2023 Israel - Hamas war

[baza585]

Yes, committing war crimes and disregarding thousands of civilian deaths isn't really an acceptable byproduct.

There is also the small problem that "destroying" militants is a simplistic concept that may sound good to some people, but such actions only serve to create more militants in place of those who have been "destroyed"!

I don't think anyone is suggesting that the civilian deaths on both sides should be disregarded.

It is clear that there can be no lasting peace in the region without a second state solution, and also not until Iran's malign influence via it's proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah etc are neutered. The telling factor for me is the attitude of the neighbouring Arab states.

Egypt will not allow Gazans to cross in any numbers because it fears numbers of Hamas terrorists will migrate into Egypt which will destabilize that country.

Jordan helped the US and it's allies to prevent the Iranian backed drone and missile strike from causing significant damage in Israel.

Both these positions suggest they believe that the Iran backed terrorist organizations are a significant problem.

That is not to say I back the way Israel has gone about seeking to neuter Hamas, far from it. However I believe that Hamas has to be neutered before there can be a lasting solution in the region.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

In my opinion, religion (gerin oil) poisons everything. When one or both sides claim they have a god given right.

Of the two religions involved (indirectly) in this conflict, only one of them has anything to say about the other group in its sacred texts... and it isn’t a very nice thing.

 

[Typhoon]

Your suggestion that the IDF doesn't deliberately kill children is, quite frankly, laughable.

Just one example - Hind Rajab, the six-year-old Palestinian girl, who telephoned the authorities to ask to be rescued as she was in a car where all the others - relations of hers - were dead. That story was reported around the world (including Israeli and Arab news websites), and touched a nerve in many counties, especially in those who heard a recording of her phone call. You would think a priority would have been to spare her. They knew where she was, she could hardly be a threat. An opportunity for a PR success, it might show to the world that sparing the innocent was a priority. A chance to show the world that it was Hammas, not Palestinians. which were the enemy. Instead she is found dead in the car, which was riddled with bullets, like the ambulance that was sent to rescue her. Hearing that call will remain long in my memory so when I heard that an Israeli girl was injured in the recent Iranian attack, I was not exactly as sympathetic as I ought to have been.

This is not a case of Israeli good, Palestinian bad as you seem to be making out.

Certainly there are some real heroes on both sides - Jews (both living in side and outside of Israel) and Palestinians, as well as those of neither nationality, just as there are in most wars. similarly, there are villains, outlined in most of the above posts.

There is also the small problem that "destroying" militants is a simplistic concept that may sound good to some people, but such actions only serve to create more militants in place of those who have been "destroyed"!

Future recruits will be amongst those who saw their parents, siblings. other relatives or friends lying in what can be used as a mortuary in the runs of Gaza. The battle may end soon, the war won't without some dramatic change that has defeated the most able diplomats for at least a couple of generations..

I know they get a bad press but I have heard the suggestion that Iran deliberately indicated that retaliation would happen with the intention that most missiles would be intercepted as a sign of what could happen if Israel attacks embassies in other countries, given the response of the west I am not sure it was a good idea. Someone might want to ask, say, Sunak, if we would shoot down an Israeli drone heading for Iraq, for example.

 

[ainsworth74]

It's a war designed to destroy militants at the disregard for everyone else. They shouldn't disregarding everyone else but it's a different thing, they aren't deliberately targeting civilians but not much bothered if they get in the way. Like the RAF during WW2.

Of course the actions of the RAF and the USAAF in their strategic bombing campaign over Germany (and the USAAF over Japan) would be war crimes (certainly the RAF over Germany with their area bombing campaign and the USAAF over Japan with their firebombing, the USAAF in Europe might have a fig leaf in that they were attempting precision bombing of militarily significant facilities) by the standards established in the decades following the war. So Isreal not giving proper care to civilian casualties might be similar in some regards to the strategic bombing campaign of WW2 but, of course, is not excusable either. The RAF and USAAF at least were fighting in a true war of survival in a different era. Does anyone believe that the Palestinian's represent an existential threat to Isreal?

It is clear that there can be no lasting peace in the region without a second state solution, and also not until Iran's malign influence via it's proxies, Hamas, Hezbollah etc are neutered. The telling factor for me is the attitude of the neighbouring Arab states.

Yes it does feel that Hamas are a complete stumbling block here, I'm not quite sure how you can really negotiate a proper two state solution when one of the parties founding charter says:

18. The following are considered null and void: the Balfour Declaration, the British Mandate Document, the UN Palestine Partition Resolution, and whatever resolutions and measures that derive from them or are similar to them. The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and goes against their will and the will of the Ummah; it is also in violation of human rights that are guaranteed by international conventions, foremost among them is the right to self-determination.

19. There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. Whatever has befallen the land of Palestine in terms of occupation, settlement building, Judaization or changes to its features or falsification of facts is illegitimate. Rights never lapse.

20. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus.

21. Hamas affirms that the Oslo Accords and their addenda contravene the governing rules of international law in that they generate commitments that violate the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people. Therefore, the Movement rejects these agreements and all that flows from them, such as the obligations that are detrimental to the interests of our people, especially security coordination (collaboration).

22. Hamas rejects all the agreements, initiatives and settlement projects that are aimed at undermining the Palestinian cause and the rights of our Palestinian people. In this regard, any stance, initiative or political programme must not in any way violate these rights and should not contravene them or contradict them.

23. Hamas stresses that transgression against the Palestinian people, usurping their land and banishing them from their homeland cannot be called peace. Any settlements reached on this basis will not lead to peace. Resistance and jihad for the liberation of Palestine will remain a legitimate right, a duty and an honour for all the sons and daughters of our people and our Ummah.

A Document of General Principles and Policies

In the Name of Allah Most Gracious Most Merciful The Islamic Resistance Movement “Hamas”

web.archive.org

I suppose in Article 20 they do sort of agree to a two state solution but the very sentence before it is all about liberation "from the river to the sea" and then with the surrounding paragraphs it feels like a somewhat hollow agreement to a two state solution. And this is the softend 2017 edition, the 1988 edition was somewhat more hardline:

Article Thirteen:​

Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."

Now and then the call goes out for the convening of an international conference to look for ways of solving the (Palestinian) question. Some accept, others reject the idea, for this or other reason, with one stipulation or more for consent to convening the conference and participating in it. Knowing the parties constituting the conference, their past and present attitudes towards Moslem problems, the Islamic Resistance Movement does not consider these conferences capable of realising the demands, restoring the rights or doing justice to the oppressed. These conferences are only ways of setting the infidels in the land of the Moslems as arbitraters. When did the infidels do justice to the believers?

"But the Jews will not be pleased with thee, neither the Christians, until thou follow their religion; say, The direction of Allah is the true direction. And verily if thou follow their desires, after the knowledge which hath been given thee, thou shalt find no patron or protector against Allah." (The Cow - verse 120).

There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with. As in said in the honourable Hadith:

"The people of Syria are Allah's lash in His land. He wreaks His vengeance through them against whomsoever He wishes among His slaves It is unthinkable that those who are double-faced among them should prosper over the faithful. They will certainly die out of grief and desperation."

The Avalon Project : Hamas Covenant 1988

So at least in the last thirty years they've softened their stance by a slim margin. But when that's the position of one of your interlocutors I really don't see how its possible to reach some sort of agreement. Feels like Israel could unilaterally pack up all their forces from Gaza, rip out the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and retreat back to something akin to the June 1967 borders and they would still be dealing with Hamas wanting to come over and murder more Israelis. Of course the other aspect to all of this is that you wouldn't even be negotiating with one group on Palestinain side! The West Bank is under the Palestinian Authority who are headed up by Fatah (with whom no love is lost between them and Hamas). Fatah are not as much a problem as Hamas are and it might actually be possible to conclude some sort of agreement with them but, to my understanding, their legitimacy and authority in the West Bank isn't exactly great either. I suppose we come around to one of the (many) great tragedies of the Palestinian people is that they have, since roughly the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War One, been utterly failed by every single leader or group of leaders that they've ever had. Every time, always. And it continues to this day.

Of course the elephant in the room that I've been ignoring so far is whether Israel would even agree to more settlement talks. I rather suspect that any Goverment that includes Likud (let alone the nutjobs that their in coaltion with) absolutely would not and I don't think any Government would be willing to ever deal with any Palestininan represenative group that included Hamas. So I guess it's bomb baby bomb because killing and starving a few more Palestinian civilians appears to be the only strategy that current Israeli government has even if all that's probably achieveing is the further radicilisation of the Gazan population whilst the nutjobs in Government use their new found grip on the levers of power to help expand their illegal settlements in the West Bank (now over half-million and having increased by 3% in 2023 and by 15% over the last five years) which I'm sure won't eventually explode into an orgy of violence in the West Bank at some point. But, as we've been assured multiple times now on this thread, it's the average Palestinian who voted for Hamas in 2006 (when it was really only a fraction of the current population) who are the real problem...

 

[Yew]

Of the two religions involved (indirectly) in this conflict, only one of them has anything to say about the other group in its sacred texts... and it isn’t a very nice thing.

It'd be pretty remarkable if the Torah said anything specific about a religion that started around 1000 years after it was written!

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It'd be pretty remarkable if the Torah said anything specific about a religion that started around 1000 years after it was written!

True but- god told the Jews (children of Israel) to wipe out the Philistines and it is alleged by some that Palestine derives from Philistine.

 

[Bantamzen]

Of the two religions involved (indirectly) in this conflict, only one of them has anything to say about the other group in its sacred texts... and it isn’t a very nice thing.

It'd be pretty remarkable if the Torah said anything specific about a religion that started around 1000 years after it was written!

Indeed, however one can't but help wonder what it might have said had their starting points been reversed.

I'm afraid I don't ever see these religions ever playing nice with each other, having the shiniest religion to win favour with the sky fairies seems to be far more important than the lives of countless millions of innocent people slain on all sides over the centuries. Right about now would be a good time for any such deity to show up and tell them all to stop being such two hats to each other, but I'm not holding my breath...

 

[nw1]

What the hell are you talking about? Are you calling me a racist? It's a fact that rockets are constantly being flown into Israel by the Palestinians. It's not racist for stating a fact.

You suggested the Palestinian citizens are somehow complicit. To be fair, I'd call it xenophobia rather than racism.

Someone might want to ask, say, Sunak, if we would shoot down an Israeli drone heading for Iraq, for example.

Not sure if you meant Iran, not Iraq, but either way: I certainly think we should do that, as it will help prevent a wider war.

China invading Taiwan is obviously a concern, but would require an enormous build up of forces which would be highly visible. I can’t see how the Chinese could launch a surprise invasion (look at what Russia was up to before they invaded Ukraine, and that was logistically straightforward in theory), and missile strikes would surely only strengthen Taiwanese resolve.

Would China try that on in any case? China are presumably reliant on trade with the Western world as they make most products nowadays - and presumably cannot afford to lose that trade over some irrational claims on Taiwan.

 

[Typhoon]

Not sure if you meant Iran, not Iraq, but either way: I certainly think we should do that, as it will help prevent a wider war.

I did mean Iraq. Israel hit the Iranian embassy in Syria, which appears to be a close ally of Iran. Iraq is more a close ally of chaos but appears to be less closely aligned to Iran, it is also not a neighbour of Israel (but is between it and Iran). Taking people out in embassies in other countries is a dangerous tactic, in my view, and could very easily go wrong. A mistake in Iraq might embolden the militants in that country, as well as putting pressure on neutrals to take a more active anti-Israel stance.

My concern is that one false move and this could escalate still further.

 

[Silenos]

True but- god told the Jews (children of Israel) to wipe out the Philistines and it is alleged by some that Palestine derives from Philistine.

Netanyahu speaking to the IDF/Tsahal specifically referenced the Amalekites (previous inhabitants of the land) in line with Deuteronomy 25:19:

Therefore it shall be, when the LORD thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Netanyahu speaking to the IDF/Tsahal specifically referenced the Amalekites (previous inhabitants of the land) in line with Deuteronomy 25:19:

I may be thinking of the Romans then who used Philistine as a slur - or similar.

 

[Silenos]

I may be thinking of the Romans then who used Philistine as a slur - or similar.

The Bible has many examples of ethnic cleansing…

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The Bible has many examples of ethnic cleansing…

I know! And as a few people have said, it is basically a slave owners manual.

 

[Russel]

And it begins... Israel strike back at Iran.

Or not, according to Iran.

Strange times indeed.

Iran calls Israeli strike 'infiltration' as it downplays attack on Supreme Leader's birthday

US secretary of state Antony Blinken repeatedly refuses to be drawn on the incident, but insists America was not involved "in any offensive operations" and stresses the focus is on de-escalation and avoiding a wider Middle East conflict.

news.sky.com

Iran has indicated it has no plans for retaliation as it played down a strike by Israel after Tehran's unprecedented missile-and-drone assault on the country.

Troops fired air defences from a major military airbase and a nuclear site near the central city of Isfahan, reportedly hitting three drones.

There were no reports of damage or casualties.

 

[Belperpete]

And it begins... Israel strike back at Iran.

Or not, according to Iran.

Strange times indeed.

It does look like Iran is trying to de-escalate the situation. They couldn't just ignore Israel slapping them in the face with the strike on their embassy, but retaliated in a way that looked impressive but was easy to ward off. Now they seem to be down playing Israel's response, I am hoping this is a tactic to excuse themselves out of a counter retaliation.

 

[DustyBin]

Would China try that on in any case? China are presumably reliant on trade with the Western world as they make most products nowadays - and presumably cannot afford to lose that trade over some irrational claims on Taiwan.

We're going a bit OT so I'll keep it brief, but most likely not IMO. I can't see them wanting an actual war; they'd only invade if they thought they'd be able to waltz in with little or no resistance, which isn't going to happen. Putin's miscalculation in Ukraine should (hopefully) serve as a warning....

 

[GRALISTAIR]

It does look like Iran is trying to de-escalate the situation.

Agreed.

They couldn't just ignore Israel slapping them in the face with the strike on their embassy, but retaliated in a way that looked impressive but was easy to ward off.

Again I agree.

Now they seem to be down playing Israel's response, I am hoping this is a tactic to excuse themselves out of a counter retaliation.

Yes it does look if calmer heads are beginning to emerge/prevail. I honestly thought Israel would have launched a massive attack against Irans nuclear facilities - I thought they had been itching to do that for a while.

 

[ainsworth74]

but retaliated in a way that looked impressive but was easy to ward off

I think that perhaps undersells the achievement last Saturday night/Sunday morning! The attack included 170 drones, 30 cruise missiles and 110 ballistic missiles which was relatively well coordinated to have everything arrive on targets in a fairly tight window with the aim to saturate Israeli defences.

To defeat that attack required cooperation of the IDF, RAF and US Air Force and US Navy along with assistance from the French and Royal Jordanian Air Force. Coordinating the number of moving pieces alone to make sure that no-one accidently shot down a friendly aircraft is quite something let alone intercepting the majority of the drones and cruise missiles before they reached Israel. US Navy and IDF force then had to engage 110 ballistic missiles and seemingly shot down all but five of them. This wasn't "easy" this was a staggering display of air defence capability that is probably unmatched in the modern era even allowing for some of the heroics that Ukraine has been pulling off in the last two years.

I am completely certain that Iran expected their attack to inflict significant damage on IDF installations and are now scrambling to recover having had their effort so utterly thwarted. What happened last weekend was a tour de force in air defence and there are very few countries who could have managed similar.

Now they seem to be down playing Israel's response, I am hoping this is a tactic to excuse themselves out of a counter retaliation.

I wouldn't blame them! Israel and allies just demonstrated that Iran's offensive capabilities against Israel are, likely, quite limited. So if they feel they have to retaliate again for domestic political reasons they'll struggle to do so which clearly has internal security implications. It would be fascinating also to know what means Israel used and how much of the attack was intercepted by Iranian air defences. If the answer to the last question is "not much" all the more reason to try and find a way to back down from a fight. With Israel able to maul any long range attacks you make and able to penetrate your air defences with comparative ease that isn't an ideal situation in which to escalate tit for tat exchanges...

 

[Silenos]

I honestly thought Israel would have launched a massive attack against Irans nuclear facilities - I thought they had been itching to do that for a while.

We don’t, however, know if this is intended to be all of Israel’s response. It would, for example, be possible for the Israelis to wait for a bit to lull the Iranians into a false sense of security and then launch a massive assault.

With Israel able to maul any long range attacks you make and able to penetrate your air defences with comparative ease that isn't an ideal situation in which to escalate tit for tat exchanges...

That must open new possibilities up for Israeli military planners. Given Netanyahu’s long-expressed view that Iran is the real enemy, it must make the idea of a large scale assault on Iranian nuclear and military facilities much more attractive

 

[ainsworth74]

That must open new possibilities up for Israeli military planners. Given Netanyahu’s long-expressed view that Iran is the real enemy, it must make the idea of a large scale assault on Iranian nuclear and military facilities much more attractive

That would very much depend on just how Israel carried out this attack. I've heard some suggestion it might have been via drones launched from within Iran which is a troubling development for Iran as it suggests a significant Isreal intelligence/special forces penetration of their interior security but equally isn't the stuff from which a massive aerial assault on key military/strategic facilities is made.

A long range air strike ala the destruction of the unfinished Osirak nuclear reactor south of Baghdad would be far harder to pull off and it would likely require an air strike of some magnitude to ensure destruction of the various Iranian nuclear facilities. For one thing there isn't anything really in the Israeli inventory with the un-refuelled range, even using drop-tanks, to reach those targets and get back to Isreal afterwards. The US providing tanker assistance seems unlikely as does any of the useful Arab states like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Qatar, Bahrain or the UAE allowing the Israelis to forward base in their territory. They do have their own small tanker fleet but that requires spending time quite obviously loitering over the aforementioned Arab states who are unlikely to be very happy with that state of affairs. The Israelis do have ballistic missiles but those with the range to strike throughout Iran are part of their nuclear deterrent and the others that might not be nuclear tipped can only hit part of Iran not the whole country and therefore not necessarily all the relevant installations.

So whilst it gives the Iranian's a headache if Isreal can strike without facing much resistance from Iranian air defence and gives heart to Israeli planners their ability to launch a large scale assault on Iranian nuclear facilities is perhaps still somewhat limited. Certainly not ruling anything out but I'm not sure we're about to see the skies of Tehran darkend by Israeli missiles and aircraft either!

 

[brad465]

The Olympic's opening ceremony will be fun: in alphabetical order you have the following: Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel. Ireland are essentially a UN buffer zone, or a row of stewards separating different football fans in a stadium.

 

[JamesT]

The Olympic's opening ceremony will be fun: in alphabetical order you have the following: Iran, Iraq, Ireland, Israel. Ireland are essentially a UN buffer zone, or a row of stewards separating different football fans in a stadium.

Thankfully I believe that’s still the case in French too.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

We don’t, however, know if this is intended to be all of Israel’s response. It would, for example, be possible for the Israelis to wait for a bit to lull the Iranians into a false sense of security and then launch a massive assault.

Israel doesn't want to peeve of its new found support so a limited response while it cracks on with destroying Hamas despite the collateral damage to Gaza residents