election with 1997.
The first was back then the world was a more stable place and we seemed on the path to a better future. The Soviet Union had fallen and the Cold War was over. South Africa had elected Mandela. Back home, the economy was coming out of the downturn of the early 1990s. People thought Labour should be given a chance and they could gamble. That is not the case now. The world is a much more uncertain place and, bar SKS and possibly Reeves, I'm not sure the public would trust Labour's front bench in an uncertain world.
The second is events. Sunak and the Tories are sh1t and the situation is dire but it is hard to imagine that they can take a further sharp step down (their support looks to have bottomed). That is not the case with Labour. It might be said they are having the best of times now - no real scrutiny of their policies, benefiting from the Tories' performance etc. What happens though if the Middle East situation continues (as seems likely) and Labour loses core parts of its base? Or the policies come under more scrutiny?
The third is Starmer. Maybe I drink with different people but I have not heard one person - even my Labour friends - say he is great, in fact mediocre is the most common description. That is fine if the Government is so hated Conservative voters don't turn out but, given one and two, there is a risk Labour gets sideswiped especially if the economy picks up (which it is likely to do).
However, there is one point I think will trump this.
For most people, the last four years have seen multiple cataclysmic events hit them one after the other - Covid, inflation, war in Ukraine and now the Middle East. What happened last year or 18 months ago might as well be another century.
And that means nothing is fixed with people likely to be very volatile in their opinions. No one is even thinking of the election right now. Sure, they may hate the Tories now but if the economy improves and they still uncertain about Starmer, it could look very different in 12 months time. Just over two years ago, we were seriously considering SKS having to step down if Labour lost Batley and Spen. That sort of volatility never happened in the early 1990s.
Will I put money on a Conservative majority? Possibly. But God knows where we will stand next year.
I was in a meeting with Shell in The Hague. A really tense negotiation. Their team kept disappearing out for twenty minutes, came back in, said nothing, carried on. This happened several times.
Eventually, I got a call from the London office. "Well, we've managed to get you a hotel for the next couple of nights, but no chance of flights..."'
"Woah, what are you talking about?"
Turns out the Shell team had been going out and watching coverage, but never said a word. My colleague and I were some of the last people anywhere to see any footage of 9/11.
Arseholes.
My colleague was especially freaked, as his uncle had been one of the senior architects of the Twin Towers.
Comments
A cautious politician would be aware of his lack of knowledge, but that's not exactly Trump's defining characteristic.
NEW THREAD
In a real existential hot war, Iran would stand a greater chance of "ceasing to exist" than Israel - at least the leadership and capacity would. Hezbollah and Syria are gnats.
Iran has an army of 610,000 and has been pursuing nuclear weapons for years, as well as funding and training Hamas. Hezbollah and Syria to the north also pose an additional threat. Anything less than a decisive response now will only embolden those who seek to destroy not only Israel, but also exterminate all Jewish people, as the recent surge in hate crimes around the world demonstrates.
Day 2: Israel ceases building settlements in the West Bank.
HOW ON EARTH would that be interpreted by many in the region and in particular by Hamas wrt the PLO.
There are a few things which make it tricky to compare the run-up to next year's election with 1997.
The first was back then the world was a more stable place and we seemed on the path to a better future. The Soviet Union had fallen and the Cold War was over. South Africa had elected Mandela. Back home, the economy was coming out of the downturn of the early 1990s. People thought Labour should be given a chance and they could gamble. That is not the case now. The world is a much more uncertain place and, bar SKS and possibly Reeves, I'm not sure the public would trust Labour's front bench in an uncertain world.
The second is events. Sunak and the Tories are sh1t and the situation is dire but it is hard to imagine that they can take a further sharp step down (their support looks to have bottomed). That is not the case with Labour. It might be said they are having the best of times now - no real scrutiny of their policies, benefiting from the Tories' performance etc. What happens though if the Middle East situation continues (as seems likely) and Labour loses core parts of its base? Or the policies come under more scrutiny?
The third is Starmer. Maybe I drink with different people but I have not heard one person - even my Labour friends - say he is great, in fact mediocre is the most common description. That is fine if the Government is so hated Conservative voters don't turn out but, given one and two, there is a risk Labour gets sideswiped especially if the economy picks up (which it is likely to do).
However, there is one point I think will trump this.
For most people, the last four years have seen multiple cataclysmic events hit them one after the other - Covid, inflation, war in Ukraine and now the Middle East. What happened last year or 18 months ago might as well be another century.
And that means nothing is fixed with people likely to be very volatile in their opinions. No one is even thinking of the election right now. Sure, they may hate the Tories now but if the economy improves and they still uncertain about Starmer, it could look very different in 12 months time. Just over two years ago, we were seriously considering SKS having to step down if Labour lost Batley and Spen. That sort of volatility never happened in the early 1990s.
Will I put money on a Conservative majority? Possibly. But God knows where we will stand next year.
Eventually, I got a call from the London office. "Well, we've managed to get you a hotel for the next couple of nights, but no chance of flights..."'
"Woah, what are you talking about?"
Turns out the Shell team had been going out and watching coverage, but never said a word. My colleague and I were some of the last people anywhere to see any footage of 9/11.
Arseholes.
My colleague was especially freaked, as his uncle had been one of the senior architects of the Twin Towers.