Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
Do candidates realize we do live in an age of technology ? As to how much damage it’s done to the party , if this was last October it would have been far worse .
You’ve changed your tune. 2 days ago it was all fake offence from PB Tories.
I never said it was but that the situation is different now. The public aren’t going to be so outraged about the comments made having witnessed the disproportionate response from the IDF.
Much of the goodwill post October 7th towards Israel is now lying under a pile of dead Gazans !
What disproportionate response?
How else would you destroy Hamas other than what Israel is doing?
Its like you don't want Israel to be able to defend herself. Funny that.
Israel is not defending itself . It’s embarking on the complete destruction of Gaza and ensuring the place is un-inhabitable .
This is not a war , and Gazans are effectively being treated as fish in a barrel .
Executing paramedics desperately trying to save a 6 year old is horrific . The sooner Netenyahu goes the better , sadly he’s now intent on dragging the slaughter out for as long as possible . Probably in the hope his fellow sociopath will take over in the USA and give him carte Blanche to embark on ever more extreme actions .
It is war. Hamas need to be destroyed and this is the only way to do it.
War is hell and non-combatants get caught up in any warzone which is why the honourable thing for any neighbouring nations to do is offer refuge or safe harbour to non-combatants, but nobody wants to it seems, so non-combatants are going to die. That's a reality of war, its ignorant, juvenile and pathetic to think there can be a war without non-combatant casualties.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
Israel have fought this war with one hand tied behind their back, being very concerned with trying to avoid civilian casualties.
Far from not giving a shit, I completely applaud them for that and hope they continue doing what that they're doing until Hamas is completely destroyed.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with (snip)
I'm unsure whether we know that or not. Hamas are not stupid, and they will be making it as hard as possible for Israel to get them. It's not as if Hamas give more of a sh*t for Palestinian civilians than Israel do...
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
I don’t believe the war will destroy Hamas
No, Israel are being far too restrained and gentle for that.
But I respect them for that, they're sticking to the rules of proportionality and trying to minimise civilian casualties. If only Hamas had a fraction of their humanity.
Are you in Gaza? How on earth do you know that the IDF is trying to minimise civilian casualties? Because they say they are?
Evidence I've read suggests that they're making a pretty bad job of it if they are, but I'm not there so I don't know for sure. Nor do you.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
Israel have fought this war with one hand tied behind their back, being very concerned with trying to avoid civilian casualties.
Far from not giving a shit, I completely applaud them for that and hope they continue doing what that they're doing until Hamas is completely destroyed.
So like I said you are happy to see them kill tens of thousands of civilians to get what they want.
I might give the IDF the benefit of the doubt. I certainly don't extend that courtesy to scum like you.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
I don’t believe the war will destroy Hamas
No, Israel are being far too restrained and gentle for that.
But I respect them for that, they're sticking to the rules of proportionality and trying to minimise civilian casualties. If only Hamas had a fraction of their humanity.
Are you in Gaza? How on earth do you know that the IDF is trying to minimise civilian casualties? Because they say they are?
Evidence I've read suggests that they're making a pretty bad job of it if they are, but I'm not there so I don't know for sure. Nor do you.
From the evidence I've seen, which is the only way any of us can take a view.
Everything I've read shows that Israel are trying to avoid civilian casualties. Nobodies perfect and civilians will die in war, Iraqi and Afghani civilians died when we went to war, but they're trying which is more than can be said about Hamas.
Do candidates realize we do live in an age of technology ? As to how much damage it’s done to the party , if this was last October it would have been far worse .
You’ve changed your tune. 2 days ago it was all fake offence from PB Tories.
I never said it was but that the situation is different now. The public aren’t going to be so outraged about the comments made having witnessed the disproportionate response from the IDF.
Much of the goodwill post October 7th towards Israel is now lying under a pile of dead Gazans !
What disproportionate response?
How else would you destroy Hamas other than what Israel is doing?
Its like you don't want Israel to be able to defend herself. Funny that.
Israel is not defending itself . It’s embarking on the complete destruction of Gaza and ensuring the place is un-inhabitable .
This is not a war , and Gazans are effectively being treated as fish in a barrel .
Executing paramedics desperately trying to save a 6 year old is horrific . The sooner Netenyahu goes the better , sadly he’s now intent on dragging the slaughter out for as long as possible . Probably in the hope his fellow sociopath will take over in the USA and give him carte Blanche to embark on ever more extreme actions .
The Palestinians think it is a war.
A war is two sides fighting against each other. I just see the IDF destroying buildings and killing Gazans . And that’s what most of the UK public see hence why they overwhelmingly want an end to the slaughter .
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
I don’t believe the war will destroy Hamas
No, Israel are being far too restrained and gentle for that.
But I respect them for that, they're sticking to the rules of proportionality and trying to minimise civilian casualties. If only Hamas had a fraction of their humanity.
Are you in Gaza? How on earth do you know that the IDF is trying to minimise civilian casualties? Because they say they are?
Evidence I've read suggests that they're making a pretty bad job of it if they are, but I'm not there so I don't know for sure. Nor do you.
If it was really shooting fish in a barrel there would be a whole lot fewer fish left than there seem to be. There is by every news report ongoing fighting. Who do we suppose is doing the fighting? Six year old girls?
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
Israel have fought this war with one hand tied behind their back, being very concerned with trying to avoid civilian casualties.
One can only admire their restraint and resolve having to conduct a war in such adverse conditions being clearly hamstrung as they are.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
Israel have fought this war with one hand tied behind their back, being very concerned with trying to avoid civilian casualties.
Far from not giving a shit, I completely applaud them for that and hope they continue doing what that they're doing until Hamas is completely destroyed.
So like I said you are happy to see them kill tens of thousands of civilians to get what they want.
I might give the IDF the benefit of the doubt. I certainly don't extend that courtesy to scum like you.
Don't be juvenile.
We resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq, in a war that was far less existential for us than it was for Israel.
What's so unique about Israel that means they, when existentially defending themselves means they can't fight if it means tens of thousands of civilian deaths, but we can even if it leads to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths?
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
Proportionate collateral damage is not a war crime.
Do candidates realize we do live in an age of technology ? As to how much damage it’s done to the party , if this was last October it would have been far worse .
You’ve changed your tune. 2 days ago it was all fake offence from PB Tories.
I never said it was but that the situation is different now. The public aren’t going to be so outraged about the comments made having witnessed the disproportionate response from the IDF.
Much of the goodwill post October 7th towards Israel is now lying under a pile of dead Gazans !
What disproportionate response?
How else would you destroy Hamas other than what Israel is doing?
Its like you don't want Israel to be able to defend herself. Funny that.
Israel is not defending itself . It’s embarking on the complete destruction of Gaza and ensuring the place is un-inhabitable .
This is not a war , and Gazans are effectively being treated as fish in a barrel .
Executing paramedics desperately trying to save a 6 year old is horrific . The sooner Netenyahu goes the better , sadly he’s now intent on dragging the slaughter out for as long as possible . Probably in the hope his fellow sociopath will take over in the USA and give him carte Blanche to embark on ever more extreme actions .
The Palestinians think it is a war.
A war is two sides fighting against each other. I just see the IDF destroying buildings and killing Gazans . And that’s what most of the UK public see hence why they overwhelmingly want an end to the slaughter .
As of today, 232 IDF soldiers have been killed in the operation in Gaza. They're not all accidentally shooting themselves or having destroyed buildings fall on them; it's clear that Hamas is still a force.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
Israel have fought this war with one hand tied behind their back, being very concerned with trying to avoid civilian casualties.
Far from not giving a shit, I completely applaud them for that and hope they continue doing what that they're doing until Hamas is completely destroyed.
So like I said you are happy to see them kill tens of thousands of civilians to get what they want.
I might give the IDF the benefit of the doubt. I certainly don't extend that courtesy to scum like you.
It's what happens in war. We did our bit in Iraq and Afghan and those folk were thousands of miles away. Not across the road as Israel is facing.
I hate the civilian count in Iraq and Gaza but these are actions that have occurred. I would say the one in Gaza is a lot more understandable and justified than the one in Iraq. We weren't fighting for the nation's survival in Iraq I believe.
Do candidates realize we do live in an age of technology ? As to how much damage it’s done to the party , if this was last October it would have been far worse .
You’ve changed your tune. 2 days ago it was all fake offence from PB Tories.
I never said it was but that the situation is different now. The public aren’t going to be so outraged about the comments made having witnessed the disproportionate response from the IDF.
Much of the goodwill post October 7th towards Israel is now lying under a pile of dead Gazans !
What disproportionate response?
How else would you destroy Hamas other than what Israel is doing?
Its like you don't want Israel to be able to defend herself. Funny that.
Israel is not defending itself . It’s embarking on the complete destruction of Gaza and ensuring the place is un-inhabitable .
This is not a war , and Gazans are effectively being treated as fish in a barrel .
Executing paramedics desperately trying to save a 6 year old is horrific . The sooner Netenyahu goes the better , sadly he’s now intent on dragging the slaughter out for as long as possible . Probably in the hope his fellow sociopath will take over in the USA and give him carte Blanche to embark on ever more extreme actions .
The Palestinians think it is a war.
A war is two sides fighting against each other. I just see the IDF destroying buildings and killing Gazans . And that’s what most of the UK public see hence why they overwhelmingly want an end to the slaughter .
Have Hamas stopped firing rockets at Israel then? I’d missed that bit of news.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
I don’t believe the war will destroy Hamas
No, Israel are being far too restrained and gentle for that.
But I respect them for that, they're sticking to the rules of proportionality and trying to minimise civilian casualties. If only Hamas had a fraction of their humanity.
Are you in Gaza? How on earth do you know that the IDF is trying to minimise civilian casualties? Because they say they are? .
Indeed. They’re the kindly benefactors here. If they say it then it has to be true as they’re the good guys.
Definitely one of your better thread headers @TSE. It had me chortling throughout.
I was really proud of this paragraph.
I know this sounds catty but the thought of George Galloway becoming an MP again fills me with a dread that is only matched by when my other half asks to use my mobile phone. If Galloway wins I will not salute his courage, his strength, his indefatigability,
@TSE's observations about "a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing" seems to be breaking out on PB, let alone at the by election.
We are all entitled to our opinions on the rights and wrongs of Israel's response to the evil of Hamas but I really don't see why they can't be expressed in more temperate terms. Its not as if our opinions are of any moment whatsoever to those actually engaged in this.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
@BartholomewRoberts is correct that the IDF does try very hard to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that if you kill 100,000 non-combatants to take out 40,000 Hamas members then I reckon you've probably created 60,000 new Hamas supporters.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
The Tories didn't win Rochdale in either the high water marks of 1983 or 2019 so quite how they're going to win a by election when they're the incumbent government and 20 points behind in the polls takes some massive leaps of the imagination
In all fairness all Pubman said was that they had more chance than in Welly. I read this to be tiny vs infinitesimal
Tories no chance in Rochdale, better than Zero but slim chance in Wellingborough, Zero chance in Kingswood.
Isn't the "how is the Conservative campaign in Wellingborough going" reportage essentially saying "there isn't one"?
I reckon it will be Lab-Lab-Lab, but that the Tories will be less far behind the winner in Rochdale than in either of the other two. i.e. they will do best in Rochdale. I wonder if a market for this question exists?
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
It’s almost as if the concept of war crimes is something that only troubles some combatant nations. For others it’s a triviality.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
@BartholomewRoberts is correct that the IDF does try very hard to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that if you kill 100,000 non-combatants to take out 40,000 Hamas members then I reckon you've probably created 60,000 new Hamas supporters.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
And that's why we come back to Sharon's act over Gaza, Robert. Israel tried it. They tried the peace route. It didn't seem to work. Hence Netanyahu (who is a dick) and his "support" for Hamas because he thought it might bring peace.
If Israel's neighbours guarantee peace there can be a workable solution (think Jordan, Egypt).
The Tories didn't win Rochdale in either the high water marks of 1983 or 2019 so quite how they're going to win a by election when they're the incumbent government and 20 points behind in the polls takes some massive leaps of the imagination
The Muslim/lefite vote splits between the (non) Labour candidate and the Gorgeous One allowing Con to come through in the middle!
No, I don't believe it! If anyone came through the middle it'd be the Lib-Dems, probably.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
@BartholomewRoberts is correct that the IDF does try very hard to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that if you kill 100,000 non-combatants to take out 40,000 Hamas members then I reckon you've probably created 60,000 new Hamas supporters.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
I agree, although the hatred is there already and would be with or without the IDF's actions, which is why my preferred solution is to see Hamas eliminated, then ideally after that the conditions created to allow a peaceful Palestinian state.
But first must come the elimination of Hamas, then can come a better tomorrow hopefully.
Defeating the Nazis and Imperial Japan led to a better future for both. I don't have high hopes for the future of Gaza, but there's more chance of it being rebuilt in a humane and successful manner without Hamas than with it.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
Of course he is. But because he is such a brave realist it doesn't bother him. If only we could all be this clear-sighted and unencumbered by foolish notions like killing little children is bad.
It's war. We aren't really used to it in this country. We are used to containment actions.
We have no idea what it must be like to have a neighbour intent on destroying you and indeed trying to do so.
Our frame of reference, certainly for many on PB, simply can't comprehend this. Or war. So we try to impose our bien pensant on the one hand views on it.
But it's war. Even the Palestinian para medics featured on the BBC documentary acknowledge it's war.
I am not denying it is a war. The Hamas attack was a horrific crime and Israel has a right to defend itself. However, I do not believe that Israel's actions are proportionate, and I believe they have as a result killed civilians in a way and in numbers that cannot be justified. Moreover, their actions are completely counterproductive because what Palestinian would want to make peace with Israel now, after so many innocent people have died? Indeed, what neutral person can look at the actions of the last few months with anything other than horror at the sheer disproportionality of violence that Israel has unleashed? Meanwhile, in Britain it has become almost a thought crime to express any criticism of Israel at all. The disconnect between what the elite deems acceptable thought and what most people think about what's happening in Gaza is huge (71% of Britons support an immediate ceasefire according to YouGov). Shutting down debate in the way that both main parties are trying to do right now never ends well.
Yes...but it's Feb 7-11. Delta were Feb 8-12: Lab 45, +2; Con 27, nc, LD 8, -2, Ref 10, +1. And Refield Feb 7-11 has Lab 45, +2, Con 21, -2, LD 11, +1, Ref 12, nc.
It's an embarassing week but I'm not sure there's much structural damage.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
@BartholomewRoberts is correct that the IDF does try very hard to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that if you kill 100,000 non-combatants to take out 40,000 Hamas members then I reckon you've probably created 60,000 new Hamas supporters.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
I think that this is exactly the point. If Israel is really intent on destroying Hamas completely it is chasing a dream that will turn into a nightmare. There needs to be a point at which they say enough. It is not easy when there are Hamas fighters still active in significant numbers and when there are a large number of unreturned hostages but it is surely approaching.
They need a way out of this and they need new leadership. The two are closely linked.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
Of course he is. But because he is such a brave realist it doesn't bother him. If only we could all be this clear-sighted and unencumbered by foolish notions like killing little children is bad.
It's war. We aren't really used to it in this country. We are used to containment actions.
We have no idea what it must be like to have a neighbour intent on destroying you and indeed trying to do so.
Our frame of reference, certainly for many on PB, simply can't comprehend this. Or war. So we try to impose our bien pensant on the one hand views on it.
But it's war. Even the Palestinian para medics featured on the BBC documentary acknowledge it's war.
I am not denying it is a war. The Hamas attack was a horrific crime and Israel has a right to defend itself. However, I do not believe that Israel's actions are proportionate, and I believe they have as a result killed civilians in a way and in numbers that cannot be justified. Moreover, their actions are completely counterproductive because what Palestinian would want to make peace with Israel now, after so many innocent people have died? Indeed, what neutral person can look at the actions of the last few months with anything other than horror at the sheer disproportionality of violence that Israel has unleashed? Meanwhile, in Britain it has become almost a thought crime to express any criticism of Israel at all. The disconnect between what the elite deems acceptable thought and what most people think about what's happening in Gaza is huge (71% of Britons support an immediate ceasefire according to YouGov). Shutting down debate in the way that both main parties are trying to do right now never ends well.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
Of course he is. But because he is such a brave realist it doesn't bother him. If only we could all be this clear-sighted and unencumbered by foolish notions like killing little children is bad.
It's war. We aren't really used to it in this country. We are used to containment actions.
We have no idea what it must be like to have a neighbour intent on destroying you and indeed trying to do so.
Our frame of reference, certainly for many on PB, simply can't comprehend this. Or war. So we try to impose our bien pensant on the one hand views on it.
But it's war. Even the Palestinian para medics featured on the BBC documentary acknowledge it's war.
I am not denying it is a war. The Hamas attack was a horrific crime and Israel has a right to defend itself. However, I do not believe that Israel's actions are proportionate, and I believe they have as a result killed civilians in a way and in numbers that cannot be justified. Moreover, their actions are completely counterproductive because what Palestinian would want to make peace with Israel now, after so many innocent people have died? Indeed, what neutral person can look at the actions of the last few months with anything other than horror at the sheer disproportionality of violence that Israel has unleashed? Meanwhile, in Britain it has become almost a thought crime to express any criticism of Israel at all. The disconnect between what the elite deems acceptable thought and what most people think about what's happening in Gaza is huge (71% of Britons support an immediate ceasefire according to YouGov). Shutting down debate in the way that both main parties are trying to do right now never ends well.
Ask the hundreds of thousands of marchers it seems every Saturday if they are being "shut down".
And proportionality goes out of the window when the combatants embed themselves among the civilian population. The Israelis went into a hospital with a surgical (!) strike against some combatants who had hidden in there. And they were criticised for it. They didn't bomb the hospital they went and took the guys out. But that is not always possible and you can't give your enemy the ability to say don't shoot I'm in a civilian's house which in any case itself is a "war crime".
The Tories didn't win Rochdale in either the high water marks of 1983 or 2019 so quite how they're going to win a by election when they're the incumbent government and 20 points behind in the polls takes some massive leaps of the imagination
The Muslim/lefite vote splits between the (non) Labour candidate and the Gorgeous One allowing Con to come through in the middle!
No, I don't believe it! If anyone came through the middle it'd be the Lib-Dems, probably.
I guess the question is whether anyone can establish themselves as the Only Choice To Stop Galloway. Otherwise, it could easily be all the top four on twentysomething percent each, and flip knows who is on top.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
@BartholomewRoberts is correct that the IDF does try very hard to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that if you kill 100,000 non-combatants to take out 40,000 Hamas members then I reckon you've probably created 60,000 new Hamas supporters.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
I think that this is exactly the point. If Israel is really intent on destroying Hamas completely it is chasing a dream that will turn into a nightmare. There needs to be a point at which they say enough. It is not easy when there are Hamas fighters still active in significant numbers and when there are a large number of unreturned hostages but it is surely approaching.
They need a way out of this and they need new leadership. The two are closely linked.
Why?
The best analogy I can think of is WWII when we demanded the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
Israel should press on against Hamas until they get unconditional surrender.
No negotiations, no peace talks, simple unconditional surrender. Once they get that, then its enough, just as we demanded in the past.
Listening to Cameron in the HOL he is seeking a ceasefire and 2 state solution which is Sunak's position and the majority in the UK
Starmer is facing a crisis in his party which could go anywhere and how this pans out I have no idea
Yes. Cameron said that Hamas could stop this war at any time they wanted. They could lay down their arms and release the hostages.
It is in their hands. But they seem to not mind all the Gazan civilians dying. But it is their constituency as they were voted in with a policy of destroying Israel and they are trying to do that so I suppose everyone's happy.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Yes...but it's Feb 7-11. Delta were Feb 8-12: Lab 45, +2; Con 27, nc, LD 8, -2, Ref 10, +1. And Refield Feb 7-11 has Lab 45, +2, Con 21, -2, LD 11, +1, Ref 12, nc.
It's an embarassing week but I'm not sure there's much structural damage.
“SKS FANS PLEASE EXPLAIN.”
I would explain it like this BJO
1 fieldwork finished on 11th, so no Dalegate in this at all. 2 of the last half dozen from this pollster, the Con figure average is spot on, but labour tend to average 42, though there’s a 41 in sequence too, so a 2% lower Labour from this pollsters recent average in this one poll 3 in ref to what people said below, it is a 2K responded survey, which means’s lower chance of error, according to some arbitrary line in the sand 4 an awful lot of polls have been published since you last asked Starmer fans to explain one BJO, have you been away? 😆
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
What's the laptop? Thinkpads and some of the corporate Dells and similar are easy enough to remove the keyboard and likely a cheap replacement if needed. Most consumer laptops, not so easy.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
You mean Hamas and their defenders, right?
Hamas deliberately targeting, raping and killing civilians is murder. Civilians being a tragic collateral damage in war is not murder.
Actually it is if the attacking force does not take the necessary steps to avoid killing them. Something Israel to date does not appear to have been much bothered with and certainly sopmething you don't seem to give a shit about.
It’s almost as if the concept of war crimes is something that only troubles some combatant nations. For others it’s a triviality.
You’ve probably hit upon a truth there.
The LAOC offer a very thin and weak shield to civilians. Growing urbanisation, and the willingness of combatants to embed themselves among civilians, mean that such casualties will be terrible.
Yes...but it's Feb 7-11. Delta were Feb 8-12: Lab 45, +2; Con 27, nc, LD 8, -2, Ref 10, +1. And Refield Feb 7-11 has Lab 45, +2, Con 21, -2, LD 11, +1, Ref 12, nc.
It's an embarassing week but I'm not sure there's much structural damage.
“SKS FANS PLEASE EXPLAIN.”
I would explain it like this BJO
1 fieldwork finished on 11th, so no Dalegate in this at all. 2 of the last half dozen from this pollster, the Con figure average is spot on, but labour tend to average 42, though there’s a 41 in sequence too, so a 2% lower Labour from this pollsters recent average in this one poll 3 in ref to what people said below, it is a 2K responded survey, which means’s lower chance of error, according to some arbitrary line in the sand 4 an awful lot of polls have been published since you last asked Starmer fans to explain one BJO, have you been away? 😆
Bigger sample means smaller random error, so the band in which 95% of samples are expected to fall is lower. But just as likely (5% chance) to be one of the rogue polls outside the expected margin of error as any other poll.
Systematic error isn't affected by sample size - of they're sampling strategy or post-sample adjustments are off then they'll be just as off, whatever the size.
TLDR: Bigger samples should mean less random movement, but you can still get outliers and if it's crap it's crap however many people you sample.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
What's the laptop? Thinkpads and some of the corporate Dells and similar are easy enough to remove the keyboard and likely a cheap replacement if needed. Most consumer laptops, not so easy.
But I'd keep going with the compressed air first
Asus Tuf A15 FA506 gaming Laptop.
Probably in the not so easy, though I have been inside the case before, I replaced both fans a few months ago and reapplied the thermal paste etc as at least one fan's bearing had failed and was very noisy.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Most war criminals are not people like Oskar Dirlewanger or Amon Goth or Lavrentiy Beria. They’re “ordinary men” who fade back into civilian life, when the war is over.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
If Arafat hadn't blown up the Camp David talks there'd have been a Palestinian state two decades ago.
Graham Jones looks to have been hard done by today. It’s not anti-Semitic to bemoan Israel, and to deplore Brits going along to fight in its potentially genocidal war.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
I expect Labour to hold on in Rochdale. If anything the candidate's comments on Israel, while distasteful, may allow him to hold off Galloway. Technically Starmer disowning him may also help him hold the Muslim vote
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
Depending on the model a repair shop may be able to repair it. Google "[name of laptop] keyboard" and see if they are sold separately. If they are, go to a repair shop, and ask them to buy a keyboard and fit it. They'll also clean out the fluff for you for an extra charge.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
What's the laptop? Thinkpads and some of the corporate Dells and similar are easy enough to remove the keyboard and likely a cheap replacement if needed. Most consumer laptops, not so easy.
But I'd keep going with the compressed air first
Asus Tuf A15 FA506 gaming Laptop.
Probably in the not so easy, though I have been inside the case before, I replaced both fans a few months ago and reapplied the thermal paste etc as at least one fan's bearing had failed and was very noisy.
Have a look at Youtube videos like this one and decide whether you are up to it or would prefer to pay a repair shop.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
On current performance killing 30-50,000 Hamas members probably means killing at least 100-200,000 non combatants. This is what you are advocating even if you try to avoid confronting it.
@BartholomewRoberts is correct that the IDF does try very hard to avoid civilian casualties. The problem is that if you kill 100,000 non-combatants to take out 40,000 Hamas members then I reckon you've probably created 60,000 new Hamas supporters.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
I think that this is exactly the point. If Israel is really intent on destroying Hamas completely it is chasing a dream that will turn into a nightmare. There needs to be a point at which they say enough. It is not easy when there are Hamas fighters still active in significant numbers and when there are a large number of unreturned hostages but it is surely approaching.
They need a way out of this and they need new leadership. The two are closely linked.
Why?
The best analogy I can think of is WWII when we demanded the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
Israel should press on against Hamas until they get unconditional surrender.
No negotiations, no peace talks, simple unconditional surrender. Once they get that, then its enough, just as we demanded in the past.
Bartholomew continued:
"But I got a word of warning for all you would-be warriors. When you join my command, you take on a debit. A debit you owe me personally. Each and every man under my command owes me one hundred Hamas scalps. And I want my scalps. And all y'all will git me one hundred Hamas scalps, taken from the heads of one hundred dead Hamas terrorists. Or you will die tryin'!"
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
I know very little about WW2. But wasn’t Bomber Command strategy basically predicated on the idea that bombing Germany out of the war would save the innumerable slaughter witnessed in WW1?
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
Both.
And that's the tragedy, for tragedy it is.
Indeed and if only they’d take steps to resolve it.
Labour suspends second parliamentary candidate after recording emerges
Labour has suspended a second parliamentary candidate after allegations that he made comments about Israel.
Former MP Graham Jones is also facing an investigation, the BBC understands.
It comes after Labour withdrew support for the party's candidate for the Rochdale by-election, Azhar Ali, for apparently making antisemitic remarks.
Mr Jones has been contacted for comment.
Labour had selected Mr Jones to contest his former Lancashire seat of Hyndburn in the upcoming general election.
But, on Tuesday the Guido Fawkes website published audio in which the former MP allegedly uses an expletive to refer to Israel and arguing that British people who fight in the Israel Defence Forces "should be locked up".
I don't see how the drip of anti-semitic revelations will necessarily play badly for Lab. Sympathy for Israel and therefore the Jews must be at an all-time low in the UK (and elsewhere throughout Europe and the world) and people have shown that sympathy for Hamas and the Gazans is very strong.
I don't see that Lab will suffer all that much. The Jewish Labour Movement may bleat on about this or that but overall I would say it would at best/worst be neutral for Lab, perhaps a slight positive.
This may put me in a minority but I have a lot of sympathy for Jewish students at Birmingham University facing demands from pro-Palestinian students that they should be thrown off campus. And very little sympathy for any political party which seeks to get votes from the sort of people who make or support these demands.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
I think Edwin Starr called it
War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Say it Again
I've actually tuned out of all news and listen to podcasts (incidentally not about War..what is it good for...absolutely nothing...say it again.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
What's the laptop? Thinkpads and some of the corporate Dells and similar are easy enough to remove the keyboard and likely a cheap replacement if needed. Most consumer laptops, not so easy.
I expect Labour to hold on in Rochdale. If anything the candidate's comments on Israel, while distasteful, may allow him to hold off Galloway. Technically Starmer disowning him may also help him hold the Muslim vote
The percentages last time were L52C31. This time, 30 percent probably wins.
Can Labour keep two thirds of their 2019 share with no campaign from here onwards? It's not obvious that they can't.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
I think Edwin Starr called it
War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing. Say it Again
I've actually tuned out of all news and listen to podcasts (incidentally not about War..what is it good for...absolutely nothing...say it again.
We wage war, because we are intelligent social animals.
War actually can settle a lot of problems, forever.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
I know very little about WW2. But was Bomber Command strategy basically predicated on the idea that bombing Germany out of the war would save the innumerable slaughter witnessed in WW1?
Yep. Harris wanted to defeat Germany without the need for any British soldiers to land on the continent, other than to accept the surrender. There have been many arguments over the years about whether Bomber Command was worth the money and resources (materials and men) that it took. Max Hastings thought not in his book on the bomber war. Others disagree. Certainly the bombing campaign tied up tens if not hundreds of thousands of Germans defending the Reich who could have been fighting in the East. And combined with the 8th airforce’s campaign, the Allies achieved air dominance over the Luftwaffe, making D-Day much easier and restricting German movements to night time, to avoid being attacked from the air. By the end of 44 and into 45 the German transport system was wrecked, so moving anything was hard, including troops, tanks etc.
Sadly the idea that you could depress the morale of a nation under a fascist authoritarian regime was false. Even if a German housewife wanted to end the war after her house was destroyed, there was no mechanism for her to achieve it. And the Blitz had shown the resilience of the Brits under the bomb.
But ultimately strategic bombing contributed to winning the war and to describe one target destroyed as a war crime is infantile rubbish.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
What's the laptop? Thinkpads and some of the corporate Dells and similar are easy enough to remove the keyboard and likely a cheap replacement if needed. Most consumer laptops, not so easy.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
Upside down compressed air cans are also a very good way of setting chocolate.
Yes will be much missed, an iconic DJ and his Sunday Love Songs show was great too
David Frost (no not that one) rated Wrighty as one of Britain's foremost interviewers. Steve Wright had journalistic experience as a youngster and he was always well researched when he interviewed his guests. It was all about them and not him. His zoo radio style was chaotic but I suspect well scripted (with assistance from writers like Richard Easter). On Radio One his character were superb ( my favourites were Mick and Keith who were voiced by Phil Cornwell. He was one of Britain's foremost radio presenters (learning his craft from US jocks - hence the numerous long weekends to the States to listen to wall to wall radio). What he wasn't was a DJ. He was a s*** DJ
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
I know very little about WW2. But was Bomber Command strategy basically predicated on the idea that bombing Germany out of the war would save the innumerable slaughter witnessed in WW1?
Yep. Harris wanted to defeat Germany without the need for any British soldiers to land on the continent, other than to accept the surrender. There have been many arguments over the years about whether Bomber Command was worth the money and resources (materials and men) that it took. Max Hastings thought not in his book on the bomber war. Others disagree. Certainly the bombing campaign tied up tens if not hundreds of thousands of Germans defending the Reich who could have been fighting in the East. And combined with the 8th airforce’s campaign, the Allies achieved air dominance over the Luftwaffe, making D-Day much easier and restricting German movements to night time, to avoid being attacked from the air. By the end of 44 and into 45 the German transport system was wrecked, so moving anything was hard, including troops, tanks etc.
Sadly the idea that you could depress the morale of a nation under a fascist authoritarian regime was false. Even if a German housewife wanted to end the war after her house was destroyed, there was no mechanism for her to achieve it. And the Blitz had shown the resilience of the Brits under the bomb.
But ultimately strategic bombing contributed to winning the war and to describe one target destroyed as a war crime is infantile rubbish.
My view is that it was horrific, and did not break German morale.
But, the ongoing destruction made it ever harder for Germany to keep fighting. Like the naval blockade, it was a very blunt incident.
PB brains trust, can I ask a question? My Laptop keyboard's has been playing up lately. Sometimes when I press a key its either not registering a key press at all, or registering multiple key presses simultaneously.
Typically happening with the same few keys. The a and r keys most especially. I had to type the r key four times then for it it to come through, and when it did on the fourth press two came through at once.
Unfortunately since I touch-type, letters not coming through is harder for me to catch since I don't typically read what I'm typing as I'm typing it since I can type perfectly normally without looking at either the keyboard or screen, but now I'm having to pay attention as a missing letter can be either spelt wrong or change the word which is unfortunate. The word "matte" in prior post was another example, it was supposed to be matter but the r mustn't have registered.
As its a Laptop, replacing the keyboard is not a simple matter and I don't want to replace the Laptop. Any advice on what can be done, other than plugging in a USB keyboard?
I have heard that it is possible to clean a laptop keyboard, but the last time I tried to do this some of the keys wouldn't go back on. You will likely find guides for your laptop model online, and if you do try it and it fails then it will provide greater motivation for paying someone to replace it, or using an external keyboard.
I would definitely give it a go with canned compressed air, first. That's cheap and generally doesn't break anything.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
Tried compressed air, *touch wood* not had any issues with the r key since, though the a key (which was the first to start playing up) is still playing up.
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
What's the laptop? Thinkpads and some of the corporate Dells and similar are easy enough to remove the keyboard and likely a cheap replacement if needed. Most consumer laptops, not so easy.
But I'd keep going with the compressed air first
Mmmm, Thinkpads...
What other laptops still have a cassette battery?
I'm now reminded of being in Dixons back in the day and some poor customer stood in front of an electric typewriter.
"Is this 'IBM Compatible'? I have some disks from a friend?"
...
"Yes! Fully! Let's just go over to the till!" said the eager assistant.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
Both.
And that's the tragedy, for tragedy it is.
Indeed and if only they’d take steps to resolve it.
Indeed.
But that probably needs people on both sides who prefer peace to absolute victory, even some intentional amnesia on who to blame. Mandela and de Klerk. Trimble and Adams.
I don't see how the drip of anti-semitic revelations will necessarily play badly for Lab. Sympathy for Israel and therefore the Jews must be at an all-time low in the UK (and elsewhere throughout Europe and the world) and people have shown that sympathy for Hamas and the Gazans is very strong.
I don't see that Lab will suffer all that much. The Jewish Labour Movement may bleat on about this or that but overall I would say it would at best/worst be neutral for Lab, perhaps a slight positive.
This may put me in a minority but I have a lot of sympathy for Jewish students at Birmingham University facing demands from pro-Palestinian students that they should be thrown off campus. And very little sympathy for any political party which seeks to get votes from the sort of people who make or support these demands.
Sympathy for the students, rather than for the demands they be thrown out, I hope ?
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
I know very little about WW2. But wasn’t Bomber Command strategy basically predicated on the idea that bombing Germany out of the war would save the innumerable slaughter witnessed in WW1?
It actually varied
At the start of the war, it was believed that Strategic Bombing would create annihilation, something close to nuclear type effects. i.e. Half of London dead in the first week
This turned out to be false.
Bomer Command started off trying to do daylight precession bombing. And got slaughtered.
They switched to night bombing and could barely hit the right country.
Harris came in and went for the idea of massed raids as a giant shotgun blast. He dismissed the attempts at precision raids as (mostly) a waste of time.
Meanwhile technology marched on. Target marking, bomb aiming, radar and above all, radio navigation.
By the end of the war a Mosquito could hit a target, using Oboe, 50% of the time. In the middle of the night, they could put a single bomb on something with near smart bomb rates. Small "playing card" formations of Mosquitos could guarantee a hit.
Meanwhile, the "Main Force" was putting 600 heavy bombers over one city.
At the end of the war, the technology for precision bombing had arrived, but the earlier failures had built an implacable resistance to depending on it.
'Musicians like Belle and Sebastian and Radiohead are huge fans of the music and people are always telling me how much their children enjoy Bagpuss. It has a gentleness and intimacy that contemporary programmes lack. Oliver once said that he and Peter never grew up. When he revisited his childhood home as an adult, he said it didn’t look right, so he got on his knees and crawled around like a child, and of course it became familiar. That’s the sort of mind he had.'
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
Both.
And that's the tragedy, for tragedy it is.
Indeed and if only they’d take steps to resolve it.
Indeed.
But that probably needs people on both sides who prefer peace to absolute victory, even some intentional amnesia on who to blame. Mandela and de Klerk. Trimble and Adams.
At the moment, the score there is 0/2.
That reference to the absolute reminds me of Bronowski’s famous speech in from of Auschwitz. It's said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That's false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance, it was done by dogma, it was done by ignorance. When people believe that they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods. Science is a very human form of knowledge. We are always at the brink of the known; we always feel forward for what is to be hoped. Every judgment in science stands on the edge of error and is personal. Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible. In the end, the words were said by Oliver Cromwell: "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ: Think it possible you may be mistaken."
I owe it as a scientist to my friend Leo Szilard, I owe it as a human being to the many members of my family who died here, to stand here as a survivor and a witness. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute knowledge and power. We have to close the distance between the push-button order and the human act. We have to touch people.
I still blame the boffins at CERN for putting us onto this timeline.
It’s not an especially silly thing to do - TikTok is how to reach a lot of people.
Sadly, advertisements in The Times are rarely perused with a keen eye these days….
There's a difference between reaching people and getting them to change their actions.
The number of people prepared to cross the Channel in small boat who decide who'd be convinced not to because they saw a TikTok "influencer" telling them not to would be no more than zero.
Listening to Cameron in the HOL he is seeking a ceasefire and 2 state solution which is Sunak's position and the majority in the UK
Starmer is facing a crisis in his party which could go anywhere and how this pans out I have no idea
I think commitment to 2 State Solution is utter drivel from David Cameron, to be honest with you.
It’s utter clueless drivel from every leader who spurts it out, Sunak, Starmer, Biden. Or anyone who says it. Do they have a clue what they are actually saying?
They are saying partition. 2 state solution is PARTITION.
A Partition neither the Israeli government, nor many Palestinians and their leaders at all want - so why Cameron and Sunak and Biden so in love with the idea? Partition asap before Israel can grab control even more Palestinian area’s, making the situation even more of a headache for Western leaders - this has been the extent of thinking for far too long.
So you support the 2 State Solution? Okay - where’s recognition the Palestinians are effectively Two States and types of government already, so let’s at least hear it for the three State solution. Now, tell us where through, like so much of the West Bank, where daily lives of Arab and Jew and Christian still so entwined, you are bringing partition, and they have to be live one side of a divide in one of the states? Where are you putting these people so it works for them democratically? Or is this a Fourth State Solution?
With all your lines of partition in a dispute over the same heritage and land, are you actually achieving agreement of all parties, so they see it as just, fair, and they are charitable to making the deal work? Getting to yes in talks like these can only start with a blank canvas, not bringing preconditions like 2 state solution to the table to start from.
2 State Solution is just jibberish from the mouths of out of touch Western leaders incapable of the imaginative and bold thinking necessary to actually solve issues like this one. whenever you hear “Two State Solution” know it comes from someone utterly clueless, lazy, and who doesn’t really care shit about peace in that region.
I don't see how the drip of anti-semitic revelations will necessarily play badly for Lab. Sympathy for Israel and therefore the Jews must be at an all-time low in the UK (and elsewhere throughout Europe and the world) and people have shown that sympathy for Hamas and the Gazans is very strong.
I don't see that Lab will suffer all that much. The Jewish Labour Movement may bleat on about this or that but overall I would say it would at best/worst be neutral for Lab, perhaps a slight positive.
This may put me in a minority but I have a lot of sympathy for Jewish students at Birmingham University facing demands from pro-Palestinian students that they should be thrown off campus. And very little sympathy for any political party which seeks to get votes from the sort of people who make or support these demands.
That is true but there is a political view which elides Israel and the Jews why our very own @nico679 pointed out the connection:
"The biggest recruiting sergeant for anti-Semitism is Netenyahu and his disgusting cabinet"
Labour, I would say broadly, supports the Palestinian position. As per Nico's post this then translates into anti-semitism and anti-Jewish sentiment so Lab could have thought it through to enhance their political position. Were the pro-Palestinian students at Birmingham University affiliated to any organisation.
The Evening Standard tonight had a double page feature on Labour's problems in its London heartland. The main focus was on the threat to Wes Streeting in Ilford North whose majority in 2019 was 5,200 and now faces an Independent candidate with links to pro-Palestine groups whose own campaign may be helped by the inclusion of some parts of Ilford South into the newly-redrawn constituency.
The Standard also confirmed what I'd heard - that Councillor Mirza and the Newham Independents are going to stand candidates in both East Ham and West Ham & Beckton against Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown respectively. Another likely challenge to Labour is in Bethnal Green & Bow from an Aspire candidate.
It seems unlikely Labour will lose any of these seats and treating "the muslim vote" as a single homogenous entity is unwise. Respect got 20% in 2005 in East Ham and I suspect that's about where any pro-Palestine anti-Labour candidate will end up later this year.
The Evening Standard tonight had a double page feature on Labour's problems in its London heartland. The main focus was on the threat to Wes Streeting in Ilford North whose majority in 2019 was 5,200 and now faces an Independent candidate with links to pro-Palestine groups whose own campaign may be helped by the inclusion of some parts of Ilford South into the newly-redrawn constituency.
The Standard also confirmed what I'd heard - that Councillor Mirza and the Newham Independents are going to stand candidates in both East Ham and West Ham & Beckton against Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown respectively. Another likely challenge to Labour is in Bethnal Green & Bow from an Aspire candidate.
It seems unlikely Labour will lose any of these seats and treating "the muslim vote" as a single homogenous entity is unwise. Respect got 20% in 2005 in East Ham and I suspect that's about where any pro-Palestine anti-Labour candidate will end up later this year.
Losing Wes Streeting from the next (likely) Cabinet of the UK would be a disaster for the whole country frankly. Someone needs to sort out the mess of the NHS and he seems like he might be up for the task. Prepared to reform and learn from other countries.
One can only hope if he loses Ilford then a quick peerage and Cabinet will happen.
The Evening Standard tonight had a double page feature on Labour's problems in its London heartland. The main focus was on the threat to Wes Streeting in Ilford North whose majority in 2019 was 5,200 and now faces an Independent candidate with links to pro-Palestine groups whose own campaign may be helped by the inclusion of some parts of Ilford South into the newly-redrawn constituency.
The Standard also confirmed what I'd heard - that Councillor Mirza and the Newham Independents are going to stand candidates in both East Ham and West Ham & Beckton against Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown respectively. Another likely challenge to Labour is in Bethnal Green & Bow from an Aspire candidate.
It seems unlikely Labour will lose any of these seats and treating "the muslim vote" as a single homogenous entity is unwise. Respect got 20% in 2005 in East Ham and I suspect that's about where any pro-Palestine anti-Labour candidate will end up later this year.
Losing Wes Streeting from the next (likely) Cabinet of the UK would be a disaster for the whole country frankly. Someone needs to sort out the mess of the NHS and he seems like he might be up for the task. Prepared to reform and learn from other countries.
One can only hope if he loses Ilford then a quick peerage and Cabinet will happen.
Wes is my MP. Ilford North is 50% Muslim according to the 2021 census.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
Because it was clear that it would not work. It was part of this ridiculous idea of British moral superiority. We had not cracked under the Blitz because we were British. But johnny foreigner is not made of the same stuff and so was bound to be broken by our bombing his cities flat.
Harris explicitly pushed this idea - that he could win the war by breaking the German spirit. It was clear in hindsight (and to many at the time) that it was a fallacy and that is one of the reasons that it was outlawed after the war. The whole campaign of targetting German civilian population would today be considered criminal and put in the same category as the use of poison gas.
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I am not Jewish, but it is worth reading the history of the pogroms and the holocaust to understand as to why they might respond in a way that might be considered by non-Jews as "disproportionate". Hamas and their paymasters in Iran and possibly the Kremlin, knew what would result.
The reality is that Hamas still holds the hostages. That is barbaric. It is terrorism. It is the collective punishment of Jews for being Jews.
Beyond barbaric, Oct 7th imo. And the response is disproportionate and indiscriminate. I don't have a problem thinking both those things at the same time.
If only everyone could just get along and kittens.
I'm sure that killing 12,000 Palestinian children will do a great deal to further the cause of peace and reconciliation.
Killing 30,000-50,000 Hamas members might though.
If Hamas cared about Palestinian children, they shouldn't have started this war. This war should end once Hamas is destoyed.
If Israel had pulled back to the 1967 border during the 1990s, Hamas may never have come about...
Do the rockets cause the occupation or does the occupation cause the rockets 🤔
Both.
And that's the tragedy, for tragedy it is.
Indeed and if only they’d take steps to resolve it.
Indeed.
But that probably needs people on both sides who prefer peace to absolute victory, even some intentional amnesia on who to blame. Mandela and de Klerk. Trimble and Adams.
The Evening Standard tonight had a double page feature on Labour's problems in its London heartland. The main focus was on the threat to Wes Streeting in Ilford North whose majority in 2019 was 5,200 and now faces an Independent candidate with links to pro-Palestine groups whose own campaign may be helped by the inclusion of some parts of Ilford South into the newly-redrawn constituency.
The Standard also confirmed what I'd heard - that Councillor Mirza and the Newham Independents are going to stand candidates in both East Ham and West Ham & Beckton against Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown respectively. Another likely challenge to Labour is in Bethnal Green & Bow from an Aspire candidate.
It seems unlikely Labour will lose any of these seats and treating "the muslim vote" as a single homogenous entity is unwise. Respect got 20% in 2005 in East Ham and I suspect that's about where any pro-Palestine anti-Labour candidate will end up later this year.
Number of Muslims in London 2001 607k 2011 1m 2021 1.7m
So I’d think that the percentage of votes in big Muslim areas could be higher than 20
Unfortunately this is a by-election dominated by a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know far, far too much.
There are conflicts all around the world that don't get a fraction of the spotlight or attention that this one has had. I wonder what is so unique about this one conflict, that every moment becomes headline news unlike all the others?
The physical carnage, the huge civilian casualties, the mass displacement of people, the resulting humanitarian disaster, the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west - these do make for a big story.
"the inflictor of all this being a regime supported by the west".
I think you might need to understand that this awful conflict was blatantly started by Hamas who "inflicted" rape torture and murder on innocent people.
There is a reasonable argument that the Israeli response has been disproportionate, but the "infliction" was initiated by Hamas terrorists.
As you have been an occasional apologist for Corbyn (and probably indirectly voted for him to be PM) I guess this is hard to recognise?
I know who started the fire. Hamas did. Oct 7th was unspeakable. It's now 13th February and Israel has wreaked a mighty vengeance for it.
Justifiable response to a threat deemed existential? Or barbaric collective punishment of the population of Gaza?
I think the latter.
I think you'll find that war does involve what useful idiots such as yourself would call "collective punishment".
Collective punishment is a war crime under Article 33 of the Geneva Convention. People who make excuses for it are idiots, useful or otherwise.
That's why I put it in quotation marks. Or perhaps Kinabalu thinks what Israel is doing is a war crime.
Well many of us do.
Yes hugely important that arseholes on the internet think something or other.
The arseholes being those who defend the murder of civilians as a necessary evil.
You suit the description perfectly.
It's war, Dickie boy. Look it up in the dictionary.
Indeed hence war crimes. Look them up yourself.
I suspect the proportion of military combatants to civilians was far smaller ratio in the Hamburg firestorm and the levelling of Dresden. But we weren't on trial at Nuremburg.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
Nope. Many commentators these days consider Dresden as a war crime. Indeed there is no escaping that for Harris as his explicit stated aim of breaking the German spirit by targeting civilians is specifically addressed as a war crime today.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
Personally I think only idiots living without the fear of Nazi tyranny consider Dresden a war crime. Why Dresden and not every single bombing raid that Bomber Command mounted? Because like it or not, Bomber Command wanted to achieve Dresden results EVERY time they set out. Dresden stands out as it was late in the war, and was highly successful, due to the firestorm. But many, many allied soldiers died after Dresden. Many Jews and other captives of the Nazis died after Dresden. Germany could have surrendered and stopped it all.
I know very little about WW2. But was Bomber Command strategy basically predicated on the idea that bombing Germany out of the war would save the innumerable slaughter witnessed in WW1?
Yep. Harris wanted to defeat Germany without the need for any British soldiers to land on the continent, other than to accept the surrender. There have been many arguments over the years about whether Bomber Command was worth the money and resources (materials and men) that it took. Max Hastings thought not in his book on the bomber war. Others disagree. Certainly the bombing campaign tied up tens if not hundreds of thousands of Germans defending the Reich who could have been fighting in the East. And combined with the 8th airforce’s campaign, the Allies achieved air dominance over the Luftwaffe, making D-Day much easier and restricting German movements to night time, to avoid being attacked from the air. By the end of 44 and into 45 the German transport system was wrecked, so moving anything was hard, including troops, tanks etc.
Sadly the idea that you could depress the morale of a nation under a fascist authoritarian regime was false. Even if a German housewife wanted to end the war after her house was destroyed, there was no mechanism for her to achieve it. And the Blitz had shown the resilience of the Brits under the bomb.
But ultimately strategic bombing contributed to winning the war and to describe one target destroyed as a war crime is infantile rubbish.
There were lots of things done on both sides in both wars which would now be considered war crimes. The whole point of civilisation is that we develop and learn from our mistakes.
Comments
War is hell and non-combatants get caught up in any warzone which is why the honourable thing for any neighbouring nations to do is offer refuge or safe harbour to non-combatants, but nobody wants to it seems, so non-combatants are going to die. That's a reality of war, its ignorant, juvenile and pathetic to think there can be a war without non-combatant casualties.
Far from not giving a shit, I completely applaud them for that and hope they continue doing what that they're doing until Hamas is completely destroyed.
Evidence I've read suggests that they're making a pretty bad job of it if they are, but I'm not there so I don't know for sure. Nor do you.
This advert was seen in Redbridge, where @wesstreeting is the MP.
Redbridge residents are mounting a campaign to unseat Streeting at the #GeneralElection2024
https://x.com/newhamindparty/status/1757458515197567032?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
I might give the IDF the benefit of the doubt. I certainly don't extend that courtesy to scum like you.
Everything I've read shows that Israel are trying to avoid civilian casualties. Nobodies perfect and civilians will die in war, Iraqi and Afghani civilians died when we went to war, but they're trying which is more than can be said about Hamas.
We resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths in Afghanistan and Iraq, in a war that was far less existential for us than it was for Israel.
What's so unique about Israel that means they, when existentially defending themselves means they can't fight if it means tens of thousands of civilian deaths, but we can even if it leads to hundreds of thousands of civilian deaths?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/commander-2-troops-killed-in-gaza-blast-raising-ground-operation-death-toll-to-232/
I hate the civilian count in Iraq and Gaza but these are actions that have occurred. I would say the one in Gaza is a lot more understandable and justified than the one in Iraq. We weren't fighting for the nation's survival in Iraq I believe.
The voice of radio in the afternoon.
We are all entitled to our opinions on the rights and wrongs of Israel's response to the evil of Hamas but I really don't see why they can't be expressed in more temperate terms. Its not as if our opinions are of any moment whatsoever to those actually engaged in this.
I don't believe you can stamp out hatred of Israel in the occupied territories just by killing Hamas members, because I think you create new adherents at a faster pace than you are killing them.
And there are as many Palestinians in the area of Israel + Palestine as you do Jews. Brutal repression might stop the violence in the short term, but unless the Palestinians have some hope of a better life (which they don't, particularly in Gaza, right now), then it's still bubbling under the surface, ready to explode in violence.
That's no way for Israel to live, and it's no way for the Palestinians.
If Israel's neighbours guarantee peace there can be a workable solution (think Jordan, Egypt).
If not, not.
No, I don't believe it! If anyone came through the middle it'd be the Lib-Dems, probably.
Removing keys is generally a bad idea unless the keyboard is designed for it. Most laptop keyboards aren't.
But first must come the elimination of Hamas, then can come a better tomorrow hopefully.
Defeating the Nazis and Imperial Japan led to a better future for both. I don't have high hopes for the future of Gaza, but there's more chance of it being rebuilt in a humane and successful manner without Hamas than with it.
Meanwhile, in Britain it has become almost a thought crime to express any criticism of Israel at all. The disconnect between what the elite deems acceptable thought and what most people think about what's happening in Gaza is huge (71% of Britons support an immediate ceasefire according to YouGov). Shutting down debate in the way that both main parties are trying to do right now never ends well.
And Refield Feb 7-11 has Lab 45, +2, Con 21, -2, LD 11, +1, Ref 12, nc.
It's an embarassing week but I'm not sure there's much structural damage.
Starmer is facing a crisis in his party which could go anywhere and how this pans out I have no idea
Will give compressed air a couple more goes, but will wait until Laptop is off and cool before trying it again.
They need a way out of this and they need new leadership. The two are closely linked.
And proportionality goes out of the window when the combatants embed themselves among the civilian population. The Israelis went into a hospital with a surgical (!) strike against some combatants who had hidden in there. And they were criticised for it. They didn't bomb the hospital they went and took the guys out. But that is not always possible and you can't give your enemy the ability to say don't shoot I'm in a civilian's house which in any case itself is a "war crime".
The best analogy I can think of is WWII when we demanded the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan.
Israel should press on against Hamas until they get unconditional surrender.
No negotiations, no peace talks, simple unconditional surrender. Once they get that, then its enough, just as we demanded in the past.
It is in their hands. But they seem to not mind all the Gazan civilians dying. But it is their constituency as they were voted in with a policy of destroying Israel and they are trying to do that so I suppose everyone's happy.
Is it a free pass for war crimes if you win the war?
I would explain it like this BJO
1 fieldwork finished on 11th, so no Dalegate in this at all.
2 of the last half dozen from this pollster, the Con figure average is spot on, but labour tend to average 42, though there’s a 41 in sequence too, so a 2% lower Labour from this pollsters recent average in this one poll
3 in ref to what people said below, it is a 2K responded survey, which means’s lower chance of error, according to some arbitrary line in the sand
4 an awful lot of polls have been published since you last asked Starmer fans to explain one BJO, have you been away? 😆
But I'd keep going with the compressed air first
Fake or not, it taps into labour being all over the place on Gaza at the moment, Labour has an issue on Gaza that could damage it.
https://x.com/anon05136448000/status/1757476504638791955?s=61
The LAOC offer a very thin and weak shield to civilians. Growing urbanisation, and the willingness of combatants to embed themselves among civilians, mean that such casualties will be terrible.
Systematic error isn't affected by sample size - of they're sampling strategy or post-sample adjustments are off then they'll be just as off, whatever the size.
TLDR: Bigger samples should mean less random movement, but you can still get outliers and if it's crap it's crap however many people you sample.
Probably in the not so easy, though I have been inside the case before, I replaced both fans a few months ago and reapplied the thermal paste etc as at least one fan's bearing had failed and was very noisy.
It’s not anti-Semitic to bemoan Israel, and to deplore Brits going along to fight in its potentially genocidal war.
The UK, and importantly in this debate, Israel both signed up to the post WW2 international rules on the conduct of war which outlawed many of the things both sides did in WW2 and which Israel and Russia are both doing now.
And that's the tragedy, for tragedy it is.
ASUS TUF Gaming A15 FA506II / Keyboard Replacement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uKOd_vLBNI
"But I got a word of warning for all you would-be warriors. When you join my command, you take on a debit. A debit you owe me personally. Each and every man under my command owes me one hundred Hamas scalps. And I want my scalps. And all y'all will git me one hundred Hamas scalps, taken from the heads of one hundred dead Hamas terrorists. Or you will die tryin'!"
But wasn’t Bomber Command strategy basically predicated on the idea that bombing Germany out of the war would save the innumerable slaughter witnessed in WW1?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-68289460
Labour suspends second parliamentary candidate after recording emerges
Labour has suspended a second parliamentary candidate after allegations that he made comments about Israel.
Former MP Graham Jones is also facing an investigation, the BBC understands.
It comes after Labour withdrew support for the party's candidate for the Rochdale by-election, Azhar Ali, for apparently making antisemitic remarks.
Mr Jones has been contacted for comment.
Labour had selected Mr Jones to contest his former Lancashire seat of Hyndburn in the upcoming general election.
But, on Tuesday the Guido Fawkes website published audio in which the former MP allegedly uses an expletive to refer to Israel and arguing that British people who fight in the Israel Defence Forces "should be locked up".
War, what is it good for? Absolutely nothing.
Say it Again
I've actually tuned out of all news and listen to podcasts (incidentally not about War..what is it good for...absolutely nothing...say it again.
Can Labour keep two thirds of their 2019 share with no campaign from here onwards? It's not obvious that they can't.
War actually can settle a lot of problems, forever.
Sadly the idea that you could depress the morale of a nation under a fascist authoritarian regime was false. Even if a German housewife wanted to end the war after her house was destroyed, there was no mechanism for her to achieve it. And the Blitz had shown the resilience of the Brits under the bomb.
But ultimately strategic bombing contributed to winning the war and to describe one target destroyed as a war crime is infantile rubbish.
If that's something you do of a weekend.
But, the ongoing destruction made it ever harder for Germany to keep fighting. Like the naval blockade, it was a very blunt incident.
"Is this 'IBM Compatible'? I have some disks from a friend?"
...
"Yes! Fully! Let's just go over to the till!" said the eager assistant.
But that probably needs people on both sides who prefer peace to absolute victory, even some intentional amnesia on who to blame. Mandela and de Klerk. Trimble and Adams.
At the moment, the score there is 0/2.
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1757474953086054578
At the start of the war, it was believed that Strategic Bombing would create annihilation, something close to nuclear type effects. i.e. Half of London dead in the first week
This turned out to be false.
Bomer Command started off trying to do daylight precession bombing. And got slaughtered.
They switched to night bombing and could barely hit the right country.
Harris came in and went for the idea of massed raids as a giant shotgun blast. He dismissed the attempts at precision raids as (mostly) a waste of time.
Meanwhile technology marched on. Target marking, bomb aiming, radar and above all, radio navigation.
By the end of the war a Mosquito could hit a target, using Oboe, 50% of the time. In the middle of the night, they could put a single bomb on something with near smart bomb rates. Small "playing card" formations of Mosquitos could guarantee a hit.
Meanwhile, the "Main Force" was putting 600 heavy bombers over one city.
At the end of the war, the technology for precision bombing had arrived, but the earlier failures had built an implacable resistance to depending on it.
https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2024/feb/12/how-we-made-bagpuss-meccano-cameras-clanger-pink-cat
'Musicians like Belle and Sebastian and Radiohead are huge fans of the music and people are always telling me how much their children enjoy Bagpuss. It has a gentleness and intimacy that contemporary programmes lack. Oliver once said that he and Peter never grew up. When he revisited his childhood home as an adult, he said it didn’t look right, so he got on his knees and crawled around like a child, and of course it became familiar. That’s the sort of mind he had.'
Sadly, advertisements in The Times are rarely perused with a keen eye these days….
It's said that science will dehumanize people and turn them into numbers. That's false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp and crematorium at Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance, it was done by dogma, it was done by ignorance. When people believe that they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of gods.
Science is a very human form of knowledge. We are always at the brink of the known; we always feel forward for what is to be hoped. Every judgment in science stands on the edge of error and is personal. Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible. In the end, the words were said by Oliver Cromwell: "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ: Think it possible you may be mistaken."
I owe it as a scientist to my friend Leo Szilard, I owe it as a human being to the many members of my family who died here, to stand here as a survivor and a witness. We have to cure ourselves of the itch for absolute knowledge and power. We have to close the distance between the push-button order and the human act. We have to touch people.
The number of people prepared to cross the Channel in small boat who decide who'd be convinced not to because they saw a TikTok "influencer" telling them not to would be no more than zero.
It’s utter clueless drivel from every leader who spurts it out, Sunak, Starmer, Biden. Or anyone who says it. Do they have a clue what they are actually saying?
They are saying partition. 2 state solution is PARTITION.
A Partition neither the Israeli government, nor many Palestinians and their leaders at all want - so why Cameron and Sunak and Biden so in love with the idea? Partition asap before Israel can grab control even more Palestinian area’s, making the situation even more of a headache for Western leaders - this has been the extent of thinking for far too long.
So you support the 2 State Solution? Okay - where’s recognition the Palestinians are effectively Two States and types of government already, so let’s at least hear it for the three State solution. Now, tell us where through, like so much of the West Bank, where daily lives of Arab and Jew and Christian still so entwined, you are bringing partition, and they have to be live one side of a divide in one of the states? Where are you putting these people so it works for them democratically? Or is this a Fourth State Solution?
With all your lines of partition in a dispute over the same heritage and land, are you actually achieving agreement of all parties, so they see it as just, fair, and they are charitable to making the deal work? Getting to yes in talks like these can only start with a blank canvas, not bringing preconditions like 2 state solution to the table to start from.
2 State Solution is just jibberish from the mouths of out of touch Western leaders incapable of the imaginative and bold thinking necessary to actually solve issues like this one. whenever you hear “Two State Solution” know it comes from someone utterly clueless, lazy, and who doesn’t really care shit about peace in that region.
"The biggest recruiting sergeant for anti-Semitism is Netenyahu and his disgusting cabinet"
Labour, I would say broadly, supports the Palestinian position. As per Nico's post this then translates into anti-semitism and anti-Jewish sentiment so Lab could have thought it through to enhance their political position. Were the pro-Palestinian students at Birmingham University affiliated to any organisation.
The guilty men. :-)
A bit.
The Evening Standard tonight had a double page feature on Labour's problems in its London heartland. The main focus was on the threat to Wes Streeting in Ilford North whose majority in 2019 was 5,200 and now faces an Independent candidate with links to pro-Palestine groups whose own campaign may be helped by the inclusion of some parts of Ilford South into the newly-redrawn constituency.
The Standard also confirmed what I'd heard - that Councillor Mirza and the Newham Independents are going to stand candidates in both East Ham and West Ham & Beckton against Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown respectively. Another likely challenge to Labour is in Bethnal Green & Bow from an Aspire candidate.
It seems unlikely Labour will lose any of these seats and treating "the muslim vote" as a single homogenous entity is unwise. Respect got 20% in 2005 in East Ham and I suspect that's about where any pro-Palestine anti-Labour candidate will end up later this year.
One can only hope if he loses Ilford then a quick peerage and Cabinet will happen.
Harris explicitly pushed this idea - that he could win the war by breaking the German spirit. It was clear in hindsight (and to many at the time) that it was a fallacy and that is one of the reasons that it was outlawed after the war. The whole campaign of targetting German civilian population would today be considered criminal and put in the same category as the use of poison gas.
2001 607k
2011 1m
2021 1.7m
So I’d think that the percentage of votes in big Muslim areas could be higher than 20