Israel declares war on Hamas

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by blankall

So you take statement from Hamas at their word, but gravity doesn't exist and soldieres aren't capable of carrying full fuel cannisters? Not surprising.

Actually, I don't take anything from Hamas as being serious or at their word. They're lying pieces of ####. Having said that, I don't take anything from the Israelis as serious or at their word either because they have also proven to be lying pieces of ####. But nice try to spin anyone who corners you on your blind support of Israel, and has the audacity to point it out, as being a Hamas supporter. You and your little buddy have that in common.

I find it hilarious that you try to use that propaganda piece with the jerry cans as support for your twisted view on things, when someone who was a soldier and knows what is like to slug those things around made the exact same observation I did. Sucks that people cast a critical eye on what is portrayed ibn the media and question it all, especially when it punches holes in the propaganda you so freely lap up because of team sports.

But I thought you said no fuel was delivered? Why are they having a debate about fuel being delivered in the Israeli parliament if no fuel was delivered?

Never said no fuel was delivered. I questioned the blatant propaganda piece floated that "showed IDF forces putting their lives in danger to deliver fuel" in five gallon jerry cans, which were clearly empty or damn near empty with how they were carried. If the IDF had clear control of the hospital like YOU claim, why didn't they just drive a fuel truck up to the building and fill the holding tank the diesel generators would draw from to generate power? Such hard questions that you fail to ask as you suspend disbelief to swallow the propaganda being floated.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Can you point out where it says that the WHO closed Al Shifa? Because that’s what you said, and it seems like one of your links makes it very clear that Al Shifa is still open.

None of them indicate the hospital has “full resources,” so if you have a link for that feel free to share.



Why would I have evidence for a claim I never made? If you’d stop making up positions to argue against, you wouldn’t have to ask for evidence of it.

Since you’re at the point of providing links that contradict what you originally said, you could just say you made that up to.

The whole double-down on lying thing seems incredibly pointless for someone who finds the discussion as easy as you do.

Well Al Shifa isn't closed. They are in fact promoting Kidney Dialysis services. Kidney Dialysis is a process that takes many hours and something you could move to another location, if you absolutely had to under war-time circumstances. Kidney Dialysis machines are also very power intensive:

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/ene...re-2022-08-26/

Yet, Al Shifa Hospital, a hospital that can't stay open due to lack of fuel, is re-opening a wing specifically to provide dialysis services.

I, once again, just don't get this. Israel has probably dropped bombs on hundreds of apartment buildings. Surely, there must be an actual act of aggression you can all focus on.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by blankall

Well Al Shifa isn't closed. They are in fact promoting Kidney Dialysis services. Kidney Dialysis is a process that takes many hours and something you could move to another location, if you absolutely had to under war-time circumstances. Kidney Dialysis machines are also very power intensive:

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/ene...re-2022-08-26/

Yet, Al Shifa Hospital, a hospital that can't stay open due to lack of fuel, is re-opening a wing specifically to provide dialysis services.

I, once again, just don't get this. Israel has probably dropped bombs on hundreds of apartment buildings. Surely, there must be an actual act of aggression you can all focus on.

You’re the one who said WHO closed it.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by blankall

The Jewish people are an ethno-religious group that has roots in what is now Isarel. In fact, Jews practice many different religions that vary far more than, for example, Sunnis from #####es or Catholics from Protestants.

The Israelis also bought the land prior to 1948.



You'll notice this map of Jewish land ownership lines up very closely with the proposed border in 1948, with basically the addition of land in the Negev dessert, which is largely uninhabitable:



The idea that they just wedged a random Jewish country into an Arab one is a myth. The Jewish people already owned that land. The proposed borders weren't just random.

Do you know who does get countries? Countries that win wars, and more importantly countries that already exist. That's right Israel already exists.

And BTW the Sikhs are a very poor example. They too are largely an ethno-religious group based in the Punjab. They formerly had their own country. Large portion of Sikhs want their own country, and there's been largescale oppression of the Sikh people. And until this latest round of fighting in Gaza the insurgency in Punjab had claimed more lives than the Palestinian/Israeli conflict:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurg..._Punjab,_India

Ah, so owning small portions of the land means throwing out the indigenous population and bringing in European settlers was justified right?

[blankall]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Ah, so owning small portions of the land means throwing out the indigenous population and bringing in European settlers was justified right?

If you look at the maps, the original proposed borders almost match ownership exactly, with the exception being the Negev dessert, which even today is very sparsely populated and largely state land.

There was also no one being thrown out, until after the wars occurred in 1948, when both Jews and Arabs were forced to leave their homes.

I also disagree with your characterization of anyone who is Arab as indigenous and anyone who is Jewish as European.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Ah, so owning small portions of the land means throwing out the indigenous population and bringing in European settlers was justified right?

Were Arabs that migrated into the area within let’s say 100 years before the creation of Israel settlers too? Or is it just Jews that are settlers? Almost like this area of the Ottoman Empire had seen various levels of migration for hundreds of years, but Jews coming back to their ancestral homeland are settlers but not Arabs from Saudi Arabia? Lets just call it what it is, you don’t think Jews should be in the middle east because we are not brown or Muslim enough for you. The Europeans had the same rationale regarding Jews as well.

What happened to the Palestinians that stayed in Jewish held land? Thrown out? Or given Citizenship?

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Were Arabs that migrated into the area the 100 years before the creation of Israel settlers too? Or is it just Jews that are settlers? Almost like this area of the Ottoman Empire had seen various levels of migration for hundreds of years, but Jews coming back to their ancestral homeland are settlers but not Arabs from Saudi Arabia?

What happened to the Palestinians that stayed in Jewish held land? Thrown out? Or given Citizenship?

How many Arabs do you think came from other parts of the middle east over the last 100 years?

[afc wimbledon]

So how long does owning a bit of dirt mean your ancestors have perpetual rights to it then? as not a single Arab is alive that owned any of the land lost in '48 almost none that lost land in '67 either, their descendants claim to the land is no better or worse than the Jews or Greeks, just newer.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by _Q_

How many Arabs do you think came from other parts of the middle east over the last 100 years?

Well the Arab population grew massively between 1922 and 1947 because many Arabs from neighbouring areas wanted to take advantage of better living conditions created by the Jews. The Arab population grew 120% in those years. Arabs actually constituted 37% of immigration into pre-state Israel.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Beninho

Well the Arab population grew massively between 1922 and 1947 because many Arabs from neighbouring areas wanted to take advantage of better living conditions created by the Jews. The Arab population grew 120% in those years. Arabs actually constituted 37% of immigration into pre-state Israel.

Cite your sources.

[Beninho]

Originally Posted by _Q_

Cite your sources.

That’s been common knowledge to me, Arabs from other areas immigrated into pre-state Israel because of better living conditions, which is why the Arab population doubled. There are obviously Arabs who had been in this land for hundreds of years but there also was Arab immigration from Syria, Transjordan, Egypt in the 100 years before the creation of Israel.

https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresear...s%20built%20up.

The Peel Commission even stated “The Arab population shows a remarkable increase ….. partly due to the import of Jewish capital into Palestine and other factors associated with the growth of the [Jewish] National Home..”

The Simpson Report also discusses Arabs from neighbouring areas immigrating

Edit: i have been unable to verify the 37% of immigration into pre-state Israel was Arab. It was not cited in the article I read so I will take that back. My apologies.

[_Q_]

Originally Posted by Beninho

That’s been common knowledge to me, Arabs from other areas immigrated into pre-state Israel because of better living conditions, which is why the Arab population doubled. There are obviously Arabs who had been in this land for hundreds of years but there also was Arab immigration from Syria, Transjordan, Egypt in the 100 years before the creation of Israel.

https://cqpress.sagepub.com/cqresear...s%20built%20up.

The Peel Commission even stated “The Arab population shows a remarkable increase ….. partly due to the import of Jewish capital into Palestine and other factors associated with the growth of the [Jewish] National Home..”

The Simpson Report also discusses Arabs from neighbouring areas immigrating

Edit: i have been unable to verify the 37% of immigration into pre-state Israel was Arab. It was not cited in the article I read so I will take that back. My apologies.

Israeli historian Yehoshua Porath:

As all the research by historian Fares Abdul Rahim and geographers of modern Palestine shows, the Arab population began to grow again in the middle of the nineteenth century. That growth resulted from a new factor: the demographic revolution. Until the 1850s there was no "natural" increase of the population, but this began to change when modern medical treatment was introduced and modern hospitals were established, both by the Ottoman authorities and by the foreign Christian missionaries. The number of births remained steady but infant mortality decreased. This was the main reason for Arab population growth. ... No one would doubt that some migrant workers came to Palestine from Syria and Trans-Jordan and remained there. But one has to add to this that there were migrations in the opposite direction as well. For example, a tradition developed in Hebron to go to study and work in Cairo, with the result that a permanent community of Hebronites had been living in Cairo since the fifteenth century. Trans-Jordan exported unskilled casual labor to Palestine; but before 1948 its civil service attracted a good many educated Palestinian Arabs who did not find work in Palestine itself. Demographically speaking, however, neither movement of population was significant in comparison to the decisive factor of natural increase.

American historian Justin McCarthy

From analyses of rates of increase of the Muslim population of the three Palestinian sanjaks, one can say with certainty that Muslim immigration after the 1870s was small. Had there been a large group of Muslim immigrants their numbers would have caused an unusual increase in the population and this would have appeared in the calculated rate of increase from one registration list to another... Such an increase would have been easily noticed; it was not there.

The argument that Arab immigration somehow made up a large part of the Palestinian Arab population is thus statistically untenable. The vast majority of the Palestinian Arabs resident in 1947 were the sons and daughters of Arabs who were living in Palestine before modern Jewish immigration began. There is no reason to believe that they were not the sons and daughters of Arabs who had been in Palestine for many centuries.

And also from anecdotal evidence. I know a lot of palestinians, both in the US, Canada and the Middle East. None of them claim to have come from anywhere that is not Palestine.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

So how long does owning a bit of dirt mean your ancestors have perpetual rights to it then? as not a single Arab is alive that owned any of the land lost in '48 almost none that lost land in '67 either, their descendants claim to the land is no better or worse than the Jews or Greeks, just newer.

This is what I don’t get about the vogue for dissolving complex and deep histories into stark Settler vs Indigenous narratives. Every patch of territory on the planet has seen wave after wave after wave after wave of conquest, displacement, and assimilation. And yet only a very small number of these conquests, carried about by specific groups, are denounced as morally monstrous.

[CaptainCrunch]

Looks like the cease fire is over as there was a Hamas attack in Jerusalem today and a rocket was launched tonight into Israel from Gaza.


https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/30/middl...ntl/index.html

[flylock shox]

When the October 7th attack happened, the conspiracy-theory-inclined part of my hindbrain immediately contemplated whether Netanyahu knew it was coming but let it happen because it worked to his advantage.



It's still hard for my real-world brain to be convinced of that, by the NYT's latest story indicating that Israel had knowledge of Hamas' plans a year before the attack was realized certainly adds fuel to the conspiratorial thinking...


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/w...elligence.html

Israeli officials obtained Hamas’s battle plan for the Oct. 7 terrorist attack more than a year before it happened, documents, emails and interviews show. But Israeli military and intelligence officials dismissed the plan as aspirational, considering it too difficult for Hamas to carry out.


...


Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. The document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse in paragliders, on motorcycles and on foot — all of which happened on Oct. 7.


...


The document circulated widely among Israeli military and intelligence leaders, but experts determined that an attack of that scale and ambition was beyond Hamas’s capabilities, according to documents and officials. It is unclear whether Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu or other top political leaders saw the document, as well.

Shades of the warnings the Bush administration had before 9/11, which fuelled similar conspiracy theories at the time (beyond the administration's sheer incompetence, of course).

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by flylock shox

When the October 7th attack happened, the conspiracy-theory-inclined part of my hindbrain immediately contemplated whether Netanyahu knew it was coming but let it happen because it worked to his advantage.



It's still hard for my real-world brain to be convinced of that, by the NYT's latest story indicating that Israel had knowledge of Hamas' plans a year before the attack was realized certainly adds fuel to the conspiratorial thinking...


https://www.nytimes.com/2023/11/30/w...elligence.html





Shades of the warnings the Bush administration had before 9/11, which fuelled similar conspiracy theories at the time (beyond the administration's sheer incompetence, of course).

The attack has destroyed Netanyahu though, his only real appeal was he kept Israel safe, he is now the PM that screwed up and allowed the worst slaughter of Jews since the holocaust, has they allowed them in and then killed them all with a few dead Israeli's I could maybe see it but Oct 7th will see Netanyahu in jail

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The attack has destroyed Netanyahu though, his only real appeal was he kept Israel safe, he is now the PM that screwed up and allowed the worst slaughter of Jews since the holocaust, has they allowed them in and then killed them all with a few dead Israeli's I could maybe see it but Oct 7th will see Netanyahu in jail

Yes, he’s done politically. The only reason he hasn’t been chucked out already is Israel is temporarily united in a war footing. But Netanyahu is a dead man walking.

[blankall]

Good riddance. Netanyahu is, yet another, world leader well past his expiry date and with little grasp on the realities the modern world. Hopefully, the Israelis will elect a non-right wing government into office after this. Although that does not seem to be the trend in the world right now, with mostly alt-right types getting elected into office.

[flylock shox]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The attack has destroyed Netanyahu though, his only real appeal was he kept Israel safe, he is now the PM that screwed up and allowed the worst slaughter of Jews since the holocaust, has they allowed them in and then killed them all with a few dead Israeli's I could maybe see it but Oct 7th will see Netanyahu in jail

I'm not so sure he sees it that way. He was already unpopular, but now has a unity government backing him in a perpetual war that he may view as cause to engage in permanent expulsions of Palestinians in the occupied territories.

Netanyahu has long reminded me of Putin, and Putin's rise to power was facilitated by the apartment bombings in Chechnya that he had a hand in. Would I put it past Netanyahu to use Oct 7 as a power grab? I would not. Whether Israelis will let that happen remains to be seen.

[Fuzzy14]

I've had several friends say the same thing, that the Israelis are so technologically advanced that they had to have known and let the attack happen.

Their argument acknowledges the israeli technological superiority but ignores the hubris that naturally accompanies that position.