Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

Latest from Reuters:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denied on Thursday a report that he had spoken the previous day with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump about Gaza ceasefire talks.

"Contrary to media reports, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not speak yesterday with former President Donald Trump," a statement from Netanyahu's office said.”
 
Latest from Reuters:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu denied on Thursday a report that he had spoken the previous day with Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump about Gaza ceasefire talks.

"Contrary to media reports, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu did not speak yesterday with former President Donald Trump," a statement from Netanyahu's office said.”
I want to give these honourable and honest leaders the benefit of the doubt
 
MME:

“Israel has failed to eliminate Hamas or destroy its tunnels in Gaza and has nothing more to achieve military in the strip, senior US officials reportedly told the New York Times.

The latest American assessment is that Israel's military campaign has reached the end of the line and that the possibility of weakening Hamas further has diminished.

Continued bombings would only increase risks to civilians, the unnamed officials said.

According to the report, a growing number of national security officials believe Israel would never be able to completely eliminate Hamas despite severely damaging its capabilities in the fighting.

Current and former American and Israeli officials told NYT that returning the roughly 115 captives cannot be achieved militarily.

And while Israel has tried to damage Hamas' tunnels, it has failed to destroy them, American officials added.

The tunnel network has proved "much larger than Israel anticipated" and remains "an effective way for Hamas to hide its leaders and move around fighters," the report said.”

Fucking quelle surprise.
 
MME:

“Israel has failed to eliminate Hamas or destroy its tunnels in Gaza and has nothing more to achieve military in the strip, senior US officials reportedly told the New York Times.

The latest American assessment is that Israel's military campaign has reached the end of the line and that the possibility of weakening Hamas further has diminished.

Continued bombings would only increase risks to civilians, the unnamed officials said.

According to the report, a growing number of national security officials believe Israel would never be able to completely eliminate Hamas despite severely damaging its capabilities in the fighting.

Current and former American and Israeli officials told NYT that returning the roughly 115 captives cannot be achieved militarily.

And while Israel has tried to damage Hamas' tunnels, it has failed to destroy them, American officials added.

The tunnel network has proved "much larger than Israel anticipated" and remains "an effective way for Hamas to hide its leaders and move around fighters," the report said.”

Fucking quelle surprise.
Indeed and given all that was obvious from the very start Israel's motivation remains what, genocidal murderous vengeance and nothing less.
 
Here's a question I've been meaning to ask. Most academic discussions of Zionism today are all "settler colonial this, settler colonial that". Has anyone looked at the influence of late 19th/early 20th century central/Eastern Euro nationalism on zionist thought? Especially the idea that returning to your ethnic homeland is the highest ideal.
 
I've seen horrifying shit I never imagined I would see albeit in TV, monstrous crimes beyond my worst nightmares, body parts and dead civilians and children strewn everywhere. Enough.

As in 1945 a denazification program and regime change must be enacted: Denazification - Wikipedia

 
A very interesting long read. A take on the current Israeli society's political view on the war, through the prism of a former Jewish IDF veteran now historian.

Interestingly, he is now calling Israeli policy towards Gaza as genocide and makes direct comparison with the political environment in Israel now with Germany in the 30s-40s.

As a former IDF soldier and historian of genocide, I was deeply disturbed by my recent visit to Israel
Came here to post this.

It's genocide.
 
Saw a social media post about this, it said it's been reported on Sky News and Al Jazeera but when I searched all I could find was a couple of links to sites I've never seen before. Good day to bury bad news for the government? Man with a conscience anyway. Going to look embarrassing for the government:


E2A Yahoo News link with a bit more info:

 
Last edited:
Here's a question I've been meaning to ask. Most academic discussions of Zionism today are all "settler colonial this, settler colonial that". Has anyone looked at the influence of late 19th/early 20th century central/Eastern Euro nationalism on zionist thought? Especially the idea that returning to your ethnic homeland is the highest ideal.

Tony Judt,, the historian, wrote famous article ( which I cannot find yet that is not behind a paywall) where he says Zionism is part of 19c growth in ideas of nationalism and is past its sell by date. It's now an anachronism. He moved from supporting Zionism to supporting some kind of bi national or one state solution. He got a lot of criticism for his article.
 
Here's a question I've been meaning to ask. Most academic discussions of Zionism today are all "settler colonial this, settler colonial that". Has anyone looked at the influence of late 19th/early 20th century central/Eastern Euro nationalism on zionist thought? Especially the idea that returning to your ethnic homeland is the highest ideal.

Found this by Tony Judt.

Not read all of this article by him yet. Here is passage on nationalism. Tony Judt was a historian specialising in modern Europe

In revealing respects, Israel today resembles the small nationalist state that emerged in Eastern Europe after the end of the Russian Empire. Had Israel–like Romania or Poland or Czechoslovakia–been established in 1918 rather than 1948, it would have closely tracked the small, vulnerable, resentful, irredentist, insecure, ethnically exclusivist states to which World War I had given birth. But Israel did not come into being until after the Second World War. As a consequence, it stands out for its slightly paranoid national political culture and has become unhealthily dependent upon the Holocaust–its moral crutch and weapon of choice with which to fend off all criticism…


To add read it now. Interesting short piece. As with a lot of Jews outside Israel of his age he visited Israel on many occasions. It was after volunteering to come and support Israel in 67 war that he started to have doubts. Section in beginning of his experience in 67 war.

What he came across in 67 was a nationalist Jewish political culture that was anti Arab. Not the Kibbutz socialism he had assumed Israel was about. As he says Zionism came out of the nationalism of central Europe. With all its flaws. And its out of date ideology now.
 
Last edited:

And his work I would say also has similarities with Tony Judt critique. Its not just some kind of crass comparison with Nazis but roots it in rise of nationalism in modern Europe,

Talking about the research he did of his mothers home town in Ukraine he says this:
Buchach in Poland (now Ukraine) – from a community of inter-ethnic coexistence into one in which, under the Nazi occupation, the gentile population turned against their Jewish neighbours. While the Germans came to the town with the express goal of murdering its Jews, the speed and efficiency of the killing was greatly facilitated by local collaboration. These locals were motivated by pre-existing resentments and hatreds that can be traced back to the rise of ethnonationalism in the preceding decades, and the prevalent view that the Jews did not belong to the new nation states created after the first world war

Ethno nationalism meant minorities in Eastern Europe who had lived side by side with others were regarded as not really part of the nation.

The critique is that this aspect of nation state building is in Israel still active.

It of course can be justification. As Jews were not fully accepted Europe. So Zionism was response to this.
 
Last edited:
Here's a question I've been meaning to ask. Most academic discussions of Zionism today are all "settler colonial this, settler colonial that". Has anyone looked at the influence of late 19th/early 20th century central/Eastern Euro nationalism on zionist thought? Especially the idea that returning to your ethnic homeland is the highest ideal.

Settler colonialism and nationalism aren't necessarily separate. Zionism started at time when colonialism was not a dirty word.
 
What makes me so Angry is that its completely Blatant. Biden putting out that BS about being closer than ever to a deal knowing full well that Israel is intent on scuppering it.
Netanyahu has no problem with murdering Innocents for the sole purpose of creating enough Hatred to prolong war, In fact that has been the Zionist MO for decades poke the hornets nest make them come after us so we can kill some more of them and call it self defence.
 
Watching Al Jazeera commentators few nights ago and they agreed Iran and Hezbollah are holding off any retaliation until they see what happens at these talks.

So Netanyahu obstructing them again does not bode well.

They also said Biden really needs a ceasefire now as Democrats in US will be holding a big meeting in run up to presidential elections soon.

The commentators said that Biden will have to say that Netanyahu is the one obstructing deal if these talks get no where.

The Democrat base is more pro Palestinian now than the leadership. If no ceasefire deal now it's likely the democrats base will be out there demonstrating about Biden not doing enough.

Ie that Democrat party will appear as split in run up to election
 
I did, and if I suspected for a moment that ID47 would offer the quality of experience, learning and insight on the matter that omer bartov brings to bear in that excellent article my response to their posts would definitely be different.
I agree that Omer's writing was really well considered and obviously backed up by a mass of experience, but getting arsey on a poster for making one of the same points albeit in very simplistic terms which you basically admit as the reason for your differing attitudes just shows a marked lack of objectivity and illustrates well the propensity for the small but loud rightous crew in here to play the man and not the ball.
 
Back
Top Bottom