Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

Fucking hell. But as this is kicking off protests in tel Aviv, this may end up being a relatively "good thing" if public pressure on the government to stop the killing steps up
Was reading the West Bank are surging in support for Hamas and rumours are another uprising is in the offering. Think BN has spectacularly miscalculated this one...
 
Is that really true? Was the UK an unsafe place for Jews after WW2? Were Italy or France or Belgium or the Netherlands unsafe places for Jews after WW2? Lots of people left, but lots of people didn't leave. Lots of people returned. Primo Levi returned to Italy from Auschwitz. Jean Amery moved to Belgium. They weren't unsafe there.
You've heard of the 43 group, I expect. Have you ever read about them tho? They didn't start fighting fascists for the lols you know
 
On the Holocaust and Israel.

Thing is a lot of people went to Israel years after the Holocaust.

The present Ambassador to UK is one of those whose parents were ex USSR ( Georgia). These people were not under threat of extermination by Nazis

With the collapse of USSR Israel took in a lot of ex USSR Jews. Whilst no space for Palestinians.

As a matter of history if one was Jewish in Eastern Europe in WW2 best chance of survival was being in Red Army or USSR controlled area.

As Arno Mayer argues in his book on Holocaust


Whilst a brutal regime it was not about exterminating Jews.

Whilst Holocaust can possibly be used to justify what happened in past I do not think its credible argument now. Nor has been for decades. Particularly the events of 67 and the continued occupation of West Bank and now Gaza.

Even at the time. Tom Segev- one of the New Historians- pointed out when he was growing up in Israel the Holocaust was not central to Israel State. That came later.

That came with the Eichmann trial. His where about had been known for some time.

Trial rather than assassination was done by David Ben Gurion for internal Israeli reasons.



David Ben-Gurion, who ordered Eichmann's capture, was not interested in the man himself; he could have ordered his assassination in Buenos Aires. The prime minister was interested in a trial. At the time, Israeli society was still having trouble coalescing, and Ben-Gurion needed the trial as a sort of excuse - to rebuff allegations regarding the rescue fiascos during the Holocaust, and mainly to justify forging relations with Germany. The trial was also intended to provide answers to a series of difficult questions that accompanied the memory of the Shoah, and to formulate an authorized and binding Zionist version of the lessons to be learned from it
 
  • Like
Reactions: PTK
On the shooting hostages / anyone who looks a bit funny stories being reported, I wonder what trigger discipline is like in the IDF, isn’t it largely a conscript force?

Thinking about how big organisations behave, prioritising their own reputational survival, one can easily imagine that junior officers sweeping under the carpet all but the most blatant and excessive uses of force be commonplace, with the tacit approval of the top brass.
 
On the shooting hostages / anyone who looks a bit funny stories being reported, I wonder what trigger discipline is like in the IDF, isn’t it largely a conscript force?

Thinking about how big organisations behave, prioritising their own reputational survival, one can easily imagine that junior officers sweeping under the carpet all but the most blatant and excessive uses of force be commonplace, with the tacit approval of the top brass.
The phrase "sterile area" used by the IDF reminds me of the "free fire zones" of the USA in Vietnam.
 
On the shooting hostages / anyone who looks a bit funny stories being reported, I wonder what trigger discipline is like in the IDF, isn’t it largely a conscript force?

Thinking about how big organisations behave, prioritising their own reputational survival, one can easily imagine that junior officers sweeping under the carpet all but the most blatant and excessive uses of force be commonplace, with the tacit approval of the top brass.

Look at the way the Israeli forces behave in the west bank. They obviously are allowed to behave pretty lawlessly; only occasionally is there some hint of an investigation when caught on camera. Maybe there will be more of a need for answers/justice here because ultimately it was Israelis killed rather than Palestinians.

More from the west bank...

 
Look at the way the Israeli forces behave in the west bank. They obviously are allowed to behave pretty lawlessly; only occasionally is there some hint of an investigation when caught on camera. Maybe there will be more of a need for answers/justice here because ultimately it was Israelis killed rather than Palestinians.

More from the west bank...


Here is link to poll findings mentioned in the Guardian article:


Haven't looked at all of it. Took place during the recent ceasefire.

Those interviewed were from West Bank and Gaza

Support for armed struggle/ Support for attack on Israel/ Little support for Abbas and PA/ support for armed struggle against settlers in West Bank/ little criticism of Hamas actions on the October attack.

Hamas are not losing support due to the overwhelming force used in Gaza by IDF. The opposite is the case. So this aspect of the "Dahiya doctrine" of IDF/ Israeli government is not working. That is punishing the civilian population to reduce support for armed groups. Looks to me the opposite is the case.

Also little support for PA taking over in Gaza or Arab force.

Though polling does not say that support for Hamas per se is up. It has its supporters but not all support it in "peacetime" ( peacetime as compared with now). But it is because it is taking on the occupiers- Israel state- that it is getting more support now.

Here is the findings of what Palestinians thought of attack on the 7th October. Support from West Bank and Gaza.

Hamas’ decision to launch the October the 7th offensive:We asked respondents to speculate about Hamas’ reasons for waging its October the 7th offensive: a response to attacks on al Aqsa and to release prisoners as Hamas claimed or an Iranian plot to thwart Arab normalization with Israel. The overwhelming majority (81%; 89% in the West Bank and 69% in the Gaza Strip) said it was a “response to settler attacks on Al-Aqsa Mosque and on Palestinian citizens and for the release of prisoners from Israeli prisons;” while only 14% (5% in the West Bank and 27% in the Gaza Strip) thought it was an Iranian plot.
  • We asked the respondents what they thought of Hamas’ decision to launch the October the 7th offensive given its outcome so far, a vast majority (72%; 82% in the West Bank and 57% in the Gaza Strip) said it was a correct decision and 22% (12% in the West Bank and 37% in the Gaza Strip) said it was incorrect.
Some of this surprised me. Depth of support for attack on Israel and estimation of Hamas increased for waging armed struggle.
 
Last edited:
Looking more at the recent poll.

This was done face to face ( which given the circumstances shows bravery from those doing the poll). In peoples homes/ at camps for people bombed out of homes. Only bit they could not access safely was very north of Gaza. So as best they were able this is representative cross section.

On Hamas attack.

Their was question on war and international law. Most replied that attacking civilians was wrong. However most either were not aware of allegations against Hamas / had not seen footage/ did not think Hamas had committed atrocities.

Whether this was due to lack of information Im not sure. But those polled did believe international rules of war should be followed.

US, UK and other Western powers have little credibility for making Israel keep to international law on war.

There is support for a two state solution. But a lot do not believe US and others when they say it.

If elections took place tomorrow in West Bank/ Gaza Hamas would win.

Abbas is totally discredited figure. A liability for any hope of Fatah in elections. Most thought he should go.

However for President its a complicated picture.

If the imprisoned Marwan Barghouti stood he would get elected. Highly popular figure with all sides. Not an Islamist. Was in Fatah but left.


Hamas would likely win if he did not stand.

I get the impression from previous reading and this poll that when Hamas do what Fatah should be doing and resist the occupation they get support. Rather than the religious side of it.

However, if new parliamentary elections were held today with the participation of all political forces that participated in the 2006 elections, only 69% say they would participate in them, and among these participants, Fateh receives 19%, Hamas' Change and Reform 51%, all other lists combined 4%, and 25% say they have not yet decided whom they will vote for.
If the presidential competition is between three, Marwan Barghouti, Abbas, and Haniyeh, participation would rise to 71% and among those voting, Barghouti receives 47%, Haniyeh 43%, and Abbas 7%. Three months ago, support for Barghouti stood at 49% and Haniyeh at 36%, and Abbas at 13%.

Haniyeh is Hamas candidate.

So Fatah have a problem. No longer seen as sticking up for the Palestinian people.

If International community (US/ Biden) try to foist Abbas and his PA onto Gaza its not going to work. In West Bank he has no credibility as a leader any more.
 
Also what comes up in poll is how abandoned by not just West but other Arab countries leaders they feel. A few countries like Turkey get the thumbs up but not many.

No support for a post war peace keeping force of Arab states in Gaza for example.
 
Yes, a warm sunny country where you can be Jewish in peace and visit Jerusalem as often as you want. Its not hard to see the appeal.

I used to know someone from Usbekistan. They had a large Jewish population. Post USSR get the feeling it was that the demise of USSR was such a disaster that Jewish ex USSR went to Israel. It was not due to anti semitism. More due to that Israeli citizenship was available. She remembers them leaving.

My Usbek friend had a certain nostalgia for Soviet days. ( she was not Jewish). Life did not improve when USSR collapsed.
Between 1989 and 2021, around ninety percent of Uzbekistan's Jewish population left Uzbekistan and moved to other countries, mostly to Israel.[9]

 
I see they're bombing Rafah now.

"Safe."

French foreign ministry staffer killed. So France are now calling for a ceasefire. Even Cameron has hardened the language to "a sustainable ceasefire" - pretty please.

Maybe they'll all have a game of footie on Christmas Day eh? Once they've found a hectare or two that hasn't had the shit bombed out of it.
 
I used to know someone from Usbekistan. They had a large Jewish population. Post USSR get the feeling it was that the demise of USSR was such a disaster that Jewish ex USSR went to Israel. It was not due to anti semitism. More due to that Israeli citizenship was available. She remembers them leaving.

My Usbek friend had a certain nostalgia for Soviet days. ( she was not Jewish). Life did not improve when USSR collapsed.



When I was there I was hearing about a massive influx of ex-soviets (Russians, Belarussians, Uzbeks, Ukrainians etc) since 1990 or so. In downtown Haifa where my other half's family lived (and still live), Russian was very common to hear, lots of signs in Cyrillic script and Russian newspapers and magazines seemed everywhere.

I also heard a lot of those people were quite islamophobic and anti-arab. I was hearing that from native-born Israelis so can't discount it being it's own kind of anti-immigrant prejudice - but if that were true then those people will have raised kids by now and who knows what their attitudes are? Maybe this is part of the Israel we're seeing now, a generation after all those Russians etc settled in.

The Shoah is definitely a strong part of Israel's National Story though, not surprisingly. However I think because of that it's entered the consciousness of Israelis who never actually had / whose families never actually had a personal connection to those events. Yad Vashem being in Jerusalem (as important as the existence of such a place is), and the fact that every Israeli child gets taken there on multiple school trips, has contributed to this IMO.
 
I see they're bombing Rafah now.

"Safe."

French foreign ministry staffer killed. So France are now calling for a ceasefire. Even Cameron has hardened the language to "a sustainable ceasefire" - pretty please.

Maybe they'll all have a game of footie on Christmas Day eh? Once they've found a hectare or two that hasn't had the shit bombed out of it.
" sustainable ceasefire"? Sounds like something that nobody can disagree with -and yet less than a week ago the UK went out on a limb with the US in not calling for a ceasefire ?Are they all over the place?
 
A new investigation by +972 Magazine and Local Call suggests that, since the beginning of the Gaza war, the Israeli leadership has relegated the goal of ensuring the hostages’ safety in favor of larger military and political goals in the occupied territory — a fact that has not only stoked anger and discontent from hostages’ families, but seems to have been pursued despite concerns from soldiers, especially during the first few weeks of the operation. Intelligence sources who spoke to +972 and Local Call on the condition of anonymity, before the shooting of the three abductees on Friday, affirmed that during the initial stages of the war, the Israeli army’s intense bombardment of Gaza was conducted without having a clear picture of where many of the more than 240 hostages were being held.
Noam Dan, three of whose relatives were kidnapped on October 7 — and two of whom have since been freed — told +972 and Local Call that as soon as the first captives were released, the families discovered that much of what Israeli politicians had told them about the hostages’ whereabouts was untrue. “At first, government officials made it clear to us that the hostages were in tunnels, and therefore the army’s bombings won’t hit them,” she said. “When the hostages were released, we realized that many of them were above ground, in people’s homes. The government kept telling us that they knew where they were, that they wouldn’t do anything that would endanger them, that everything was under control. But once the abductees got out of there, these things turned out to be false. Everything we thought [was true] collapsed.”
 
Was looking up Tom Segev. As remember him being interviewed and saying when he grew up in Israel the Holocaust wasn't the big thing it is now for Israelis.

When he grew up the history he was taught was that the creation of Israel was a national liberation war against British imperialism. Taught to hate the British.

Later as one of the New Historians saw a much more complex picture of the Mandate. His book on the Mandate One Palestine Complete was recommended to me by a Palestinian.

He is in his own words a Journalistic Historian. I've read One Complete Palestine and it's packed with details and stories of individuals in Palestine. His fascination with it was that it was time when Jews and Arabs lived side by side. Even if not always harmoniously. He brings the period alive. If at times the details push out analysis.

As with other New Historians his work went against the official narrative. Ilan Pappe was another. For Israelis at the time what he and others were writing was controversial. Breaking down the myths of nation building they were taught.

He has different take than Pappe. Being more interested in complexities if the individuals involved.

His take on British was that their wanting the Mandate was not rational power Imperialism politics. That even within the Imperial British their were those who said Palestine was not worth the aggravation.

He says the British were neither pro Arab nor pro Jew. But they were pro British. Which actually some of them said after serving in Palestine.The British on the ground caught between Jews and Arabs.

Unlike Pappe I wouldn't say he was ideological anti Zionist. As Israeli he says he is not post Zionist either.

On Holocaust this is what he says re Israel,

After the war, a great silence surrounded the destruction of the Jews," the author writes, a statement that seems far-fetched and much too broad. But, he continues: "Then came moral and political conflicts, including the painful debate over relations with Germany, which slowly brought the Israelis to recognize the deeper meaning of the Holocaust. The trial of Adolf Eichmann served as therapy for the nation, starting a process of identification with the tragedy of the victims and survivors, a process that continues to this day."


From what I remember him saying of his childhood the Holocaust survivors did not fit the model of heroic workers fighting for and building a new society.

Holocaust also led to David Ben Gurion having to look to Jews of middle east to build new state. Not European Jews. Who had been decimated by Holocaust.

His interview summarising his historical work.


His work is Israeli take on it's history that I'd say is even handed.
 
Perhaps there are parallels there with the UK and the way that Remembrance (Capital R) has changed here over the decades. From something relatively low-key, commemorating events that were within living memory of many people, with poppies sold on the streets by veterans of the world wars, into something that fetishises those and other wars, in which poppy-wearing is seemingly compulsory on TV, on football shirts, etc, big fuck-off poppies in train stations and the rest of it. Remembrance that is now weaponised, ironically enough, to represent a particular form of patriotism and coopted to explicitly support the UK's more recent and ongoing history of militarism.

As the Holocaust fades from living memory, it is clearly being weaponised by the likes of Netanyahu. It has definitely been coopted to support Israel's ongoing militarism.
 
.
Is that really true? Was the UK an unsafe place for Jews after WW2? Were Italy or France or Belgium or the Netherlands unsafe places for Jews after WW2? Lots of people left, but lots of people didn't leave. Lots of people returned. Primo Levi returned to Italy from Auschwitz. Jean Amery moved to Belgium. They weren't unsafe there.

French, Dutch, Italian and Belgian government employees under the Nazis or collaborating regimes sent their Jewish co-citizens to the camps in their hundreds of thousands and went back to more conventional work after the War. Maurice Papon was a French Civil Servant, who in 1943, organised the deportation of 1,600 Jews from Bordeaux including children under 13; by 1961 he had become Paris police chief and oversaw a pogrom in which hundreds of Algerians and other Arabs were murdered with many of their corpses dumped in the Seine. In 1981 he was made Minister of the Budget by President Giscard D' Estang; in 1998 he was convicted for war crimes; and in 2002 he was released because of his ill health.

Would you feel safe with a murderous cunt like that being left in a position of authority?

In 1994 I spent five months living in a Polish city called Kielce. A place infamous for having the last Pogrom in Europe. Around fifty Kielcan Jews who had returned from the camps were slaughtered after rumours were spread that they had sacrificed a Christian child. Even in the 1990s there were plenty of antiSemitic comments.

 
On the poll.

Just been watching Owen Jones interview Professor Paul Rogers on his channel.

Its very good but had to turn it off as my blood pressure is rising again, Not that Owen Jones and Rogers are wrong. Its the injustice of it all and lack of support from West.

Reminded me of one of the poll findings Ive posted up this thread.

Support for armed struggle rises ten percentage points compared to three months ago, with more than 60% saying it is the best means of ending the Israeli occupation; in the West Bank, the percentage rises further to close to 70%. Moreover, a majority in the West Bank believes that the formation of armed groups in communities subject to settler attacks is the most effective means of combating settler terrorism against towns and villages in the West Bank.

For years the settlers have had it coming for them. They have been terrorising unarmed Palestinian farmers for years. Supported by Israeli governments since 67.

These are illegal settlements.

If a two state solution is what is going to happen then they have to go.

If international community wanted to help the Palestinians to resist this , as they do for Ukrainians , they would supply Palestinians with the weapons to do the job.

Palestinians want to take on a hard right racist government who are killing them and pushing them off their land. Do they like the Ukrainians not deserve support?
 
Some common sense from Ben Wallace, writing in the Telegraph, with comparisons between Northern Ireland and this situation.

But I also believe strongly in our obligations under the Geneva Conventions and expect all signatories to uphold them. Going after Hamas is legitimate; obliterating vast swathes of Gaza is not. Using proportionate force is legal, but collective punishment and forced movement of civilians is not.

We are entering a dangerous period now where Israel’s original legal authority of self-defence is being undermined by its own actions. It is making the mistake of losing its moral authority alongside its legal one.

I am sure that the shame Benjamin Netanyahu feels for not foreseeing the October 7 attacks is deep, especially for someone who presented himself as a security hawk and tough guy. But perhaps that shame is driving him to lose sight of the long term.

Netanyahu’s mistake was to miss the attack in the first place. But if he thinks a killing rage will rectify matters, then he is very wrong. His methods will not solve this problem. In fact, I believe his tactics will fuel the conflict for another 50 years. His actions are radicalising Muslim youth across the globe.

When all this is over, and the IDF withdraws from what is left of Gaza, there will still be Hamas. All the action will have achieved is the extinction, not of the extremists, but the voice of the moderate Palestinians who do want a two-state solution.

International sympathy will have expired and Israel will be forced to exist in an even greater state of siege.

Worth reading in full TBH, archive link -

Netanyahu’s tactics are weakening Israel

Hamas’s jihadist ideology must be defeated – but Israel’s methods will only boost that hate-filled creed
 
Back
Top Bottom