Skip to content
Options

The voters give Starmer a mandate for Palestine – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,600
edited July 30 in General
The voters give Starmer a mandate for Palestine – politicalbetting.com

With Keir Starmer announcing that the UK will recognise a Palestinian state unless Israel calls a ceasefire in Gaza, new YouGov data shows Britons support recognition by 45% to 14%yougov.co.uk/internationa…

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,293
    edited July 30
    Reform an outlier again.

    (As are Greens the other way.)

    Oh, and first?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,360
    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.
  • isamisam Posts: 42,271
    edited July 30
    Clumsy though the former Prime Minister's charge was, there were legitimate questions to be asked of Starmer's role in the Savile saga, especially given his habit of claiming credit for every success secured by the DPP on his watch. They are questions which, to this day, have still not been satisfactorily answered. His assertion he had no knowledge of – never mind role in – such a high-profile charging decision stretched credibility to breaking point.

    Johnson's accusation that the CPS allowed a notorious child-abuser to slip through their fingers whilst Keir Starmer was in overall charge of their operations was based on fact. As evidenced by his apology at that time for his organisation's failings.

    But the attempt to link Nigel Farage to Savile doesn't event amount to guilt by association. It is nothing less than base, unevidenced slander…

    …the name Jimmy Savile is political Kryptonite for Keir Starmer. And the fact it was allowed to leave the lips of one of his own Ministers beggars belief

    By reaching for the Savile slur, Starmer has also broken one of the basic rules of attack politics. Which is that, if you want to try and smear an opponent, the smear has to at least have some basic public resonance. It must, in some small way, match existing perceptions of your target.

    People have many different perceptions of Nigel Farage and Reform. But the accusation that he and his party are instinctively soft on criminals in general, and paedophiles in particular, lacks even the most minimal credibility.


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14951641/DAN-HODGES-Questions-Keir-Starmer-role-Jimmy-Savile-saga-stretch-credibility.html
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566
    Oh dear oh dear oh dear. 'A mandate for Palestine.'

    Anyway, Hamas don't approve of man dates.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,989
    isam said:

    Clumsy though the former Prime Minister's charge was, there were legitimate questions to be asked of Starmer's role in the Savile saga, especially given his habit of claiming credit for every success secured by the DPP on his watch. They are questions which, to this day, have still not been satisfactorily answered. His assertion he had no knowledge of – never mind role in – such a high-profile charging decision stretched credibility to breaking point.

    Johnson's accusation that the CPS allowed a notorious child-abuser to slip through their fingers whilst Keir Starmer was in overall charge of their operations was based on fact. As evidenced by his apology at that time for his organisation's failings.

    But the attempt to link Nigel Farage to Savile doesn't event amount to guilt by association. It is nothing less than base, unevidenced slander.

    But the name Jimmy Savile is political Kryptonite for Keir Starmer. And the fact it was allowed to leave the lips of one of his own Ministers beggars belief…

    …By reaching for the Savile slur, Starmer has also broken one of the basic rules of attack politics. Which is that, if you want to try and smear an opponent, the smear has to at least have some basic public resonance. It must, in some small way, match existing perceptions of your target.

    People have many different perceptions of Nigel Farage and Reform. But the accusation that he and his party are instinctively soft on criminals in general, and paedophiles in particular, lacks even the most minimal credibility.


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14951641/DAN-HODGES-Questions-Keir-Starmer-role-Jimmy-Savile-saga-stretch-credibility.html

    Also given Labour were refusing an investigation into a subject we don’t discuss here it makes their concern for children somewhat convenient.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,703
    I've no idea if the announcement makes much sense (certainly Heidi Alexander couldn't make that clear during the stream of waffle she deployed on Today this morning), but the critics don't seem to have much of a case either - simultaneously calling it an outrage and a meaningless gesture.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566
    Nigelb said:

    I've no idea if the announcement makes much sense (certainly Heidi Alexander couldn't make that clear during the stream of waffle she deployed on Today this morning), but the critics don't seem to have much of a case either - simultaneously calling it an outrage and a meaningless gesture.

    It's a meaningless gesture (not least with all the caveats involved) but it's hard to see how anyone who is not Netanyahu or Ben-Gvir could call it 'outrageous.'
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,043
    ydoethur said:

    Oh dear oh dear oh dear. 'A mandate for Palestine.'

    Anyway, Hamas don't approve of man dates.

    Yay somebody spotted my subtle historical reference/play on words.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,509
    Cunning pun to start the day.

  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566

    ydoethur said:

    Oh dear oh dear oh dear. 'A mandate for Palestine.'

    Anyway, Hamas don't approve of man dates.

    Yay somebody spotted my subtle historical reference/play on words.
    Anyone would think we were in League.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566

    Cunning pun to start the day.

    But the idea won't Sevres the situation.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,676
    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,265
    edited July 30
    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,470
    Polling doesn’t give a “mandate” despite your attempt for a clever pun.

  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 39,397
    Another day dawns on the darkest timeline
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,043

    Polling doesn’t give a “mandate” despite your attempt for a clever pun.

    The last Tory government said opinion polls could give a mandate.

    Scotland could hold a second independence referendum if polls show 60 percent of Scots consistently support principle of a fresh vote, Scottish Secretary Alister Jack suggested in an interview with me yesterday.

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/08/29/the-uk-government-says-opinion-polls-are-more-important-than-actual-votes/
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 16,717
    Reform voters once again proving their remarkable capacity for being wrong about everything.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 63,874
    What's the option where I never have to hear about Israel/Palestine ever again?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566

    Polling doesn’t give a “mandate” despite your attempt for a clever pun.

    The last Tory government said opinion polls could give a mandate.

    Scotland could hold a second independence referendum if polls show 60 percent of Scots consistently support principle of a fresh vote, Scottish Secretary Alister Jack suggested in an interview with me yesterday.

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/08/29/the-uk-government-says-opinion-polls-are-more-important-than-actual-votes/
    Jack=shit?
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 44,509
    I’m sure that the same folk who were told by assorted lefties, Nats and sandal wearers that Iraq was likely to be a huge, morally hazardous mistake will show a similar level of grateful humility towards those that said right from the start that Gaza was going to turn in to a criminal shitshow.

    *makes sure not to hold breath*
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566

    What's the option where I never have to hear about Israel/Palestine ever again?

    A nuclear strike on Jerusalem?

    Hopefully nobody will suggest that to Donald Trump.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,470
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    I've no idea if the announcement makes much sense (certainly Heidi Alexander couldn't make that clear during the stream of waffle she deployed on Today this morning), but the critics don't seem to have much of a case either - simultaneously calling it an outrage and a meaningless gesture.

    It's a meaningless gesture (not least with all the caveats involved) but it's hard to see how anyone who is not Netanyahu or Ben-Gvir could call it 'outrageous.'
    It’s profoundly unhelpful. And will probably make it harder to get a ceasefire. But will have minimal impact in the long term.

    I think “outrage” is over used as a word. But it’s possible to be unhelpful and meaningless.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,778
    Good morning, everyone.

    The land should be given to its rightful owner: the Seleukids.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,470
    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 11,337

    Reform an outlier again.

    (As are Greens the other way.)

    Oh, and first?

    Only to an extent - on other cultural/social issues the Conservative vote tends to be much closer to the median voter than to the Reform voter. On this, there is still a significant difference between LD/Labour opinion and Conservative, meaning that Reform voters aren't quite as isolated as usual.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566
    edited July 30

    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    I've no idea if the announcement makes much sense (certainly Heidi Alexander couldn't make that clear during the stream of waffle she deployed on Today this morning), but the critics don't seem to have much of a case either - simultaneously calling it an outrage and a meaningless gesture.

    It's a meaningless gesture (not least with all the caveats involved) but it's hard to see how anyone who is not Netanyahu or Ben-Gvir could call it 'outrageous.'
    It’s profoundly unhelpful. And will probably make it harder to get a ceasefire. But will have minimal impact in the long term.

    I think “outrage” is over used as a word. But it’s possible to be unhelpful and meaningless.
    If the Israelis don't want people lining up to recognise a non-existent Palestinian 'state' as a diplomatic gesture, they could of course stop shelling Gaza.

    However, it's meaningless because they won't do so. There are too many internal political and geopolitical calculations at play for the current Israeli government to care overmuch about any world opinion save that of the USA (and possibly to a lesser extent Egypt but they hate Hamas even more than Israel does).
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,470

    Polling doesn’t give a “mandate” despite your attempt for a clever pun.

    The last Tory government said opinion polls could give a mandate.

    Scotland could hold a second independence referendum if polls show 60 percent of Scots consistently support principle of a fresh vote, Scottish Secretary Alister Jack suggested in an interview with me yesterday.

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/08/29/the-uk-government-says-opinion-polls-are-more-important-than-actual-votes/
    If he did say that then he was wrong… Westminster would grant a second referendum taking into account public opinion. It’s not as of right.

    But since when did you believe anything the last Tory government did or said?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,995
    Can we run a book on the following -

    Recognition will mean recognising the PLA as the government of all Palestine. Including Gaza.

    How long until Fruit & Nut will claim that “Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza, and must be recognised.”?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 74,566

    Can we run a book on the following -

    Recognition will mean recognising the PLA as the government of all Palestine. Including Gaza.

    How long until Fruit & Nut will claim that “Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza, and must be recognised.”?

    She will note that the PLA are theoretically present in Gaza, but they're not involved.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 19,293

    Can we run a book on the following -

    Recognition will mean recognising the PLA as the government of all Palestine. Including Gaza.

    How long until Fruit & Nut will claim that “Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza, and must be recognised.”?

    You would have to be utterly tonto to want to make that argum...

    Oh. I see. Probably a few hours, then.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,989
    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    Israel doesn’t want a 2 state solution. The US currently supports Israel.

    Nothing else really is of any consequence here.
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,989
    ydoethur said:

    Can we run a book on the following -

    Recognition will mean recognising the PLA as the government of all Palestine. Including Gaza.

    How long until Fruit & Nut will claim that “Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza, and must be recognised.”?

    She will note that the PLA are theoretically present in Gaza, but they're not involved.
    All the problems we have in the U.K. at the moment and the preoccupation of the political class and the new Corbyn party is Gaza.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,787
    Mosab Abu Toha ........Who helped on the award winning documentary 'No Other Land' Shot by a settler who was later released


    https://x.com/mosababutoha/status/1950192452221972636?s=43
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,995

    Can we run a book on the following -

    Recognition will mean recognising the PLA as the government of all Palestine. Including Gaza.

    How long until Fruit & Nut will claim that “Hamas is the legitimate government of Gaza, and must be recognised.”?

    You would have to be utterly tonto to want to make that argum...

    Oh. I see. Probably a few hours, then.
    I’m betting on 0.431 Yoctoseconds, myself
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,787

    What's the option where I never have to hear about Israel/Palestine ever again?

    Moron
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,989

    What's the option where I never have to hear about Israel/Palestine ever again?

    If you find it let me know and sign me up
  • TazTaz Posts: 19,989
    edited July 30
    Roger said:

    What's the option where I never have to hear about Israel/Palestine ever again?

    Moron
    Why ?

    It’s utterly tedious. Two sides blaming each other. Hamas doing nothing to alleviate its own people’s suffering either but getting a free pass.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,995
    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,372
    Taz said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    Israel doesn’t want a 2 state solution. The US currently supports Israel.

    Nothing else really is of any consequence here.
    The Palestinians don't want a 2-state solution either.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,265
    edited July 30

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    In a roundabout way, I'm suggesting there is no way there will be a two-state solution. The map in this article (have used up my image allowance) shows the extent of the settlements embedded in the West Bank. To extract Israelis from there would be a task no Israeli government could consider. Land is everything to those (and their supporters) who believe it to be the Promised Land. The Two-State solution is simply shorthand for doing nothing.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1j5954edlno
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,703
    So Trump's reason for falling out with Epstein was that he "stole" Trump's adolescent employees ?

    Trump: People were taken out of the spa, hired by Epstein… I told him we don’t want you taking our people, whether it’s spa or not spa. He did it again, I said out of here.

    Reporter: Was one of the stolen people Virginia Giuffre?

    Trump: I think so. He stole her.

    https://x.com/Acyn/status/1950256617301430443
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 10,470
    Battlebus said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    In a roundabout way, I'm suggesting there is no way there will be a two-state solution. The map in this article (have used up my image allowance) shows the extent of the settlements embedded in the West Bank. To extract Israelis from there would be a task no Israeli government could consider. Land is everything to those (and their supporters) who believe it to be the Promised Land. The Two-State solution is simply shorthand for doing nothing.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1j5954edlno
    The settlers are a fundamental issue, yes.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,372
    Battlebus said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    In a roundabout way, I'm suggesting there is no way there will be a two-state solution. The map in this article (have used up my image allowance) shows the extent of the settlements embedded in the West Bank. To extract Israelis from there would be a task no Israeli government could consider. Land is everything to those (and their supporters) who believe it to be the Promised Land. The Two-State solution is simply shorthand for doing nothing.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1j5954edlno
    The settlements have always been an inexcusable sin on the part of the Israelis.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 12,953
    FPT - I am not restarting the discussion. I just wanted to acknowledge @isam from the last thread who put a counter argument to me. Although I disagree I wanted to acknowledge it was well put and made me think.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,697
    Thank-you for the header, @TSE , and good morning everyone.

    I'd be interested in earlier polling on this same question - say going back to 2000 or perhaps even to before the Oslo Accords of 1995.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,703

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    All our assumptions are indeed based on the highly unusual period of peace in Europe since the end of WWII.

    With Putin (and arguably, Trump) we will be lucky if we can return to that.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 79,703

    Battlebus said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    In a roundabout way, I'm suggesting there is no way there will be a two-state solution. The map in this article (have used up my image allowance) shows the extent of the settlements embedded in the West Bank. To extract Israelis from there would be a task no Israeli government could consider. Land is everything to those (and their supporters) who believe it to be the Promised Land. The Two-State solution is simply shorthand for doing nothing.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1j5954edlno
    The settlements have always been an inexcusable sin on the part of the Israelis.
    What was once plausibly deniable/winked at, is pretty well official government policy now.
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1j5954edlno.amp
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,746
    ydoethur said:

    Nigelb said:

    I've no idea if the announcement makes much sense (certainly Heidi Alexander couldn't make that clear during the stream of waffle she deployed on Today this morning), but the critics don't seem to have much of a case either - simultaneously calling it an outrage and a meaningless gesture.

    It's a meaningless gesture (not least with all the caveats involved) but it's hard to see how anyone who is not Netanyahu or Ben-Gvir could call it 'outrageous.'
    Recognising Palestine is highly meaningful.

    But the meaning lies in keeping the Labour Party together and Starmer in No 10 and has nothing whatever to do with helping secure peace in that benighted part of the world. Nor has anyone that I can see made a case that it will.

    Blair was ultimately brought down by his support for Israel in 2007, not for lying about Iraq or any of his hundreds of other screw-ups.

    Starmer may know nothing whatever about economics or diplomacy or many of the other arts of government, but he knows how to play the Labour Party like a fiddle, e.g. when he ran on a Corbynite manifesto for its leadership, then ditched it about two days later. And he clearly hasn't forgotten Blair's fate.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,984
    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 6,676
    I wish Emma Barnett would just fuck off from the Today programme. Her pathetic feminist digs are so inappropriate. Yesterday was her constant pointed refrain “Footballs coming home and it’s the Women who did it” and today we have her interviewing the first Female Astronomer Royal and, after asking her about how important it is that a woman has reached the role she had to be a dick and say “it’s only taken 350 years”. What an absolute tool.

    If the England men’s team win the next World Cup and Nick Robinson says “the men showing women how it’s done” he will be pilloried and cancelled. Why is it that so many people who claim to want equality are the most divisive.

    Can she not be poached by 5-live where her entreaties to “let us know what you think” are suited.
  • BattlebusBattlebus Posts: 1,265

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    This is a strategic problem for Israel. If the bordering countries continue to be hostile to them (or destabilised depending on your viewpoint), they will continue to rely on external support for their protection. And yet they ignore requests from their biggest backers. What happens when the goodwill runs out?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,697
    edited July 30
    FPT:
    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    MattW said:

    Interesting thought on the Allison Pearson Telegraph piece thread.

    Lucy Connolly should stand as a Reform candidate for Parliament.

    I don't know - could she?

    (The thread is really quite rabid. They do NOT like being told that Allison Pearson is a fantasist who needs to do some homework.)

    No. Legislation brought in after Bobby Sands got elected in the 1980s prevents the incarcerated from standing.
    Yes, but she'll be out by 2028. Full sentence was just over 3 years, so even the whole sentence will be done.

    Is a previous jail sentence an inhibition? I'm not sure.

    There was an online petition to make it so in 2015, but it received TWO signatures.

    Surely there were cases in NI of released IRA and other (IVF) previously imprisoned people standing? Wasn't Jerry Adams in the Long Kesh around 1972, but I'm not sure if that was a criminal conviction?
    UVF not IVF :lol:
    The latter is just inconceivable.
    Yes - but it's interesting. IVF was largely Conservative Evangelical and politically probably quietist / small c conservative; I have met some remarkable people from the follow-on UCCF.

    But some people of similar doctrinal stripe in eg NI, were quite willing to embrace violence. There was always a desgree of Arminian/Calvinist tension, but they navigated that successively.

    Since I said UVF, consider Ian Paisley's Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, which is orthodox Calvinist, and his claims about the "Third Force" in 1981, and his "demonstration to journalists" of 500 of his men waving their firearms licences:
    https://www.nytimes.com/1981/02/07/world/paisley-and-500-protestants-stage-ulster-show-of-force.html

    That's one obvious difference with the current USA tradition, whether MAGA or Reformed Evangelicals (Calvinist mainly - equivalent to eg Strict Baptists or Open Brethren here), who often have an unapologetic callousness which is absent from that movement in the UK. Even now, some take a hard line on 'moral' questions, but it has been gradually liberalising for more than half a century.

    Politically I think this is one reason why American style Nat Cons, and our self-dubbed "Patriots" on the Right will have quite a job appropriating the "Christian" identity in the UK, as their latest identity-skin to steal.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 123,043

    Polling doesn’t give a “mandate” despite your attempt for a clever pun.

    The last Tory government said opinion polls could give a mandate.

    Scotland could hold a second independence referendum if polls show 60 percent of Scots consistently support principle of a fresh vote, Scottish Secretary Alister Jack suggested in an interview with me yesterday.

    https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2021/08/29/the-uk-government-says-opinion-polls-are-more-important-than-actual-votes/
    If he did say that then he was wrong… Westminster would grant a second referendum taking into account public opinion. It’s not as of right.

    But since when did you believe anything the last Tory government did or said?
    I believed everything the last government did on Foreign Affairs since the 13th of November 2023.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,913

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,360

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    Putin doesn't seem to accept those borders...

    The main reason that those borders have remained stable until recently is because of the rise of democracy and the EU. With FoM it matters little who controls Alsalce and Lorraine or the Sudetenland.

    Borders in Africa and Asia have also remained pretty much unchanged in recent decades too. Not because of ethnic homogenised, but rather because of the recognition that redrawing borders requires either bloody war or interminable discussions, see the recent Thai/Cambodia fighting.

    I recently read "The Peacemakers" on the Versailles treaty of 1919. An awful lot of later conflicts were set up by those negotiations, which rarely took into account local populations views.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,089
    Morning all,
    Polling to start the day and pretty much as you were from More in Common, no fruits on show yet
    ➡️ REF UK 29% (-)
    🌹 LAB 23% (+1)
    🌳 CON 20% (-1)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-2)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 3% (+1)

    N = 2,040 | Dates: 26 - 28/7 | Change w 21/7
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,263

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    The unpleasant truth is that ethnic cleansing works, when it comes to settling borders.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,152
    edited July 30

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    Egypt's you mean? They don't seem overly keen to reclaim their citizens.
  • theoldpoliticstheoldpolitics Posts: 289

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    It isn't someone else's country. It was a district of Egypt until it was used as a staging post for yet another attempted war of extermination against the Jews. The war failed, the land was conquered.

    If Germany and Czechoslovakia/Czechia had remained in low level conflict with several major flare-ups since 1945, and Czechoslovakia/CZ had agreed to return the Sudetenland to Germany in 2005, and ethnically cleanse it of Slavs so it can be a pure German territory, should Germany

    a) make nice, be glad, turn it into a successful prosperous area
    b) elect Nazis, try to take over the rest of Czechia?

  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,984

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,913

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
    And Israel being at war with "someone else" and committed to occupying their country and establishing settlers on it.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,984
    So a question.

    To achieve international recognition and peace with Israel how much of the land within the 1967 borders should the Palestinians give up ?
  • RogerRoger Posts: 20,787
    Kemi Badenoch thinks Palestinians in Gaza are being well fed. Sir Bob Geldof doesn't. Interesting when most sensible people are trying to whitewash their comments of the last few months Kemi chooses to double down.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kemi-badenoch-geldof-israel-lies-gaza-aid-b2796765.html
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 40,387

    Taz said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    Israel doesn’t want a 2 state solution. The US currently supports Israel.

    Nothing else really is of any consequence here.
    The Palestinians don't want a 2-state solution either.
    Indeed, when they chant "from the river to the sea" we should take it at face value and not pretend that they don't really mean it etc...
  • isamisam Posts: 42,271
    Just watching highlights of the fifth day at Old Trafford; I think it was ‘not cricket’ to not applaud Jadeja & Washington’s centuries, then offer limp handshakes when they took the draw. India were perfectly within their rights to want to tire out England’s bowlers and allow their batsmen to reach their hundreds. If an English batter was on course for a maiden test ton in a match in India that was going to be a draw, I’d expect us to let him achieve it then shake hands. Tut tut Ben
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 39,263
    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    Putin doesn't seem to accept those borders...

    The main reason that those borders have remained stable until recently is because of the rise of democracy and the EU. With FoM it matters little who controls Alsalce and Lorraine or the Sudetenland.

    Borders in Africa and Asia have also remained pretty much unchanged in recent decades too. Not because of ethnic homogenised, but rather because of the recognition that redrawing borders requires either bloody war or interminable discussions, see the recent Thai/Cambodia fighting.

    I recently read "The Peacemakers" on the Versailles treaty of 1919. An awful lot of later conflicts were set up by those negotiations, which rarely took into account local populations views.
    I think that’s unfair on the Versailles treaty-makers. They organised plenty of local plebiscites to try to fix borders (even one over whether Hanover should remain a part of Germany). It’s just they were dealing with a patchwork of ethnic groups across Europe. As well as powers which had established facts on the ground.
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,913

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    It isn't someone else's country. It was a district of Egypt until it was used as a staging post for yet another attempted war of extermination against the Jews. The war failed, the land was conquered.

    If Germany and Czechoslovakia/Czechia had remained in low level conflict with several major flare-ups since 1945, and Czechoslovakia/CZ had agreed to return the Sudetenland to Germany in 2005, and ethnically cleanse it of Slavs so it can be a pure German territory, should Germany

    a) make nice, be glad, turn it into a successful prosperous area
    b) elect Nazis, try to take over the rest of Czechia?

    Wikipedia is a bit unclear, but Gaza appears to have never been part of Egypt, it was part of mandatory Palestine occupied by Egypt since the 1948 war.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 19,662
    Roger said:

    Kemi Badenoch thinks Palestinians in Gaza are being well fed. Sir Bob Geldof doesn't. Interesting when most sensible people are trying to whitewash their comments of the last few months Kemi chooses to double down.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kemi-badenoch-geldof-israel-lies-gaza-aid-b2796765.html

    I assume you've seen the footage of Hamas seizing food in Gaza? I'm wagering they weren't about to organise distribution among the women and children.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,984

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
    And Israel being at war with "someone else" and committed to occupying their country and establishing settlers on it.
    Which ended in 2005 when Israel withdrew its military and settlers from Gaza.

    Now which side started the current war ? Did Israel attack Gaza or did Gaza attack Israel ?

    You would be on more reasonable ground to complain about Israel's behaviour in the West Bank or its treatment of its own Palestinian population than how it acted towards Gaza between 2005 and 2023.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 2,758
    edited July 30
    I see the government has tripled down on their “everyone who objects to the Online Safety Act hates children” position.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 14,988

    ydoethur said:

    Oh dear oh dear oh dear. 'A mandate for Palestine.'

    Anyway, Hamas don't approve of man dates.

    Yay somebody spotted my subtle historical reference/play on words.
    About as obvious as an 8.8 magnitude earthquake.

    Too soon....
  • FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 5,164
    boulay said:

    I wish Emma Barnett would just fuck off from the Today programme. Her pathetic feminist digs are so inappropriate. Yesterday was her constant pointed refrain “Footballs coming home and it’s the Women who did it” and today we have her interviewing the first Female Astronomer Royal and, after asking her about how important it is that a woman has reached the role she had to be a dick and say “it’s only taken 350 years”. What an absolute tool.

    If the England men’s team win the next World Cup and Nick Robinson says “the men showing women how it’s done” he will be pilloried and cancelled. Why is it that so many people who claim to want equality are the most divisive.

    Can she not be poached by 5-live where her entreaties to “let us know what you think” are suited.

    She also managed to ask if earthquakes could be stopped...
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,913

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
    And Israel being at war with "someone else" and committed to occupying their country and establishing settlers on it.
    Which ended in 2005 when Israel withdrew its military and settlers from Gaza.

    Now which side started the current war ? Did Israel attack Gaza or did Gaza attack Israel ?

    You would be on more reasonable ground to complain about Israel's behaviour in the West Bank or its treatment of its own Palestinian population than how it acted towards Gaza between 2005 and 2023.
    Gaza is part of Palestine, which the Israelis are still occupying.

    Yes Hamas started the current war. The argument is about the Israelis' conduct in responding to it.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,372

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
    And Israel being at war with "someone else" and committed to occupying their country and establishing settlers on it.
    Which ended in 2005 when Israel withdrew its military and settlers from Gaza.

    Now which side started the current war ? Did Israel attack Gaza or did Gaza attack Israel ?

    You would be on more reasonable ground to complain about Israel's behaviour in the West Bank or its treatment of its own Palestinian population than how it acted towards Gaza between 2005 and 2023.
    Gaza is part of Palestine, which the Israelis are still occupying.

    Yes Hamas started the current war. The argument is about the Israelis' conduct in responding to it.
    Odd how often the 'argument' forgets what Hamas did, or the fact they're still holding 'hostages'.

    I see f-all moves from Israel towards peace. Neither do I see such moves from Hamas.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 13,089
    Phil said:

    I see the government has tripled down on their “everyone who objects to the Online Safety Act hates children” position.

    There's Kyle doing an 'every time you use a VPN a child cries' video and everything
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,215
    Reform voters the main outlier in still rejecting a Palestinian state while most of the other main parties back recognition of it, especially Green, Labour and LD voters.

    Four out of five permanent UN Security Council members would also likely back it as would the UN General Assembly but the US would again likely veto it
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 46,372

    boulay said:

    I wish Emma Barnett would just fuck off from the Today programme. Her pathetic feminist digs are so inappropriate. Yesterday was her constant pointed refrain “Footballs coming home and it’s the Women who did it” and today we have her interviewing the first Female Astronomer Royal and, after asking her about how important it is that a woman has reached the role she had to be a dick and say “it’s only taken 350 years”. What an absolute tool.

    If the England men’s team win the next World Cup and Nick Robinson says “the men showing women how it’s done” he will be pilloried and cancelled. Why is it that so many people who claim to want equality are the most divisive.

    Can she not be poached by 5-live where her entreaties to “let us know what you think” are suited.

    She also managed to ask if earthquakes could be stopped...
    Stopped, no. But we are getting better at warnings:

    "Google failed to warn 10 million of Turkey earthquake severity"

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c77v2kx304go

    (Yes, the system failed in that case. But such systems will save many lives in the future.)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,215
    Roger said:

    Kemi Badenoch thinks Palestinians in Gaza are being well fed. Sir Bob Geldof doesn't. Interesting when most sensible people are trying to whitewash their comments of the last few months Kemi chooses to double down.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kemi-badenoch-geldof-israel-lies-gaza-aid-b2796765.html

    That is Malthouse sending a letter to the 1922 then
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,215

    Morning all,
    Polling to start the day and pretty much as you were from More in Common, no fruits on show yet
    ➡️ REF UK 29% (-)
    🌹 LAB 23% (+1)
    🌳 CON 20% (-1)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-2)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 3% (+1)

    N = 2,040 | Dates: 26 - 28/7 | Change w 21/7

    Labour squeezing the LDs and Greens a bit there
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,215
    MattW said:

    FPT:

    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    viewcode said:

    MattW said:

    Interesting thought on the Allison Pearson Telegraph piece thread.

    Lucy Connolly should stand as a Reform candidate for Parliament.

    I don't know - could she?

    (The thread is really quite rabid. They do NOT like being told that Allison Pearson is a fantasist who needs to do some homework.)

    No. Legislation brought in after Bobby Sands got elected in the 1980s prevents the incarcerated from standing.
    Yes, but she'll be out by 2028. Full sentence was just over 3 years, so even the whole sentence will be done.

    Is a previous jail sentence an inhibition? I'm not sure.

    There was an online petition to make it so in 2015, but it received TWO signatures.

    Surely there were cases in NI of released IRA and other (IVF) previously imprisoned people standing? Wasn't Jerry Adams in the Long Kesh around 1972, but I'm not sure if that was a criminal conviction?
    UVF not IVF :lol:
    The latter is just inconceivable.
    Yes - but it's interesting. IVF was largely Conservative Evangelical and politically probably quietist / small c conservative; I have met some remarkable people from the follow-on UCCF.

    But some people of similar doctrinal stripe in eg NI, were quite willing to embrace violence. There was always a desgree of Arminian/Calvinist tension, but they navigated that successively.

    Since I said UVF, consider Ian Paisley's Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, which is orthodox Calvinist, and his claims about the "Third Force" in 1981, and his "demonstration to journalists" of 500 of his men waving their firearms licences:
    https://www.nytimes.com/1981/02/07/world/paisley-and-500-protestants-stage-ulster-show-of-force.html

    That's one obvious difference with the current USA tradition, whether MAGA or Reformed Evangelicals (Calvinist mainly - equivalent to eg Strict Baptists or Open Brethren here), who often have an unapologetic callousness which is absent from that movement in the UK. Even now, some take a hard line on 'moral' questions, but it has been gradually liberalising for more than half a century.

    Politically I think this is one reason why American style Nat Cons, and our self-dubbed "Patriots" on the Right will have quite a job appropriating the "Christian" identity in the UK, as their latest identity-skin to steal.
    Most UK evangelicals are also anti gay marriage and anti abortion
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,995
    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    Putin doesn't seem to accept those borders...

    The main reason that those borders have remained stable until recently is because of the rise of democracy and the EU. With FoM it matters little who controls Alsalce and Lorraine or the Sudetenland.

    Borders in Africa and Asia have also remained pretty much unchanged in recent decades too. Not because of ethnic homogenised, but rather because of the recognition that redrawing borders requires either bloody war or interminable discussions, see the recent Thai/Cambodia fighting.

    I recently read "The Peacemakers" on the Versailles treaty of 1919. An awful lot of later conflicts were set up by those negotiations, which rarely took into account local populations views.
    I think that’s unfair on the Versailles treaty-makers. They organised plenty of local plebiscites to try to fix borders (even one over whether Hanover should remain a part of Germany). It’s just they were dealing with a patchwork of ethnic groups across Europe. As well as powers which had established facts on the ground.
    It was literally impossible.

    Remember, that until WWII, there were villages of ethnic Germans, speaking a dialect of German scattered between the USSR border and about half way to Moscow*. Just an example.

    Europe was a very, very patchwork quilt.

    Drawing a border that encompassed all of ethnic group A, without B-Z, was impossible.

    Much of the rest of the world was similar.

    *Many of whom fought and died for Russia, very loyally, in WWII
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 9,563
    isam said:

    Clumsy though the former Prime Minister's charge was, there were legitimate questions to be asked of Starmer's role in the Savile saga, especially given his habit of claiming credit for every success secured by the DPP on his watch. They are questions which, to this day, have still not been satisfactorily answered. His assertion he had no knowledge of – never mind role in – such a high-profile charging decision stretched credibility to breaking point.

    Johnson's accusation that the CPS allowed a notorious child-abuser to slip through their fingers whilst Keir Starmer was in overall charge of their operations was based on fact. As evidenced by his apology at that time for his organisation's failings.

    But the attempt to link Nigel Farage to Savile doesn't event amount to guilt by association. It is nothing less than base, unevidenced slander…

    …the name Jimmy Savile is political Kryptonite for Keir Starmer. And the fact it was allowed to leave the lips of one of his own Ministers beggars belief

    By reaching for the Savile slur, Starmer has also broken one of the basic rules of attack politics. Which is that, if you want to try and smear an opponent, the smear has to at least have some basic public resonance. It must, in some small way, match existing perceptions of your target.

    People have many different perceptions of Nigel Farage and Reform. But the accusation that he and his party are instinctively soft on criminals in general, and paedophiles in particular, lacks even the most minimal credibility.


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14951641/DAN-HODGES-Questions-Keir-Starmer-role-Jimmy-Savile-saga-stretch-credibility.html

    Dunno, Farage was close to Trump, which is not exactly indicative of being tough on criminals (I make no comment on paedophiles as there's no evidence of that, but Trump is a convicted felon).
  • MattWMattW Posts: 28,697
    Picking up one question from the previous thread, and attempting to get a grip on Allison Pearson, this is her tweeting on 28/7:

    Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson
    Some of us remember when we didn’t have “communities around the country”.
    There were the British people.
    Us.
    Yes, there were huge class inequalities but there was a priceless feeling of being united.
    Things like the Lionesses fleetingly remind us.
    The way we were.

    https://x.com/AllisonPearson/status/1949902800483471548

    Pearson was born in 1960, so would realistically remember things analytically from perhaps 1975. I'm not sure what she even means. "Communities around the country" are the British reality, and have been for a number of centuries - whilst acknowledging that the state has quite the record of oppressing minorities *.

    I'm not sure what she is hankering after other than a projected 'memory' of something that never existed, or a world that may have existed in her subcultural bubble. I might suggest it is a stereotype from Terry and June.

    I'm interested what triggered her to go down the identity politics and victimhood route - it's very "woke". Most recently it seems to me to be policing standards that have long been applied to other people being applied to Pearson herself.

    * As an aside form my other post, quite a number of nonconformist denominations or associations still have memories of suppression by Govt as a significant part of their self-understanding eg under Acts requiring conformity to the Church of England, Folk-memories get institutionalised here for a long time,
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 129,215

    I’m sure that the same folk who were told by assorted lefties, Nats and sandal wearers that Iraq was likely to be a huge, morally hazardous mistake will show a similar level of grateful humility towards those that said right from the start that Gaza was going to turn in to a criminal shitshow.

    *makes sure not to hold breath*

    Saddam Hussein has been killed and replaced by an elected Iraqi government.

    Israel has had no further Hamas attacks since October 7th so neither statement really true
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,535
    I'm curious to know what boundaries Starmer will acknowledge as comprising the State of Palestine.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,360
    Sean_F said:

    Foxy said:

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    Putin doesn't seem to accept those borders...

    The main reason that those borders have remained stable until recently is because of the rise of democracy and the EU. With FoM it matters little who controls Alsalce and Lorraine or the Sudetenland.

    Borders in Africa and Asia have also remained pretty much unchanged in recent decades too. Not because of ethnic homogenised, but rather because of the recognition that redrawing borders requires either bloody war or interminable discussions, see the recent Thai/Cambodia fighting.

    I recently read "The Peacemakers" on the Versailles treaty of 1919. An awful lot of later conflicts were set up by those negotiations, which rarely took into account local populations views.
    I think that’s unfair on the Versailles treaty-makers. They organised plenty of local plebiscites to try to fix borders (even one over whether Hanover should remain a part of Germany). It’s just they were dealing with a patchwork of ethnic groups across Europe. As well as powers which had established facts on the ground.
    I wasn't just referring to Europe. For example the German concessions in China were handed over to Japan, not to China. The German Colonies in Africa were divided between Britain, France and South Africa with no consultations or plebescites. The Ottoman Empire was carved up between Britain and France, including Palestine without plebescites or local consultation etc.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,535
    HYUFD said:

    Morning all,
    Polling to start the day and pretty much as you were from More in Common, no fruits on show yet
    ➡️ REF UK 29% (-)
    🌹 LAB 23% (+1)
    🌳 CON 20% (-1)
    🔶 LIB DEM 13% (-2)
    🌍 GREEN 7% (-1)
    🟡 SNP 3% (+1)

    N = 2,040 | Dates: 26 - 28/7 | Change w 21/7

    Labour squeezing the LDs and Greens a bit there
    It's effectively no change.
  • novanova Posts: 884
    HYUFD said:

    Reform voters the main outlier in still rejecting a Palestinian state while most of the other main parties back recognition of it, especially Green, Labour and LD voters.

    Four out of five permanent UN Security Council members would also likely back it as would the UN General Assembly but the US would again likely veto it

    With Reform voters, I wonder if they have strong, objective views about it. or if they're just much more likely to be contrarians?
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 7,742

    I'm curious to know what boundaries Starmer will acknowledge as comprising the State of Palestine.

    I assume he’s not going to. The whole thing is rather nebulous (which I don’t really blame the government for, the whole thing is intractably complex) but then on the other hand I’m not entirely sure what recognising statehood actually means, beyond the gesture.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 6,123
    edited July 30
    HYUFD said:

    Reform voters the main outlier in still rejecting a Palestinian state while most of the other main parties back recognition of it, especially Green, Labour and LD voters.

    Four out of five permanent UN Security Council members would also likely back it as would the UN General Assembly but the US would again likely veto it

    Apart from @Leon , I’m not aware of any posters supporting Reform. Yet they consistently poll around 30%. Do we have a cohort of shy Reformers who are pretending still to be Conservatives, whilst agreeing with the views of Reform voters?
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 15,374

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    That's naive at best. The military state and transport infrastructure is Israeli and their to support the settlers. It is absolutely part of Israeli gradual annexation of the territory.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 55,995
    MattW said:

    Picking up one question from the previous thread, and attempting to get a grip on Allison Pearson, this is her tweeting on 28/7:

    Allison Pearson @AllisonPearson
    Some of us remember when we didn’t have “communities around the country”.
    There were the British people.
    Us.
    Yes, there were huge class inequalities but there was a priceless feeling of being united.
    Things like the Lionesses fleetingly remind us.
    The way we were.

    https://x.com/AllisonPearson/status/1949902800483471548

    Pearson was born in 1960, so would realistically remember things analytically from perhaps 1975. I'm not sure what she even means. "Communities around the country" are the British reality, and have been for a number of centuries - whilst acknowledging that the state has quite the record of oppressing minorities *.

    I'm not sure what she is hankering after other than a projected 'memory' of something that never existed, or a world that may have existed in her subcultural bubble. I might suggest it is a stereotype from Terry and June.

    I'm interested what triggered her to go down the identity politics and victimhood route - it's very "woke". Most recently it seems to me to be policing standards that have long been applied to other people being applied to Pearson herself.

    * As an aside form my other post, quite a number of nonconformist denominations or associations still have memories of suppression by Govt as a significant part of their self-understanding eg under Acts requiring conformity to the Church of England, Folk-memories get institutionalised here for a long time,

    I’ve noticed with a couple of Scottish relatives - they find London a culture shock after rural Scotland. Not that they upset - more a kind of “this is really different”.

    There is something real at the back of what she is saying - a changed context between a singular culture and multiple cultures.

    I’d say that there has been staggering cultural changes between 1985 and 2025.
  • another_richardanother_richard Posts: 27,984

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
    And Israel being at war with "someone else" and committed to occupying their country and establishing settlers on it.
    Which ended in 2005 when Israel withdrew its military and settlers from Gaza.

    Now which side started the current war ? Did Israel attack Gaza or did Gaza attack Israel ?

    You would be on more reasonable ground to complain about Israel's behaviour in the West Bank or its treatment of its own Palestinian population than how it acted towards Gaza between 2005 and 2023.
    Gaza is part of Palestine, which the Israelis are still occupying.

    Yes Hamas started the current war. The argument is about the Israelis' conduct in responding to it.
    So the part of Palestine which Israel is occupying didn't attack Israel but the part of Palestine which Israel wasn't occupying did attack Israel.

    Do you see why withdrawing from more of Palestine isn't going to be accepted by the Israelis ?

    As to how Israel has responded - blockading food supplies, destruction of urban areas, military occupation, ethnic cleansing - how does that differ to what British strategy was to Germany in the world wars ?

    Maybe I'm in a minority of one but I don't join the self-righteous condemnation of Israel for doing what we applaud ourselves for doing a few generations back.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 27,008
    One interesting thing in this poll is that the youngsters are the least likely to say "don't know". That is very unusual for opinion polling.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 55,535

    HYUFD said:

    Reform voters the main outlier in still rejecting a Palestinian state while most of the other main parties back recognition of it, especially Green, Labour and LD voters.

    Four out of five permanent UN Security Council members would also likely back it as would the UN General Assembly but the US would again likely veto it

    Apart from @Leon , I’m not aware of any posters supporting Reform. Yet they consistently poll around 30%. Do we have a cohort of shy Reformers who are pretending still to be Conservatives, whilst agreeing with the views of Reform voters?
    Not me! No time for Reform at all.
  • theoldpoliticstheoldpolitics Posts: 289

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    It isn't someone else's country. It was a district of Egypt until it was used as a staging post for yet another attempted war of extermination against the Jews. The war failed, the land was conquered.

    If Germany and Czechoslovakia/Czechia had remained in low level conflict with several major flare-ups since 1945, and Czechoslovakia/CZ had agreed to return the Sudetenland to Germany in 2005, and ethnically cleanse it of Slavs so it can be a pure German territory, should Germany

    a) make nice, be glad, turn it into a successful prosperous area
    b) elect Nazis, try to take over the rest of Czechia?

    Wikipedia is a bit unclear, but Gaza appears to have never been part of Egypt, it was part of mandatory Palestine occupied by Egypt since the 1948 war.
    Important I think not to conflate "Mandatory Palestine" (a term of convenience used by the colonial powers after WW1) with "the land claimed by the Arab movement which later latched onto the term "Palestinian" as an identity designed to assert a moral claim to that land (the Afrikaners must be particularly upset at how well this has worked).

    Egypt and related client states ruled Gaza for an extended period of time, with no significant independence movement, terror attacks, or global protests, is my point. Whether they formally legally annexed it is tangential.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 52,360
    edited July 30
    Selebian said:

    isam said:

    Clumsy though the former Prime Minister's charge was, there were legitimate questions to be asked of Starmer's role in the Savile saga, especially given his habit of claiming credit for every success secured by the DPP on his watch. They are questions which, to this day, have still not been satisfactorily answered. His assertion he had no knowledge of – never mind role in – such a high-profile charging decision stretched credibility to breaking point.

    Johnson's accusation that the CPS allowed a notorious child-abuser to slip through their fingers whilst Keir Starmer was in overall charge of their operations was based on fact. As evidenced by his apology at that time for his organisation's failings.

    But the attempt to link Nigel Farage to Savile doesn't event amount to guilt by association. It is nothing less than base, unevidenced slander…

    …the name Jimmy Savile is political Kryptonite for Keir Starmer. And the fact it was allowed to leave the lips of one of his own Ministers beggars belief

    By reaching for the Savile slur, Starmer has also broken one of the basic rules of attack politics. Which is that, if you want to try and smear an opponent, the smear has to at least have some basic public resonance. It must, in some small way, match existing perceptions of your target.

    People have many different perceptions of Nigel Farage and Reform. But the accusation that he and his party are instinctively soft on criminals in general, and paedophiles in particular, lacks even the most minimal credibility.


    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-14951641/DAN-HODGES-Questions-Keir-Starmer-role-Jimmy-Savile-saga-stretch-credibility.html

    Dunno, Farage was close to Trump, which is not exactly indicative of being tough on criminals (I make no comment on paedophiles as there's no evidence of that, but Trump is a convicted felon).
    Its just a mis-hearing of what Trump was saying in the campaign. When we thought Trump was saying "release the paedo's files" he was actually saying "release the paedophiles".

    Punctuation and spelling are critical.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 15,374

    boulay said:

    Foxy said:

    A Balfour declaration for our times. A homeland for the Palestinian people.

    Yes, thank god for Britain and France finally stepping up to the plate to sort out borders and states hashed together by the stupid, er, British and French.
    To be fair, trying to draw borders in a land where ethnic/religious nationalism haven’t been the deciding factors for centuries, then suddenly are the deciding factor is pretty much.

    A nasty thought - the main reason that Europe has stable borders is mad ethnic cleansing, first one way, then the other, followed by half a century of two nuclear armed super states telling everyone “that’s how it is”.
    There are many minority groups spanning borders in Europe, from Catholics in Northern Ireland, German speakers in the South Tyrol and Alsace, Hungarians in Romania, etc. We have stable borders because we learnt the lessons of WWII and committed to peace, through institutions like the EU. (OK, the threat of nuclear war helped provide an external focus too.)

    Somewhere like South Tyrol is happy now, not because of ethnic cleansing, but because Italy and Austria are both democracies, and both in the EU and in Schengen.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 44,152

    Foxy said:

    Battlebus said:

    Lets talk about the West Bank and how it could serve as a homeland. Here is the actual amount of land available to the Palestinians in comparison to that available to settlers and the IDF. It's been sliced and diced by roads between settlements that disrupt life there and kettles the population. Gaza is now being prepared for the same slice and dice with the various corridors.

    Even the wannabe Nobel Peace Prize winner hasn't the influence to change the facts on the ground. Note where the water for is.


    That’s a very misleading chart by combining settlers, military, state land and roads. Presumably if it were an independent homeland the military state and transport infrastructure would belong to the new state not Israel
    The areas in white are where the IDF are in control. Those roads and other infrastructure are for the use of the Israeli military and settlers only. Palestinians are not allowed.

    Its a slow but inexorable strangulation and encroachment of Area B.

    But yes, you are right. For the West Bank to become a viable state +/- Gaza and East Jerusalem the Israeli military and settlers need to go. I can't see that happening.
    Not least because the Israeli military and settlers were removed from Gaza in 2005.

    For which Israel received neither thanks nor security.
    I'm not sure why the Israelis should be thanked for ceasing to occupy someone else's country.
    The 'someone else' being at war with Israel and committed to destroying Israel.
    And Israel being at war with "someone else" and committed to occupying their country and establishing settlers on it.
    Which ended in 2005 when Israel withdrew its military and settlers from Gaza.

    Now which side started the current war ? Did Israel attack Gaza or did Gaza attack Israel ?

    You would be on more reasonable ground to complain about Israel's behaviour in the West Bank or its treatment of its own Palestinian population than how it acted towards Gaza between 2005 and 2023.
    Gaza is part of Palestine, which the Israelis are still occupying.

    Yes Hamas started the current war. The argument is about the Israelis' conduct in responding to it.
    Yes true.

    Potted history:

    Israel's view - they left Gaza completely to see if the Palestinians could live peacefully alongside Israel. At the time there were great investment plans (eg for the port) and billions committed to the regeneration of Gaza. Then, on account of the corruption of the PA, the Palestinians voted in Hamas and the rest is history.

    Palestinian view - Israel continues to occupy Palestine which comprises Gaza and the West Bank (and arguably the bit in between) and it is only via armed struggle that Israel agreed to leave Gaza and therefore the struggle continues.

    That is yer problem right there.
Sign In or Register to comment.