Israel vs. the rest of the world?

[RecklessAbandon]

5 minutes ago, P.K. said:

I wonder if it's down to how anti-Israel the UN General Assembly is?

After all, this year "Palestine" was ridiculously recognised as a Sovereign State by 146 of the member states which is 75% of the total. The words "wind" and "pissing" come to mind here as the US, Israels main backer, voted against the motion...

Or, and hear me out here, maybe its because there is documented evidence of Israel committing war crimes and genocide (as well as, you know, intentionally shooting at UN Peacekeepers, which is a whoopsie).

I notice you failed to mention they have also issued an arrest warrant for the (current) head of Hamas as well.

So not exactly as antisemite as you wail. 

[Josem]

6 hours ago, P.K. said:

I wonder if it's down to how anti-Israel the UN General Assembly is?

The International Criminal "Court" is not part of the United Nations.

[P.K.]

On 11/22/2024 at 4:12 PM, Josem said:

The International Criminal "Court" is not part of the United Nations.

No shit Sherlock.

The ICC is an independent judicial body established by the Rome Statute and is not part of the United Nations. But they have a cooperative and complementary relationship. In other words the ICC is backed by the UN.

The UN is highly influential and the General Assembly has shown where it stands on Palestine with, ridiculously IMHO, not only recognising the State of Palestine as a sovereign nation (what!) but also  overwhelmingly voting for Israel to end it's ‘unlawful presence’ in Occupied Palestinian Territory. That's the same UN that recognised Israel as the Occupying Power in Gaza!

Fortunately the General Assembly is more of an echo chamber than anything else...

[Chinahand]

Nice to see some pragmatism from Hezbollah. They know they've been defeated and know there is little appetite for war amongst the Lebanese people. 

Their withdrawal and demilitarisation of Southern Lebanon is a real victory. 

Hamas should have shown such pragmatism rather than zealotry which has brought destruction on their people. 

I wonder if they will learn. 

[P.K.]

13 hours ago, Chinahand said:

Nice to see some pragmatism from Hezbollah. They know they've been defeated and know there is little appetite for war amongst the Lebanese people. 

Their withdrawal and demilitarisation of Southern Lebanon is a real victory. 

Hamas should have shown such pragmatism rather than zealotry which has brought destruction on their people. 

I wonder if they will learn. 

I thought that far from being demilitarised Southern Lebanon will be held by the LAF. But the withdrawal of Hezbollah is definitely a victory or Netayahu would never have gone for it.

What Iran does next will be interesting. I'm wondering if their proxy has been so badly mauled they agreed to a ceasefire to let them re-group. But are Hezbollah still worth funding if they've essentially been knocked out of the game? Plus would they be prepared to take on the LAF to be able to exert pressure on Northern Israel again?

As to Hamas so much of their infrastructure has been destroyed they are now but a shadow of their former influence. So the next major assault on Israel has been pushed way out into the future which was the whole idea of the Israeli campaign. But what of the hostages...?

[RecklessAbandon]

51 minutes ago, P.K. said:

As to Hamas Palestine and Gaza so much of their infrastructure has been destroyed...

I know its lazy to "correct" another posters text, but it was such easy low hanging fruit, I couldn't resist.

Quote

But what of the hostages...?

 

[Max Power]

10 hours ago, RecklessAbandon said:

I know its lazy to "correct" another posters text, but it was such easy low hanging fruit, I couldn't resist.

 

But it didn't need correcting unfortunately. Hamas have brought all of this upon Gaza, they have received billions in aid since Israel withdrew from there in 2005, and spent it on weaponry, digging a huge network of tunnels and educating young people to see themselves as martyrs and to hate Jews. 

I hate the death and destruction, but I don't know what Israel are expected to do? If they roll over, they are seen as weak and this will rise up again, they are trying to let their enemies know that they can't keep seeking terrorism solutions. The first duty of any government is to keep its citizens safe, Hamas would have done well to have considered this before October 7th 2003!    

[Non-Believer]

I don't think Hezbollah are out of the game as such, I think that both they and Israel recognise that both sides would sustain huge losses if it went to the next phase which would be an Israeli ground incursion. Hezbollah are much better organised, bigger and more funded than Hamas, Israel knows that it would be fighting on two fronts and will be taking on a much bigger foe than Hamas. I think this may be a regrouping and retrenchment period for both Israel and Hezbollah. Let's hope that the ceasefire holds and can be extended.

 

[hoopsaa]

12 hours ago, RecklessAbandon said:

I know its lazy to "correct" another posters text, but it was such easy low hanging fruit, I couldn't resist.

 

OK, but if they released the hostages it would increase the pressure on Israel to stop.

What is the benefit to Hamas, and certainly to the residents of gaza, in keeping hold of these poor innocents?

[P.K.]

35 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

I don't think Hezbollah are out of the game as such, I think that both they and Israel recognise that both sides would sustain huge losses if it went to the next phase which would be an Israeli ground incursion. Hezbollah are much better organised, bigger and more funded than Hamas, Israel knows that it would be fighting on two fronts and will be taking on a much bigger foe than Hamas. I think this may be a regrouping and retrenchment period for both Israel and Hezbollah. Let's hope that the ceasefire holds and can be extended.

The IDF have been operating in Lebanon for a while now.

See https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9vp7dg3ml1o for some very good information.

[RecklessAbandon]

11 hours ago, Max Power said:

I hate the death and destruction, but I don't know what Israel are expected to do?

Maybe not commit documented genocide and war crimes?

That would be a good start, it would certain not burn a lot of the good will and sympathy that Israel had before they started setting kids on fire and illegally settling land they have stolen.

[RecklessAbandon]

10 hours ago, hoopsaa said:

OK, but if they released the hostages it would increase the pressure on Israel to stop.

What is the benefit to Hamas, and certainly to the residents of gaza, in keeping hold of these poor innocents?

Its more the point that Israel doesn't want the hostages released.

If they are released, they then lose any facade of "we're bombing this people out of existence to rescue the hostages".

It will then just be "we're bombing this people out of existence for the land and the gas/oil" - and that is a little harder to sell to the world.

[Max Power]

On 11/28/2024 at 9:04 AM, RecklessAbandon said:

Maybe not commit documented genocide and war crimes?

That would be a good start, it would certain not burn a lot of the good will and sympathy that Israel had before they started setting kids on fire and illegally settling land they have stolen.

You say 'documented genocide' but documented by whom? And if it's genocide, Israel are making a pretty poor job of something that they are quite capable of carrying out!

As an analogy, if your family were to move into a neighbourhood over 100 years ago and were constantly being told by an ever increasing band of people from an opposing religion that they wanted you all dead and pushed into the sea. This is followed up by physical attacks upon you, your family and your property. There are no attempts at negotiation or arbitration, despite trying to leave them alone in their own house, and only your death will suffice. Your neighbours sit back, your friends are far away but don't want to get directly involved. Then one day, your neighbour, who has by now grown a huge family, who have been indoctrinated with the sole purpose of killing you and clearing you out of your house, launches a murderous attack on a large number of your family! You would be inclined to get rid of the threat once and for all!  

[RecklessAbandon]

1 hour ago, Max Power said:

You say 'documented genocide' but documented by whom? And if it's genocide, Israel are making a pretty poor job of something that they are quite capable of carrying out!

As an analogy, if your family were to move into a neighbourhood over 100 years ago and were constantly being told by an ever increasing band of people from an opposing religion that they wanted you all dead and pushed into the sea. This is followed up by physical attacks upon you, your family and your property. There are no attempts at negotiation or arbitration, despite trying to leave them alone in their own house, and only your death will suffice. Your neighbours sit back, your friends are far away but don't want to get directly involved. Then one day, your neighbour, who has by now grown a huge family, who have been indoctrinated with the sole purpose of killing you and clearing you out of your house, launches a murderous attack on a large number of your family! You would be inclined to get rid of the threat once and for all!  

I said genocide and war crimes (why did you choose to only focus on one and ignore the other?).

Israel-Gaza: What did the ICJ ruling really say? - BBC News

"The UN's top court is hearing Israel's response to a case brought by South Africa seeking an emergency halt to its offensive in Rafah.

South Africa has also accused Israel of genocide in the Gaza war.

Israel, which has called South Africa's case "wholly unfounded" and "morally repugnant", responded on Friday accusing South Africa of bringing "biased and false claims".

The words of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) have been subject to intense scrutiny since South Africa brought its case and it’s centred around the use of the word “plausible” in the ruling.

In January, the ICJ delivered an interim judgement - and one key paragraph from the ruling drew the most attention: “In the Court’s view, the facts and circumstances... are sufficient to conclude that at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa and for which it is seeking protection are plausible.”

This was interpreted by many, including some legal commentators, to mean that the court had concluded that the claim that Israel was committing genocide in Gaza was “plausible”."

Rather than analogy, I prefer to use evidence from organisations trusted around the world like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and UN peacekeepers.

Evidence of Israel's unlawful use of white phosphorus in southern Lebanon as cross-border hostilities escalate

Lebanon: Israel’s White Phosphorous Use Risks Civilian Harm | Human Rights Watch

[RecklessAbandon]

Ground News - An Israeli strike that killed 3 Lebanese journalists was most likely deliberate, Human Rights Watch says

Another example that doesn't exactly paint Israel in a good light