Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hamas/Israel conflict: news and discussion

The last example of Israel not heeding signs of attack is the Yom Kippur war in 1973.

This took the Egyptian army months of planning and training.

Israelis dismissed signs of possible attack and were caught by surprise. Egyptian forces had to cross Suez canal to attack. It took a lot of planning. Somehow Egyptians managed to do all this and Israel didn't read the signs.

I think it's not just about warning it's about wanting to read situation correctly.

Some of it is that back in 73 Israel didn't think Egypt was capable of this. They had beaten Arab armies in 67 and thought Arabs were basically rubbish at fighting.

I think same with Hamas. The Israeli governments thought that the normalisation process was going fine and Palestinians were being forgotten about.

The occasional cutting of the grass as it's put of Gaza would be necessary. But the situation was containable.

West Bank was gradually being defacto annexed.

So it was serious blunder. Under estimating of the enemy. Hubris

But looking at whole history of conflict and Palestinians whilst losing are never quite beaten.

The difference with 1973 is that then it was possible to understand how the military and government could have misread the signs that an attack was imminent. Israeli intelligence was much less capable, there was much less exploitable technology and the Arab states had better support than they’d ever had before.

The 2023 attack on the other hand is very difficult to believe as a sudden failure of intelligence.
 
The difference with 1973 is that then it was possible to understand how the military and government could have misread the signs that an attack was imminent. Israeli intelligence was much less capable, there was much less exploitable technology and the Arab states had better support than they’d ever had before.

The 2023 attack on the other hand is very difficult to believe as a sudden failure of intelligence.
That's because it wasn't a sudden failure but the culmination of lots of failures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tim
Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu urges removal of UN peacekeepers from Lebanon, claiming they are 'hostages of Hezbollah'



IDf " we are attacking UN peace keepers to keep them safe".. removing witness from there actions more than likely
Indeed. The Irish (possibly others) who are there have made it pretty damn clear they aren't going anywhere. The only ones attempting to be corecive in this are the Israelis.

They've invaded a soverign nation, are targetting UN peacekeepers (are they allowed to fire back in self defence?), and are clearly targetting civillians and we are still being expected to believe that continuing to support and arm them is justified or morally acceptable.
 
Dßà
Indeed. The Irish (possibly others) who are there have made it pretty damn clear they aren't going anywhere. The only ones attempting to be corecive in this are the Israelis.

They've invaded a soverign nation, are targetting UN peacekeepers (are they allowed to fire back in self defence?), and are clearly targetting civillians and we are still being expected to believe that continuing to support and arm them is justified or morally acceptable.
You might think that the UN Security Council would be organising an extraordinary meeting to discuss this development as a matter of urgency.
 
Indeed. The Irish (possibly others) who are there have made it pretty damn clear they aren't going anywhere. The only ones attempting to be corecive in this are the Israelis.

They've invaded a soverign nation, are targetting UN peacekeepers (are they allowed to fire back in self defence?), and are clearly targetting civillians and we are still being expected to believe that continuing to support and arm them is justified or morally acceptable.

hmm the un peace keepers can fight back in self defence or to defend their mandate but the UN firing on the IDF would be some extraordinary..
and they don't have the fire power to do it effectively
 
.




The war of 1973 led to the Egyptians regaining control of Sinai. What did the Pogrom of 7 October last year acheive? Gaza has been devestated; 42,000 Palestinians are dead, Southern Lebanon faces catastrophe, the Hamas leadership aren't safe if thety leave Qatar - they even get blown up when in VIP accommodation in Tehran. Where was the rationality in the attack?

I didn't say anything about Hamas in the post your quoting.

So not sure what point your making.

Or why your putting two separate posts of mine together. As though your quoting one post.
 
Clause IV Part 3 of Chapter 1 of the Labour Party Rule Book states that Labour is committed to co-operating in the United Nations and other international bodies to secure peace.

“Labour is committed to the defence and security of the British people and to co-operating in European institutions, the United Nations, the Commonwealth and other international bodies to secure peace, freedom, democracy, economic security and environmental protection for all.”

Yet neither Lammy nor Starmer are condemning the attack on the UN forces in Lebanon, and asking for the Security Council to be convened to discuss this.
 
So what was the Balfour declaration about?

Why did British help to get it actually written into the Mandate?

Like many things that happened during WW1, the reasons for the Balfour declaration are complex.

It's worth recalling that in 1905 Balfour as PM had helped pushed through the Aliens act, and was vocal in his opposition to the increasing Jewish immigration to Britain because of pogroms in Russia. He met Chaim Weizman around this time, and over the next few years he cultivated zionist contacts, including Herbert Samuel, and importantly Edmond de Rothschild, and he took a great interest in zionism (IMO because he believed if jews could go to Palestine it'd mean they wouldn't need to come to Britain).

As foreign secretary under Lloyd George, Balfour met with Weizman again in 1916/17 to discuss Palestine, and possible Jewish support there (recall it was WW1). The declaration is said to have been made in part to secure jews in Palestine as an ally against the Ottoman empire, and jews everywhere as an ally in the war (many jews were sympathetic to Germany at the time, Germany or the states that pre-existed it had always been something of a heartland for european jews, so unlike in ww2 jewish support for the allies in ww1 wasn't certain)

Anyway the declaration is pretty vague when you really look at it ... view with favour ... in Palestine (so could be as small as one valley or one city) a (not the) Jewish home (not homeland). However, when in the light of this document there was naturally pushback from the Palestine Arab Congress and the nascent Arab nationalist movement, the British found themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. Increasing violence from both arabs and jews on each other and the british overseers finally led to britain limiting Jewish immigration, but by that point WW2 was on the horizon, the nazis were deep into their antisemitism terror, and Britain had other concerns anyway.
 
Like many things that happened during WW1, the reasons for the Balfour declaration are complex.

It's worth recalling that in 1905 Balfour as PM had helped pushed through the Aliens act, and was vocal in his opposition to the increasing Jewish immigration to Britain because of pogroms in Russia. He met Chaim Weizman around this time, and over the next few years he cultivated zionist contacts, including Herbert Samuel, and importantly Edmond de Rothschild, and he took a great interest in zionism (IMO because he believed if jews could go to Palestine it'd mean they wouldn't need to come to Britain).

As foreign secretary under Lloyd George, Balfour met with Weizman again in 1916/17 to discuss Palestine, and possible Jewish support there (recall it was WW1). The declaration is said to have been made in part to secure jews in Palestine as an ally against the Ottoman empire, and jews everywhere as an ally in the war (many jews were sympathetic to Germany at the time, Germany or the states that pre-existed it had always been something of a heartland for european jews, so unlike in ww2 jewish support for the allies in ww1 wasn't certain)

Anyway the declaration is pretty vague when you really look at it ... view with favour ... in Palestine (so could be as small as one valley or one city) a (not the) Jewish home (not homeland). However, when in the light of this document there was naturally pushback from the Palestine Arab Congress and the nascent Arab nationalist movement, the British found themselves caught between a rock and a hard place. Increasing violence from both arabs and jews on each other and the british overseers finally led to britain limiting Jewish immigration, but by that point WW2 was on the horizon, the nazis were deep into their antisemitism terror, and Britain had other concerns anyway.

The other thing was British imperial interests.

Weissman had been trying to get support from one of the great powers of the time.

British empire had some interest in middle east in order to protect the route to India. The jewel in the crown of the Empire.

Having what one British official said would be a loyal little Ulster in Palestine would protect British imperial interests.

But in practice British empire oscillated between supporting Zionists and supporting Arabs. To the satisfaction of neither. And this was done for purely selfish motives of protecting Empire

Just finished James Barr A Line in the Sand. Worth a read as puts foundation of Israel in context of post WW1 Imperial rivalries in middle east ( France and British - at that time it wasn't an area of much interest to USA. )

His view is that Britain and France have a lot to answer for in laying basis for future conflicts in middle east. With their self interested imperial meddling. At that time they were not trying to fully take over area as in the scramble for Africa. But to carve it up as spheres of influence.

From conclusion of his book:
Britain’s sponsorship of the Jews in Palestine and France’s favouritism of the Christians in the Lebanon were policies designed to strengthen their respective positions in the region by eliciting gratitude from both minorities. The appreciation they generated by doing so was short-lived, but they deeply antagonised the predominantly Muslim Arab population of both countries, and the wider region, with irreversible effects.

. As Britain and France became increasingly unpopular, they were forced into oscillating alliances that only polarised Arab and Jew, Christian and Muslim further. The mandatories’ abrupt changes of policy under pressure, and their refusal to institute meaningful, representative government, made it clear to those they ruled that violence worked.

So the victorious Imperial powers instead of guiding people to independence as per the Mandates exploited latent divisions for their own ends.

The effects of which are seen to this day.

Lebanon and Palestine most relevant to the threads here

Id also say the British empire support for Zionism wasn't monolithic Even to late period. Which explains the oscillation between supporting Arabs and at other time Zionists.

For example when post war Labour government was elected Bevin became Foreign secretary. He really wasn't that enamoured by Zionism. Unlike say the later Harold Wilson. And his foreign office officials didn't see supporting Zionism as good for British hard headed interests abroad. So yes Balfour, Lloyd George and Churchill were pro Zionist. But not all establishment were. As they didn't see it furthering needs of the Empire.
 
Yes exactly. By about 1930 the British state's love affair with zionism was basically over as it became clear it wasn't a quick and easy solution to 'the jewish problem', and was in fact creating an 'arab problem'. And by the time ww2 was over and thousands of stateless, traumatised jews were heading for 'zion' (mainly because nowhere else would take them in and naturally enough they didnt want to (or couldn't) go back to where they came from) britain was desperately trying to stop mass immigration into Palestine. But it was too late by then.
 
Did nobody notice that Israel firebombed tents outside a hospital in Northern Gaza last night? There are some truly awful vids online which I won't be posting here. Spain and France have apparently called for a cessation of trade with Israel.

View attachment 446951

I think its a call by them (and Ireland, and some others) to suspend the EU-Israel free trade agreement which has human rights clauses, rather than cut them off entirely. That has to be done now, as you say the footage is genuinely horrific and some sources are claiming it was in relation to an influx of casualties from elsewhere.

The days when we were all told they didn't attack hospitals (after they attacked this hospital the second time) seems long ago now.
 
Sheer rage and impotence.

The Israelis know they can do what they like with impunity.

We can march and meet and share online and 'raise our voices' all we like, in safe Western capitals, they will keep doing this.

This is straightforward genocide and mass murder, a daily drumbeat of crimes against humanity, and nothing will be done about it other than a little tut-tutting from Washington and Brussels and very occasionally a diplomatic cable asking "Please don't do this sort of thing again" which will be ignored.

Only a couple of hundred UN peacekeeprs on the Lebanese border are showing what might be achieved with international diplomatic and military resistance. And I'm sure the stance of the Irish and other international peacekeeps- Ghanaianas, Poles, Italians, Belarusians, is being furiously worked against behind the scenes by those who could compel them to move.

Only a withdrawal of American and Western support will give Israel pause for thought- if not to stop. And calling for that support to be withdrawn is about as useful as calling for the reformation of Austria-Hungary. No one who has the power to do it is listening. In the case of the Americnas- actually sending the Israelis military equipment as we speak- quite the opposite.

Sickening and appalling footage which if you haven't seen, you're lucky- don't.
 
Last edited:
Just watched the Al Jazeera report on the hospital attack

Talking about up to 50 with severe burns.

Hospital hasn't resources to treat severe burns. Its also hasn't enough capacity to treat people properly. So doctor said trying to stabilise them. They need specialised treatment elsewhere.

There is footage of children on fire that was talked about but Al Jazeera didn't show it.

Footage they did show looked like the flames were so fierce and fire spread so quickly that people could not get near to fire to save people. One shot looked like someone on fire bystanders trying to reach but beaten back by flames.

Doctor said majority of victims are women and children.

These Palestinians were hoping they would be safer by a hospital.

Palestinians have had 75 years of this from Israel and that country still gets support.
 
Something that has just become a teeny bit more fiddly for me now they've disappeared from 235 on Freeview. (No I don't have freeplay and don't even know what it is).

They shifted to 251 but it's a streaming service and on my TV it's like going back to the late 90s and buffering.

So now I have to watch it on You Tube.
I wondered what was wrong, thought it was interference because I was trying to watch during a storm.
 
Israeli attacks on UN forces in Lebanon must stop – Britain, Italy, France and Germany say
Israeli attacks on the United Nations’ peacekeeping mission in Lebanon, known as UNIFIL, are contrary to international humanitarian law and must stop at once, Italy, Britain, France and Germany said, Reuters reports.

In a joint statement, the four nations reaffirmed “the essential stabilising role” played by UNIFIL in southern Lebanon, adding that Israel and other parties had to ensure the safety of the peacekeepers at all times.

The UNIFIL mission, which includes hundreds of European soldiers, has said it has repeatedly come under attack from the Israeli military in recent days. Israel has called on the UN to move troops out of the area as it targets Hezbollah forces.

Wasn't expecting this. From the Guardian
 

Back in February Spain and Ireland asked this. EU commission are dragging their feet on this.
“The European Commission must respond once and for all to the formal request made by two European countries to suspend the association agreement with Israel if it is found, as everything suggests, that human rights are being violated,” Sánchez told an event on Monday in Barcelona.
 
Last edited:
Testimony of Dr. Ali Tawil on the AlAqsa hospital massacre:


Dr. Ali Tawil
@alitawil92

#AlAqsaHospital "I Was There"I felt uncomfortable, as if my heart wanted to jump out of its place, as if something was going to happen. I don't know if it was just a passing feeling of something coming on the horizon or if it was an intuition we gained from this damned war."

In every shift I have, I cannot take my hand away from my heart for fear of the coming massacre."This is how your shift begins, laden with the worries and tragedies of the earth, you start it as if you are waging a fierce war against the cosmic current, striving with the size of the pain that resides within you to help your people, those who have been raped by the distorted memory of the land and the margins of fake history.

I started my shift fearing myself. I am the ghost of that person whom I forgot with the passing of days and months in this holocaust. After everything, I am one of this people who live the genocide with its details, stories, tragedies, madness, cruelty, brutality and tyranny. I always try to extract from the pain an imagination full of will and challenge so that I can storm the field of death mixed with life, where I sometimes succeed in saving a soul and living the pain of losing another.

On the virtual margin of our distorted memory, we try to write a line of humor with a colleague here or there, perhaps we can unite with the human nature that we deeply miss, perhaps we can steal a specter from the dark loneliness, perhaps we can regain a sparkle from the memory of violets, or we can catch a dream lost in the endless catacombs of death.

Then you turn to the clock to discover that its pendulum is spinning with the heaviness of someone suffering from depression, and the wall around it with its worn-out, dilapidated green color doubles the ecstasy of feeling depressed. Suddenly, a sound of an explosion uproots your heart from its place, followed by the sound of ringing in your ear, you try to touch your head and body and move your limbs to know that you are still alive, then you turn to check on those around you to see pale faces and eyes afflicted with astonishment and the tongue in a unified voice saying: "Where is it?", and everyone runs towards the nearest window or balcony overlooking the hospital yard in the hope that it will bring us the certain news. And it was ...

The scene was indescribable, much uglier than you can imagine, as if it were the resurrection. A yellow beam illuminating the darkness of the days, smoke rising from the flying flames, men wandering and screaming, women and children running, some seeking rescue, some trying to put out the fires, some fleeing in fear and panic, and another taking pictures that may not resemble the real picture we see here.

With all this hysteria, while you are scattered from inside facing this challenge, trying to save what can be saved in the shadow of this hell, you have to pour salt on your wounds to heal the wounds of others, you have to be the first and last line of confrontation to rearrange the barricades that were shattered by the zi0nist treachery machine, and you have to rearrange the lost identity in that face that was disfigured by the fires of darkness. After all that, you remain alone, living your tragedy with yourself without anyone hearing you, uniting with silence, and merging with the fragility of worn-out time, to say: “I was here one day, caressing the butterfly of memory, so will I be there tomorrow to relive our first dance and rearrange the story from the beginning?”

Dr. Ali Tawil
1728938096465.png

source
 
Last edited:
Sheer rage and impotence.

The Israelis know they can do what they like with impunity.

We can march and meet and share online and 'raise our voices' all we like, in safe Western capitals, they will keep doing this.

This is straightforward genocide and mass murder, a daily drumbeat of crimes against humanity, and nothing will be done about it other than a little tut-tutting from Washington and Brussels and very occasionally a diplomatic cable asking "Please don't do this sort of thing again" which will be ignored.

Only a couple of hundred UN peacekeeprs on the Lebanese border are showing what might be achieved with international diplomatic and military resistance. And I'm sure the stance of the Irish and other international peacekeeps- Ghanaianas, Poles, Italians, Belarusians, is being furiously worked against behind the scenes by those who could compel them to move.

Only a withdrawal of American and Western support will give Israel pause for thought- if not to stop. And calling for that support to be withdrawn is about as useful as calling for the reformation of Austria-Hungary. No one who has the power to do it is listening. In the case of the Americnas- actually sending the Israelis military equipment as we speak- quite the opposite.

Sickening and appalling footage which if you haven't seen, you're lucky- don't.

There are 379 Irish UNIFIL personnel in Lebanon.

And they're putting the entire UK military to shame. Not that our brave lads need much help in the shame department.
 
hmm the un peace keepers can fight back in self defence or to defend their mandate but the UN firing on the IDF would be some extraordinary..
and they don't have the fire power to do it effectively
Ultimately, UN peacekeeping missions are like a sticking plaster, not fit for purpose once a situation starts to deteriorate.

Their presence creates a temporary illusion of peace, and when things go south, when there's already a gaping wound they have no way of stemming further blood-flow.

It's not their remit and it's not within their capacity.

All they can do is bear witness. And Israel doesn't want them to be around to do that.

Canadian UN peacekeeper Romeo Dallaire wrote about what happened in Rwanda.

 

This incensed me.

It's Cameron doing his I really wanted to do something but couldn't line.

When he was in power he did FA except support Israel.

Now he's out of power he's telling public about all the things he wanted to do. But it was all so difficult.

Did this on austerity. He personally didn't want to have to do this and wanted to pursue his big society project.

The right wing Tories get a lot of stick. I think I prefer them to a sensible centrist Tory like Cameron.

The difference between the two is the centrist ones wring their hands about how they would like to do more. But end up not being that different to the right wing Tories.
 
Back
Top Bottom