Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Labour’s antisemitism problem will always bedevil Corbyn as lo

13»

Comments

  • William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
  • felixfelix Posts: 12,607
    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    You are a troll - go away.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 47,568
    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
  • William_HWilliam_H Posts: 346
    felix said:

    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    You are a troll - go away.
    Disagreeing with a cosy little racist consensus does not make me a troll. If you disagree with me, refute me, don't resort to abuse
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 12,853
    John_M said:

    Good morning all. Superb article from David - it's a real treat to have two of his measured, thoughtful offerings in one week.

    It's an old book ('82) but Le Carre's 'The Little Drummer Girl' is well worth a read. It really opened my eyes as to the plight of the Palestinians, while not being unsympathetic to the Israelis.

    I'm going to skip PB's attempts to solve the Middle Eastern question, but my view is that the UK has little or nothing to contribute to any lasting solution, other than making sympathetic noises.

    Dontcha think a certain ex PM would be a great envoy for Middle East peace?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 22,756
    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    surby said:

    malcolmg said:

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:



    So the only future for the Palestinians is life in an Apartheid Bantustan in the occupied territories, denied the rights of other peoples to self rule?

    What is your solution, and how would you get there?

    What matters are the people, whether Israeli, Palestinian, Jew, Muslim, Christian, or whatever. People deserve the opportunity to live and thrive in a peaceful environment that their 'leaders' (on all sides) are unable to provide them.

    That is what all the peoples of the ME should get - and which, perversely, Israel provides the best at the moment.
    ?
    How your twisted mind could possibly equate Scotland with any of this is mind boggling.
    The only solution is a two state solution [ ultimately even Hamas will accept it ] on the 1967 borders with Jerusalem as the joint Capital. East Jerusalem will go to the Palestinian state.

    Let's not be too hung up on the security issue. Israel is a nuclear power.

    Off topic for me, my wonderment is how he could try to say Scotland was similar to Kurdistan , Arakan etc. Need to be seriously not right in the head to try and equate Scotland to be similar.
    I am not sure why you consider that. My point is that in each of these cases a substantial body of the nation considers that it should be an independent state. Obviously there are major differences in how Scotland pursues the issue compared with the other ones that I mentioned, but that is in large part a product of a different environment.
    Well it is a bit like saying that the UK is like Chile was under Pinochet, at the moment
    Not sure what you mean by that. The question of the place of nationalism in a globalised world is at the core of a number of political disputes around the world. It is a core theme of Scottish politics, but also Irish, and Brexit. All of these are likely to be peaceful, if rancorous.

    There is also the explosive issue of ethnicity and nationality too, in a world where many have dual nationality. There is also a more fluid attitude to citizenship when a passport is a consumer good, and a form of inherited wealth. I have been musing on this for some weeks.

    I mean no insult to Scots or Kurds by the analogy, but both are currently nations without recognised statehood at present.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,166

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 4,679

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    I think a lot of us were deluded when we voted. I had no idea what the implications were.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=40&v=OTJIez1oRZ4

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,166
    It really must be a slow news day, as I am at a loss as to why this story even made it onto the local news section.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-45225045

    A homeowner has been told she could be breaking the law by parking on her own driveway in Merseyside.

    Helen Maloney, of Emmanuel Road, Southport, said she received a letter from Sefton Council as she does not have a dropped kerb and has to drive over the pavement.


    I mean, of course that is the case, why wouldn't it be?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890
    kle4 said:

    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.

    I'm just teasing Carlotta. ;)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,166

    kle4 said:

    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.

    I'm just teasing Carlotta. ;)
    :)
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776
    edited August 2018

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    You think if the Russian blockade of West Berlin had succeeded in starving the population of Berlin, that would not have a been a casus belli?
  • FloaterFloater Posts: 13,058
    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    Hi Jeremy

    Give my best to Seamus.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Neither Adonis nor Farage are deluded on this. Get ready for the People's vote. The Backlash is here.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,264
    felix said:

    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    You are a troll - go away.
    TIL the word "helotage". I think he should stay if he'll promise to keep teaching us new words.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    You are a troll - go away.
    TIL the word "helotage". I think he should stay if he'll promise to keep teaching us new words.
    If Jacob Rees-Mogg starts using it in the context of Brexit we'll know he's reading...
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Mortimer said:

    John_M said:

    Good morning all. Superb article from David - it's a real treat to have two of his measured, thoughtful offerings in one week.

    It's an old book ('82) but Le Carre's 'The Little Drummer Girl' is well worth a read. It really opened my eyes as to the plight of the Palestinians, while not being unsympathetic to the Israelis.

    I'm going to skip PB's attempts to solve the Middle Eastern question, but my view is that the UK has little or nothing to contribute to any lasting solution, other than making sympathetic noises.

    Dontcha think a certain ex PM would be a great envoy for Middle East peace?
    Oh, yes. The one on Israeli pay. He also gave away a lot of the settlements.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 64,166
    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,443

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    You think if the Russian blockade of West Berlin had succeeded in starving the population of Berlin, that would not have a been a casus belli?
    Blockading the Straits of Tiran would not have starved the population of Israel.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 15,264

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    You are a troll - go away.
    TIL the word "helotage". I think he should stay if he'll promise to keep teaching us new words.
    If Jacob Rees-Mogg starts using it in the context of Brexit we'll know he's reading...
    Market on the first person in public life to say the word "helotage", where's Shadsy when you need him?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 22,756
    Floater said:
    Err, that is what is described in the article, prosecution and the children taken into care.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    edited August 2018
    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Because of Security Council resolution 242. Yes, supported by the US and the UK !!!

    More importantly, accepted by ALL Arab countries, the PLO and ISRAEL [ then ].

    I also feel Hamas will accept if all sides agree at the same time. But the Israelis will not leave the settlements.

    That's why.

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations-Resolution-242

  • notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    Well they were invaded on multiple sides in 1948 which ended with a ceasefire and the ceasefire was cancelled by those who had invaded. What does a side at war cancelling a ceasefire mean to you? To me it means the war is active again.

    Not sure what you find interesting but a military blockade has historically always been a casus belli. It's never not been one.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    kle4 said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
    "Wrong" referred to the 4.2m views.
  • surby said:

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Because of Security Council resolution 242. Yes, supported by the US and the UK !!!

    More importantly, accepted by ALL Arab countries, the PLO and ISRAEL [ then ].

    That's why.

    That's not true. The Arab states rejected 242 at the time. Syria only formally accepted it after the Yom Kippur war. Furthermore the principle was always and stated then to be a negotiated land for peace as has subsequently been agreed with Egypt and others. Hamas still doesn't recognise Israel's right to exist and hasn't negotiated peace.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890
    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
    "Wrong" referred to the 4.2m views.
    4.2m is just from that specific tweet that went viral this week. It's been posted elsewhere too, as well as the original from Comedy Central.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    You think if the Russian blockade of West Berlin had succeeded in starving the population of Berlin, that would not have a been a casus belli?
    Blockading the Straits of Tiran would not have starved the population of Israel.
    So you haven't answered the point then.

    Noted.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 19,594
    edited August 2018
    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    It’s because the Occupied Territories were part of the land originally allocated to the Palestinian state in 1948 (which Jordan then seized for itself). So if there is to be a Palestinian state then those 1967 borders are a starting point.
    DavidL said:

    Having had my tuppance worth about why I disagree with David earlier I also want to say that I agree with those who point out (a) that this is not really our problem and (b) given our history we are very unlikely to make a positive contribution to the solution.

    Which makes you wonder really why we obsess with this so much. It's not as if we don't have a lot of problems of our own that we could be getting on with.

    Because it is relevant to the Labour Party’s attitude to the Jewish community here. And that is an important issue. For a major political party to start scapegoating a minority and enabling or turning a blind eye to anti-semitism is not something we have really seen in British politics in recent decades and something we should want ended pdq.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    The_Mule_ said:

    I don't mind pineapple on pizza but strawberries?

    https://twitter.com/sltda_srilanka/status/1030322365597732866

    Apparently (source The Guardian’s KFC article) one can, in the Philippines, buy a pizza-like product based on fried chicken. A layer of deep fried KFC-type chicken with ham and pineapple on top.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,443

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    Well they were invaded on multiple sides in 1948 which ended with a ceasefire and the ceasefire was cancelled by those who had invaded. What does a side at war cancelling a ceasefire mean to you? To me it means the war is active again.

    Not sure what you find interesting but a military blockade has historically always been a casus belli. It's never not been one.
    So in the face of a military blockade, fight back with anything you've got? Rockets, for example?

    Of course in 1967 the Israelis initilally stated that it was Egypt who had made the intial attack, but when that story fell apart they shiftily moved onto the preemptive strike justification - 'The Israeli government later abandoned its initial position, acknowledging Israel had struck first'
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
    "Wrong" referred to the 4.2m views.
    4.2m is just from that specific tweet that went viral this week. It's been posted elsewhere too, as well as the original from Comedy Central.
    When it exceeeds the number of Remain voters we'll talk....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    Well, it started as a private initiative, with moneyed Christian fundamentalists arming the Mujihadeen to fight the Russians. Back in the day!
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,443

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    You think if the Russian blockade of West Berlin had succeeded in starving the population of Berlin, that would not have a been a casus belli?
    Blockading the Straits of Tiran would not have starved the population of Israel.
    So you haven't answered the point then.

    Noted.
    'Noted.'

    It's nice that you have a pomposity dial that goes up to 11.

    What was your point again?

  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    surby said:

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Because of Security Council resolution 242. Yes, supported by the US and the UK !!!

    More importantly, accepted by ALL Arab countries, the PLO and ISRAEL [ then ].

    That's why.

    That's not true. The Arab states rejected 242 at the time. Syria only formally accepted it after the Yom Kippur war. Furthermore the principle was always and stated then to be a negotiated land for peace as has subsequently been agreed with Egypt and others. Hamas still doesn't recognise Israel's right to exist and hasn't negotiated peace.
    Bollocks!

    "United Nations Resolution 242, resolution of the United Nations (UN) Security Council passed in an effort to secure a just and lasting peace in the wake of the Six-Day (June) War of 1967, fought primarily between Israel and Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. The Israelis supported the resolution because it called on the Arab states to accept Israel’s right “to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” Each of the Arab states eventually accepted it (Egypt and Jordan accepted the resolution from the outset) because of its clause calling for Israel to withdraw from the territories conquered in 1967. The Palestine Liberation Organization rejected it until 1988 because it lacked explicit references to Palestinians. Though never fully implemented, it was the basis of diplomatic efforts to end Arab-Israeli conflicts until the Camp David Accords and remains an important touchstone in any negotiated resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict."

    https://www.britannica.com/topic/United-Nations-Resolution-242
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    edited August 2018

    deleted
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    edited August 2018
    deleted
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    edited August 2018
    deleted
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    deleted
  • Stark_DawningStark_Dawning Posts: 6,427
    Has he ever been away? I was trying to tune my radio to TMS last Sunday and stumbled upon him droning on about Boris and burkas on something called 'The Nigel Farage Show'. It was a chilling experience. It must have been like hearing Lord Haw Haw in the early 1940s.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    You think if the Russian blockade of West Berlin had succeeded in starving the population of Berlin, that would not have a been a casus belli?
    Blockading the Straits of Tiran would not have starved the population of Israel.
    So you haven't answered the point then.

    Noted.
    'Noted.'

    It's nice that you have a pomposity dial that goes up to 11.

    What was your point again?

    My point was you run away when someone makes a point that you don't want to answer.

    So there's really no reason to engage with you.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    deleted
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227


    Well, it started as a private initiative, with moneyed Christian fundamentalists arming the Mujihadeen to fight the Russians. Back in the day!
    And recruiting a zealous young man named Osama for the cause.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,443

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    You think if the Russian blockade of West Berlin had succeeded in starving the population of Berlin, that would not have a been a casus belli?
    Blockading the Straits of Tiran would not have starved the population of Israel.
    So you haven't answered the point then.

    Noted.
    'Noted.'

    It's nice that you have a pomposity dial that goes up to 11.

    What was your point again?

    My point was you run away when someone makes a point that you don't want to answer.

    So there's really no reason to engage with you.
    Before you huffily disengage yet again, what was the point I ran away from?
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
    "Wrong" referred to the 4.2m views.
    4.2m is just from that specific tweet that went viral this week. It's been posted elsewhere too, as well as the original from Comedy Central.
    When it exceeeds the number of Remain voters we'll talk....
    Each click from a non-Labour voted increased the Labour vote. I think it was that video which catapulted Labour from 31% to 40%.
  • On Topic:

    #HerdsonComparisons :lol:

    (only kidding, David!)
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    surby said:


    Well, it started as a private initiative, with moneyed Christian fundamentalists arming the Mujihadeen to fight the Russians. Back in the day!
    And recruiting a zealous young man named Osama for the cause.
    Indeed. Be careful what you wish for!!!!!
  • Things are seriously f*cked up in my native Kerala:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45231222
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,288

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    felix said:

    William_H said:

    This is a deeply racist article that writes off Palestinian rights to expiate western sins and seeks to justify the unending helotage of their people.

    Lol.
    Why is justifying the ethnic cleansing, mass murder and continued servitude of a people "LOL" to you?
    You are a troll - go away.
    TIL the word "helotage". I think he should stay if he'll promise to keep teaching us new words.
    If Jacob Rees-Mogg starts using it in the context of Brexit we'll know he's reading...
    While still inaccurate, it might be slightly more apposite in that context, the helots being the subjugated peoples who provided economic sustenance to the Spartan state.
  • TheJezziahTheJezziah Posts: 3,718
    Haven't got much time but I think the suggestion that the British ownership of the land quite compared to the replacement that took place when Israel was created. British ownership of the land was not like the replacement that took place afterwards. Similarly a group of people who already live somewhere splitting up Yugoslavia style. To suggest this is what happened with Palestine and Israel is either ignorant of history or a lie for propaganda purposes.

    it was foreign people coming to take land and kick the locals out.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,288
    One thing is for sure, no settlement is going to come from an effort to ascribe blame to one side or the other.
    Which constitutes most of the current debate.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 13,481
    surby said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Neither Adonis nor Farage are deluded on this. Get ready for the People's vote. The Backlash is here.
    There is some bunch of Remainers trying to get CLPs to put a motion to conference supporting a 'People's Vote'. Apparently over 100 CLPs have put the motion forward. Including mine, unfortunately.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 36,501
    edited August 2018
    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890

    surby said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Neither Adonis nor Farage are deluded on this. Get ready for the People's vote. The Backlash is here.
    There is some bunch of Remainers trying to get CLPs to put a motion to conference supporting a 'People's Vote'. Apparently over 100 CLPs have put the motion forward. Including mine, unfortunately.
    A "bunch of Remainers" indeed...

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/27/david-cameron-bunch-of-migrants-jibe-pmqs-callous-dehumanising
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 27,195
    @rcs1000 CrowdScores is all messed up. Android 8.0 Sony Xperia XZ Premium. It keeps crashing as soon as I open it.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    Things are seriously f*cked up in my native Kerala:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45231222

    Are any of your relatives affected? If so, are they OK?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Dr. Prasannan, hope your family's ok.
  • Messrs Dancer and KingCole,

    Thanks, as far as I know things aren't too bad where they live (Kannur District).
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    Dr. Prasannan, good to hear.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776
    edited August 2018

    surby said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Neither Adonis nor Farage are deluded on this. Get ready for the People's vote. The Backlash is here.
    There is some bunch of Remainers trying to get CLPs to put a motion to conference supporting a 'People's Vote'. Apparently over 100 CLPs have put the motion forward. Including mine, unfortunately.
    How many of those 100 constituencies have a Labour MP though? And how many of those constituencies voted Leave?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 39,776

    Things are seriously f*cked up in my native Kerala:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45231222

    The greatest aid we could send would be an Indian Test win....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    Dr. Prasannan, good to hear.

    Seconded.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
    German had taken territory from Poland in the past.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,288

    Things are seriously f*cked up in my native Kerala:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45231222

    The greatest aid we could send would be an Indian Test win....
    Not impossible.
    The recall of Stokes is, thus far, not an unmitigated success - and has deprived Rashid of Curran’s footmarks to bowl into.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    Nigelb said:

    Things are seriously f*cked up in my native Kerala:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45231222

    The greatest aid we could send would be an Indian Test win....
    Not impossible.
    The recall of Stokes is, thus far, not an unmitigated success - and has deprived Rashid of Curran’s footmarks to bowl into.
    Peoplke are already posting suggestions that it was a bad decision by Root to bowl. Not sure if they are people who originally thought it a good one!
  • notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
    German had taken territory from Poland in the past.
    Indeed, compare the map of modern Poland with one of Poland from around 1000 AD:

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Działania_podczas_wojny_polsko_niemieckiej_1002-1005.png
  • Things are seriously f*cked up in my native Kerala:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-45231222

    The greatest aid we could send would be an Indian Test win....
    My Tebbit Chip will be tested to destruction in that scenario!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    Dr. Prasannan, the Polish-Lithuanian state was rather large too.

    But it depends how far back one goes. I saw a tweet the other day (wibbling about the UK, EU, and Ireland) saying that the Republic wouldn't leave the EU for a closer state of affairs with the UK because of 800 years of wickedness.

    That's getting quite close to me holding a grudge for the Harrying of the North when 75% of Yorkshiremen ended up dead. It's fortunate I'm not inclined to do so, as the Normans integrated themselves to extinction so I'm not sure against whom said grudge would be held in any case.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 12,240
    Hard sell of Israel Bonds against this header for me. If David had written an article that was less pro-Israel would the affiliate marketing kick in the same way?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
    German had taken territory from Poland in the past.
    Indeed, compare the map of modern Poland with one of Poland from around 1000 AD:

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Działania_podczas_wojny_polsko_niemieckiej_1002-1005.png
    Or even 500 years later.
  • MaxPB said:

    @rcs1000 CrowdScores is all messed up. Android 8.0 Sony Xperia XZ Premium. It keeps crashing as soon as I open it.

    Likewise on my Cat S60.
    Was fine until the most recent update
  • A couple of people have posted here before the quarterly changes since the referendum as forecast by the shock and severe shock scenarios, along with what has really happened since. Does anyone have a copy of that data or a link to it, I can't find it from Google. I'd also be curious if possible please to see a link to the if we voted remain predictions.

    Thanks for anyone who can help.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    edited August 2018

    Dr. Prasannan, the Polish-Lithuanian state was rather large too.

    But it depends how far back one goes. I saw a tweet the other day (wibbling about the UK, EU, and Ireland) saying that the Republic wouldn't leave the EU for a closer state of affairs with the UK because of 800 years of wickedness.

    That's getting quite close to me holding a grudge for the Harrying of the North when 75% of Yorkshiremen ended up dead. It's fortunate I'm not inclined to do so, as the Normans integrated themselves to extinction so I'm not sure against whom said grudge would be held in any case.

    The Harrying of the North was almost 1000 years ago; Irish grieviances against the UK (or more specifically England are almost within living memory. Indeed suspect it wouldn’t be too difficult to find old men and women who remember the Black and Tans.

    And no, I don’t mean the drink.

    Edited. sp.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 36,890
    edited August 2018

    A couple of people have posted here before the quarterly changes since the referendum as forecast by the shock and severe shock scenarios, along with what has really happened since. Does anyone have a copy of that data or a link to it, I can't find it from Google. I'd also be curious if possible please to see a link to the if we voted remain predictions.

    Thanks for anyone who can help.

    This one?

    image

    Also this:

    image
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    Mr. Meeks, that is weird. Why donate in that way? Surely, if nefarious (and competent) you'd want to at least try and do it through a means that's legal but obfuscates the true origins?

    King Cole, true, but the Harrying was circa 920 years ago and the tweet I reference cited 800 years of evildoing (could've been a little longer, actually).

    The Second World War's also in living memory. I recall having a bit of a disagreement with my grandpa over the Germans (I didn't feel they should be held responsible for WWII. He, er, wasn't a fan of them).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 30,288

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
    German had taken territory from Poland in the past.
    Indeed, compare the map of modern Poland with one of Poland from around 1000 AD:

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Działania_podczas_wojny_polsko_niemieckiej_1002-1005.png
    Or even 500 years later.
    The borders of Eastern Europe were almost as subject to change as those of the Middle East up until the end of WWII. Indeed interwar Polish Zionists envisaged a Jewish homeland in Eastern Europe as well as Palestine.
    Subsequent events of course precluded that.

  • notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    Well they were invaded on multiple sides in 1948 which ended with a ceasefire and the ceasefire was cancelled by those who had invaded. What does a side at war cancelling a ceasefire mean to you? To me it means the war is active again.

    Not sure what you find interesting but a military blockade has historically always been a casus belli. It's never not been one.
    So in the face of a military blockade, fight back with anything you've got? Rockets, for example?

    Of course in 1967 the Israelis initilally stated that it was Egypt who had made the intial attack, but when that story fell apart they shiftily moved onto the preemptive strike justification - 'The Israeli government later abandoned its initial position, acknowledging Israel had struck first'
    Yes of course. If someone attempted to blockade the UK militarily I would 100% support rockets etc to be used in any fight back. You wouldn't? You'd sit idly by while we were blockaded? How else do you expect a military blockade to end?
  • John_MJohn_M Posts: 7,503

    surby said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Neither Adonis nor Farage are deluded on this. Get ready for the People's vote. The Backlash is here.
    There is some bunch of Remainers trying to get CLPs to put a motion to conference supporting a 'People's Vote'. Apparently over 100 CLPs have put the motion forward. Including mine, unfortunately.
    A "bunch of Remainers" indeed...

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/27/david-cameron-bunch-of-migrants-jibe-pmqs-callous-dehumanising
    What's your preferred collective noun? How about 'a petulance of remainers'? No?
  • A couple of people have posted here before the quarterly changes since the referendum as forecast by the shock and severe shock scenarios, along with what has really happened since. Does anyone have a copy of that data or a link to it, I can't find it from Google. I'd also be curious if possible please to see a link to the if we voted remain predictions.

    Thanks for anyone who can help.

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524967/hm_treasury_analysis_the_immediate_economic_impact_of_leaving_the_eu_web.pdf

    Page 43 of the report gives the Treasury GDP predictions.

    And this is the actual GDP outturn:

    https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/grossdomesticproductgdp/timeseries/ihyq/pn2
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 26,443

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    Well they were invaded on multiple sides in 1948 which ended with a ceasefire and the ceasefire was cancelled by those who had invaded. What does a side at war cancelling a ceasefire mean to you? To me it means the war is active again.

    Not sure what you find interesting but a military blockade has historically always been a casus belli. It's never not been one.
    So in the face of a military blockade, fight back with anything you've got? Rockets, for example?

    Of course in 1967 the Israelis initilally stated that it was Egypt who had made the intial attack, but when that story fell apart they shiftily moved onto the preemptive strike justification - 'The Israeli government later abandoned its initial position, acknowledging Israel had struck first'
    Yes of course. If someone attempted to blockade the UK militarily I would 100% support rockets etc to be used in any fight back. You wouldn't? You'd sit idly by while we were blockaded? How else do you expect a military blockade to end?
    Didn't expect solidarity with Hamas from your direction, but I'm sure those lads will take what they can get.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    Mr. Meeks, that is weird. Why donate in that way? Surely, if nefarious (and competent) you'd want to at least try and do it through a means that's legal but obfuscates the true origins?

    King Cole, true, but the Harrying was circa 920 years ago and the tweet I reference cited 800 years of evildoing (could've been a little longer, actually).

    The Second World War's also in living memory. I recall having a bit of a disagreement with my grandpa over the Germans (I didn't feel they should be held responsible for WWII. He, er, wasn't a fan of them).

    950-48 actually (1068-90)
    The English invasion of Ireland started about 100 years later, when Dairmait of Leinster, who had been deposed by the High King sought English help in recovering his lands.

    'Diarmait was a traitor
    A traitor to his prince.
    He brought stangers into Ireland.
    And they’ve been here ever since.'

    Not sure where that came from.
  • FregglesFreggles Posts: 3,474
    I wonder who could possibly be so invested in a nationalist eurosceptic revival.
  • surby said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
    "Wrong" referred to the 4.2m views.
    4.2m is just from that specific tweet that went viral this week. It's been posted elsewhere too, as well as the original from Comedy Central.
    When it exceeeds the number of Remain voters we'll talk....
    Each click from a non-Labour voted increased the Labour vote. I think it was that video which catapulted Labour from 31% to 40%.
    I suspect things like student debt, housing and social care taxes had more to do with it.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    King Cole, the Irish had raided and (certainly in the case of what is today Scotland) settled in Britain too.

    The Scottish invasion during the reign of Robert the Bruce was so well-received that the English and Irish worked together to defeat it.

    Learning history's important but I'll never understand people who cling to grudges when those who perpetrated certain acts lived long ago. I wouldn't expect a German to hate Italians because Caesar committed genocide. We aren't responsible for the sins of our fathers, but should learn from their mistakes to profit from their experience without paying the price that they did to receive the initial lesson.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966
    Nigelb said:

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
    German had taken territory from Poland in the past.
    Indeed, compare the map of modern Poland with one of Poland from around 1000 AD:

    https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Działania_podczas_wojny_polsko_niemieckiej_1002-1005.png
    Or even 500 years later.
    The borders of Eastern Europe were almost as subject to change as those of the Middle East up until the end of WWII. Indeed interwar Polish Zionists envisaged a Jewish homeland in Eastern Europe as well as Palestine.
    Subsequent events of course precluded that.

    It has been argued that many ..... most ....... East European Jews were not Jews by blood but Khazars, a group from the Caucusus who converted.
  • JWisemannJWisemann Posts: 1,082

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    While Israel may have been under various degrees of threat from mobilised neighbours, it struck first. Always best to be precise about these things.
    Depends how you define strike.

    Egypt and Israel were technically at war but with a ceasefire. Egypt cancelled the ceasefire and started a military blockade. Both of which are strikes. The latter has always been a casus belli.
    But not 'invaded on multiple sides'.

    Interesting that you think a military blockade is a casus belli.
    Well they were invaded on multiple sides in 1948 which ended with a ceasefire and the ceasefire was cancelled by those who had invaded. What does a side at war cancelling a ceasefire mean to you? To me it means the war is active again.

    Not sure what you find interesting but a military blockade has historically always been a casus belli. It's never not been one.
    So in the face of a military blockade, fight back with anything you've got? Rockets, for example?

    Of course in 1967 the Israelis initilally stated that it was Egypt who had made the intial attack, but when that story fell apart they shiftily moved onto the preemptive strike justification - 'The Israeli government later abandoned its initial position, acknowledging Israel had struck first'
    Yes of course. If someone attempted to blockade the UK militarily I would 100% support rockets etc to be used in any fight back. You wouldn't? You'd sit idly by while we were blockaded? How else do you expect a military blockade to end?
    Didn't expect solidarity with Hamas from your direction, but I'm sure those lads will take what they can get.
    Haha. Israel fanatic done up like a kipper. SO weird that so many hard-right Tories are Israel fanatics.
  • TheWhiteRabbitTheWhiteRabbit Posts: 11,097

    A couple of people have posted here before the quarterly changes since the referendum as forecast by the shock and severe shock scenarios, along with what has really happened since. Does anyone have a copy of that data or a link to it, I can't find it from Google. I'd also be curious if possible please to see a link to the if we voted remain predictions.

    Thanks for anyone who can help.

    This one?

    image

    Also this:

    image
    William

    I can't make sense of the graphs.

    The OBR's March 2016 forecast effectively assumes a "remain" vote, and theBank Of England numbers are similar not their Brexit forecast. I assume however that the Economists for Brexit were assuming, er, Brexit.

    Does that note make them all rather difficult to compare?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 55,317
    New thread.
  • MJWMJW Posts: 695

    notme said:

    What’s this obsession with reverting back to the 1967 boundaries? From what I understand the 1967 war, Israel was invaded on multiple sides with the intention of wiping it out. Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected. It not only repelled the invaders it chased them back to the Jordan sea and then incorporated that land as their own. That’s not theft. That’s what happens when you pick a fight with someone who you think is weaker than you.

    Germany picked a fight with Poland in 1939 and six years later had to cede vast territories to, er, Poland.
    It is an intriguing accident of history that helps fuel the situation in the Middle-East that Israel/Palestine being divided occurred at the very end of an era when the redrawing of national boundaries and large population movements were commonplace - and thus the idea not just of Palestinians deserving a home but of specific borders, which were pretty arbitrary (with the exception of Jerusalem, which should've been made an international city imo) has become such a totemic sticking point. National borders have remained largely static since 1950 - other than to split internally, and so we see it through that lens of an inviolable right to not just land but a state on certain borders.
  • Mr. Meeks, that is weird. Why donate in that way? Surely, if nefarious (and competent) you'd want to at least try and do it through a means that's legal but obfuscates the true origins?

    King Cole, true, but the Harrying was circa 920 years ago and the tweet I reference cited 800 years of evildoing (could've been a little longer, actually).

    The Second World War's also in living memory. I recall having a bit of a disagreement with my grandpa over the Germans (I didn't feel they should be held responsible for WWII. He, er, wasn't a fan of them).

    950-48 actually (1068-90)
    The English invasion of Ireland started about 100 years later, when Dairmait of Leinster, who had been deposed by the High King sought English help in recovering his lands.

    'Diarmait was a traitor
    A traitor to his prince.
    He brought stangers into Ireland.
    And they’ve been here ever since.'

    Not sure where that came from.
    You can go back a further 500 years to find the man who first started the invasions of Ireland.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_Patrick
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 2,341

    surby said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    surby said:

    kle4 said:

    “Deluded” doesn’t quite cover it, does it?
    Your favourite film is now up to 4.2 million views since Wednesday. And you were so sure it wouldn't catch on...

    https://twitter.com/SarahDuggers/status/1029514363122659328
    That Corbyn IRA video during the GE got a lot of views too - views do not necessarily equal any effect.
    Wrong. The last meter reading we got from Carlotta was 5.5m. Richard Nabavi was also hung up with that video. I hope it was well made.
    I don't quite know what you think I am wrong about. A video might have impact, or be reflective of a change in mood, but the mere presence of a video which gets a lot of views doesn't in itself signify anything.
    "Wrong" referred to the 4.2m views.
    4.2m is just from that specific tweet that went viral this week. It's been posted elsewhere too, as well as the original from Comedy Central.
    When it exceeeds the number of Remain voters we'll talk....
    Each click from a non-Labour voted increased the Labour vote. I think it was that video which catapulted Labour from 31% to 40%.
    I suspect things like student debt, housing and social care taxes had more to do with it.
    That Titanic video doesn't do a goddamn thing to change anyone's minds. It starts off from a premise that Brexit is bad and proceeds to play to its gallery - remainers - for two minutes.

    Compare it with this Labour video:

    https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/1030353287080554496

    Whereas the Titanic video simply states "Brexit is bad, har-de-har" ad nauseam, the Austerity video attempts to demonstrate that austerity is wrong. Not bad, but wrong. The aim is to change your mind about something. It's clever becasue it attempts to make it obvious that Labour are right on the economy and the Tories - for all their reputation for fiscal competence - are naive idiots.

    It's not enough to make a video your supporters already agree with. It's about attempting to change the minds of the people who disagree with you.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 21,966

    King Cole, the Irish had raided and (certainly in the case of what is today Scotland) settled in Britain too.

    The Scottish invasion during the reign of Robert the Bruce was so well-received that the English and Irish worked together to defeat it.

    Learning history's important but I'll never understand people who cling to grudges when those who perpetrated certain acts lived long ago. I wouldn't expect a German to hate Italians because Caesar committed genocide. We aren't responsible for the sins of our fathers, but should learn from their mistakes to profit from their experience without paying the price that they did to receive the initial lesson.

    There are plenty of people in Britain who are anit-German, as a result of the World Wars but historivcally speaking we’ve been allied with most of what is now German more than we;ve fought them.
    George V, of course, had to change is surname from Saxe-Coburg-Gotha and I believe some of Victoria’s descendents fought in the German army in both World War.

    I was at a Book Group discussion on Friday where we were discussing ‘The Nightingale”, by an American, Kristin Hannah, about two sisters who had to cope with the Occupation. Raised a lot of questions. One member, a very blonde lady, with two blonde daughters reported being abused as Boche in Central France this summer.
  • surbysurby Posts: 1,227
    Freggles said:

    I wonder who could possibly be so invested in a nationalist eurosceptic revival.
    The fingerprint database points to a Russian born in St.Petersberg.
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293

    notme said:

    Unfortunately it was better prepared than expected.

    I presume “unfortunately” only in the view of the invaders, not in absolute terms?

    yes.. Sorry that was not clear.
This discussion has been closed.