Israel invaded

[biggbn]

julian987R said:

biggbn said:

Can you point to actual support for Hamas on this thread. Anyone actually saying they support Hamas? I confess I've not read every page, and I have read many roundly criticising the IDF, Hamas, the Israeli government, the Palestinian people and I have heard many supporting the above as well. But supporting Hamas? Supporting the actions taken? Nope, sorry. If you could show me someone actually supporting Hamas please?

Sadly, I have read pages of keyboard warriors supporting the barbaric reprisals because apparently two wrongs now make a right, and 'its all they understand' etc..., reprisals now roundly criticised by the international community who are sending aid to Gaza regularly. But then, in your head, me writing that probably makes me supportive of Hamas or anti-semitic?

Uh oh. Here it comes. Just wait.

Well for starters, lo and behold, the reply to the OP below.
There is tons of support here for Hamas. It’s like a Hamas love fest this thread.

Show me. Uh oh. I'm waiting...

[andymadmak]

biggbn said:

Can you point to actual support for Hamas on this thread. Anyone actually saying they support Hamas? I confess I've not read every page, and I have read many roundly criticising the IDF, Hamas, the Israeli government, the Palestinian people and I have heard many supporting the above as well. But supporting Hamas? Supporting the actions taken? Nope, sorry. If you could show me someone actually supporting Hamas please?

Sadly, I have read pages of keyboard warriors supporting the barbaric reprisals because apparently two wrongs now make a right, and 'its all they understand' etc..., reprisals now roundly criticised by the international community who are sending aid to Gaza regularly. But then, in your head, me writing that probably makes me supportive of Hamas or anti-semitic?

Uh oh. Here it comes. Just wait.

It is the case that nobody (as far as I can remember) has actually come onto the thread and said "I support Hamas". But come on man, you're astute enough to recognise that when poster after poster comes on to the thread and ALL they do is criticise Israel, never criticise Hamas, even on the very day of the attack and in the few days afterwards then its understandable to assume where their support really lies, even if they're not brave enough (stupid enough?) to actually put it into the thread.
Even today, you've had a poster saying that it's "virtue signalling" to have to criticise the attack on the 7th. We're just supposed to assume that they think it's awful whilst they get on with their daily critique of Israel. It doesn't really wash now does it?
That's before you get to the obvious sealioning and deflection from some.
Many posters on this thread HAVE found a way to criticise both sides, without it being labelled as virtue signalling. Posters who only criticise one side reveal themselves for what they are, whether they like it or not. (and that applies both ways imho)

[andymadmak]

911hope said:

andymadmak said:

911hope. Please don't sealion like this. Just read the first 20 pages of this thread. I posted examples from the first half dozen pages earlier today, all taken from the 7th October. And when you have done that, maybe answer my question rather than deflect?

Having checked a few and see that you have "quoted" nothing. What you have done is paraphrased and applied an interpretation.

I haven't found one, which says the 7 Oct attack was justified.

It is a big leap from someone describing prior events and the Palestinians' plight to get to the "support of Hamas position"

And still you deflect. I never claimed I quoted. You just made that up, presumably to get out of answering the question.
I'll remind you:

And criticism of Israel on the actual day of the "terrible triggering event",whilst making "justification" type posts on that same day, and completely failing to say anything negative about that "terrible triggering event" on the same day, before Israel had even responded.... how should that be interpreted?

[skwdenyer]

Mopey said:

Electro1980 said:

Mopey said:

People saying Israel is responsible for the lack of s two state solution. Didn’t Arafat walk away? So Palestine is responsible when a deal or progress was on the table.

Call me naive but releasing the hostages would go some way to a cease fire happening.

You’re naive. Israel have repeatedly stated their aim is to destroy Hamas. The hostages should absolutely be released, but at the same time there should be an immediate ceasefire. The two need to be simultaneous. As long as they are not this will continue.

However, the main issue is Israel’s killing of civilians and disruption of aid.

No, the main issue is a bunch of terrorists committed an atrocity and are holding hostages, easy to forget that as you seem to have done there.

First, labelling Hamas as terrorists is automatically taking a side in the underlying, decades-long conflict. Were the French Resistance terrorists? Was George Washington? Are Ukrainians who blew up the Crimean bridge? Were the original IRA (the group who in effect expelled the British from Eire)?

As the old saying goes, one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. Unless and until people recognise this inherent dichotomy, all that will happen is more shouting will occur.

Now, before I kick off a further round of opprobrium, that does not mean that Hamas attacking civilians was justified in my mind. But those talking about “desperate people” and the like shouldn’t just be condemned out-of-hand for pointing out a pretty obvious truth about asymmetric wars of independence.

This place, the people on this forum are brighter and better than that, I believe.

The human trend towards polarising every issue does not help in this discussion. But avoid it we must if any progress is to be made. Hamas undoubtedly committed an atrocity against non-combatants. Israel is undoubtedly behaving now in a manner wholly inconsistent with its obligations under international law, never mind in such a way as to jeopardise whatever claim it might think it has to moral superiority. Both things can be true, and both build on a long history of terrible behaviour on both sides. And we mustn’t also forget that Hamas is what Likud wanted, and supported…

The tragedy is that, had the patient work of Baruk been continued for the requisite time, rather than the situation being weaponised by right-wing politicians, I very much doubt we’d be here today. And before anyone says “but the Palestinians walked away” perhaps we should remember quite how long, and how many false starts, are involved in most such negotiations.

[biggbn]

andymadmak said:

biggbn said:

Can you point to actual support for Hamas on this thread. Anyone actually saying they support Hamas? I confess I've not read every page, and I have read many roundly criticising the IDF, Hamas, the Israeli government, the Palestinian people and I have heard many supporting the above as well. But supporting Hamas? Supporting the actions taken? Nope, sorry. If you could show me someone actually supporting Hamas please?

Sadly, I have read pages of keyboard warriors supporting the barbaric reprisals because apparently two wrongs now make a right, and 'its all they understand' etc..., reprisals now roundly criticised by the international community who are sending aid to Gaza regularly. But then, in your head, me writing that probably makes me supportive of Hamas or anti-semitic?

Uh oh. Here it comes. Just wait.

It is the case that nobody (as far as I can remember) has actually come onto the thread and said "I support Hamas". But come on man, you're astute enough to recognise that when poster after poster comes on to the thread and ALL they do is criticise Israel, never criticise Hamas, even on the very day of the attack and in the few days afterwards then its understandable to assume where their support really lies, even if they're not brave enough (stupid enough?) to actually put it into the thread.
Even today, you've had a poster saying that it's "virtue signalling" to have to criticise the attack on the 7th. We're just supposed to assume that they think it's awful whilst they get on with their daily critique of Israel. It doesn't really wash now does it?
That's before you get to the obvious sealioning and deflection from some.
Many posters on this thread HAVE found a way to criticise both sides, without it being labelled as virtue signalling. Posters who only criticise one side reveal themselves for what they are, whether they like it or not. (and that applies both ways imho)

Andy, thanks for your thoughtful response, my answer was for Jules who is not as nuanced as you.

[biggbn]

skwdenyer said:

First, labelling Hamas as terrorists is automatically taking a side in the underlying, decades-long conflict. Were the French Resistance terrorists? Was George Washington? Are Ukrainians who blew up the Crimean bridge? Were the original IRA (the group who in effect expelled the British from Eire)?

As the old saying goes, one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter. Unless and until people recognise this inherent dichotomy, all that will happen is more shouting will occur.

Now, before I kick off a further round of opprobrium, that does not mean that Hamas attacking civilians was justified in my mind. But those talking about “desperate people” and the like shouldn’t just be condemned out-of-hand for pointing out a pretty obvious truth about asymmetric wars of independence.

This place, the people on this forum are brighter and better than that, I believe.

The human trend towards polarising every issue does not help in this discussion. But avoid it we must if any progress is to be made. Hamas undoubtedly committed an atrocity against non-combatants. Israel is undoubtedly behaving now in a manner wholly inconsistent with its obligations under international law, never mind in such a way as to jeopardise whatever claim it might think it has to moral superiority. Both things can be true, and both build on a long history of terrible behaviour on both sides. And we mustn’t also forget that Hamas is what Likud wanted, and supported…

The tragedy is that, had the patient work of Baruk been continued for the requisite time, rather than the situation being weaponised by right-wing politicians, I very much doubt we’d be here today. And before anyone says “but the Palestinians walked away” perhaps we should remember quite how long, and how many false starts, are involved in most such negotiations.

A good post

[Electro1980]

Mopey said:

No, the main issue is a bunch of terrorists committed an atrocity and are holding hostages, easy to forget that as you seem to have done there.

None of which justifies the behaviour of Israel and the IDF, yet you seem to be absolutely happy to justify this despite every major organisation and government disagreeing with you. Even the US FFS.

[Electro1980]

andymadmak said:

But come on man, you're astute enough to recognise that when poster after poster comes on to the thread and ALL they do is criticise Israel, never criticise Hamas,

That’s a sign of the reprehensible behaviour of Israel, not support for Hamas. Hamas committed atrocities, they hold hostages and have undoubtedly committed terrorist attacks.

HOWEVER the current issue is the civilians. What you are deeming support for Hamas is people not equivocating their criticism of Israel in their killing of civilians. Your definition of supporting Hamas puts the entire international community in that group. Saying Israel need to stop committing war crimes without saying “also Hamas did some stuff” is not supporting Hamas.

[JJJ.]

Is this support for Hamas? I await the onslaught but I'm unconcerned.

The Hamas attack and the Israeli response has at last really and truly highlighted the Palestinian people's general dire situation. The whole world has sat up and taken notice, even distant countries like South Africa and Ireland made their voices heard. Israel has been roundly condemned again for it's treatment of the Palestinian people both in Gaza and the West Bank. The U.S. has also been roundly condemned along with other Israeli allies and a lot of condemnation has actually come from western citizens never mind the UN, ICJ, aid NGO's etc, etc.

The eventual hope now is, thanks to Hamas attack, that some sort of permanent and peaceful plan will be put into action so the Palestinians can live a normal life in their own country, while governing themselves without Israeli interference, evictions, violence, imprisonment or death.

Maybe, just maybe the Hamas attack is blessing in disguise for the Palestinians long term. One can only hope.

Whatever, nobody will ever forget the ongoing Israeli retaliation to the Palestinians.

Edited by JJJ. on Friday 29th March 21:23

[911hope]

andymadmak said:

And still you deflect. I never claimed I quoted. You just made that up, presumably to get out of answering the question.
I'll remind you:

And criticism of Israel on the actual day of the "terrible triggering event",whilst making "justification" type posts on that same day, and completely failing to say anything negative about that "terrible triggering event" on the same day, before Israel had even responded.... how should that be interpreted?

Perhaps you can provide a quote where someone did indeed attempt to justify the attack.

That's what is needed to support using phrases like..... "justification" type posts

There are people who posted criticism of Israel's prior actions against Palestinians on the day of 7 Oct. This shows some understanding and sympathy for their plight, but does not equate to supporting the Hamas attack.

Some people may choose to be offended by such posts and a politically aware person would normally keep quiet on such a day. Being insensitive is not supporting the atrocity.

Prior events did occur and the balance of power and harms inflicted, over the 70 year conflict weigh heavily in the favour of Israel.

As the UN secretary General said..... "This has not happened in a vacuum"

Pointing this out does not make a person a supporter of the Hamas terrorist actions.

[biggbn]

911hope said:

andymadmak said:

And still you deflect. I never claimed I quoted. You just made that up, presumably to get out of answering the question.
I'll remind you:

And criticism of Israel on the actual day of the "terrible triggering event",whilst making "justification" type posts on that same day, and completely failing to say anything negative about that "terrible triggering event" on the same day, before Israel had even responded.... how should that be interpreted?

Perhaps you can provide a quote where someone did indeed attempt to justify the attack.

That's what is needed to support using phrases like..... "justification" type posts

There are people who posted criticism of Israel's prior actions against Palestinians on the day of 7 Oct. This shows some understanding and sympathy for their plight, but does not equate to supporting the Hamas attack.

Some people may choose to be offended by such posts and a politically aware person would normally keep quiet on such a day. Being insensitive is not supporting the atrocity.

Prior events did occur and the balance of power and harms inflicted, over the 70 year conflict weigh heavily in the favour of Israel.

As the UN secretary General said..... "This has not happened in a vacuum"

Pointing this out does not make a person a supporter of the Hamas terrorist actions.

I think JJJ post before yours almost attempts to justify it....perhaps clumsily worded but -

'Maybe, just maybe the Hamas attack is blessing in disguise for the Palestinians long term. One can only hope.'

Now, I understand what they are saying and what they mean but that comes across, to my (sympathetic, humanist, pacifist) ears as linguistic justification by proxy

[andymadmak]

Electro1980 said:

andymadmak said:

But come on man, you're astute enough to recognise that when poster after poster comes on to the thread and ALL they do is criticise Israel, never criticise Hamas,

That’s a sign of the reprehensible behaviour of Israel, not support for Hamas. Hamas committed atrocities, they hold hostages and have undoubtedly committed terrorist attacks.

HOWEVER the current issue is the civilians. What you are deeming support for Hamas is people not equivocating their criticism of Israel in their killing of civilians. Your definition of supporting Hamas puts the entire international community in that group. Saying Israel need to stop committing war crimes without saying “also Hamas did some stuff” is not supporting Hamas.

ok, so on the 7th October, the first day of this thread, it was appropriate for posters to simply criticise Israel without any reference to the atrocities being committed on that day by Hamas, and its unreasonable of me to draw the conclusion from that such posters support Hamas actions?
I'm specifically not talking about what's going on today, I'm pointing to what posters were saying on the day of the atrocity and in the days following, BEFORE Israel began its reprisals, and I'm saying that those posters, in my opinion, appear to support Hamas, even of they don't overtly say so.

[JJJ.]

biggbn said:

I think JJJ post before yours almost attempts to justify it....perhaps clumsily worded but -

'Maybe, just maybe the Hamas attack is blessing in disguise for the Palestinians long term. One can only hope.'

Poorly worded rather than clumsy, I'd say. Best that why considering what I read by the pro Israeli's and Zionists on this thread.

[911hope]

andymadmak said:

ok, so on the 7th October, the first day of this thread, it was appropriate for posters to simply criticise Israel without any reference to the atrocities being committed on that day by Hamas, and its unreasonable of me to draw the conclusion from that such posters support Hamas actions?
I'm specifically not talking about what's going on today, I'm pointing to what posters were saying on the day of the atrocity and in the days following, BEFORE Israel began its reprisals, and I'm saying that those posters, in my opinion, appear to support Hamas, even of they don't overtly say so.

You are entitled to your opinion, but before you accuse someone of supporting Hamas, you need a solid basis. You already seem to acknowledge that you don't have this supporting information.

In the decades before the attacks, Israel had established a substantial lead in terms of inflicting harm on their enemy.This is a demonstrable fact.

How do you choose to interpret me mentioning this?

[biggbn]

JJJ. said:

biggbn said:

I think JJJ post before yours almost attempts to justify it....perhaps clumsily worded but -

'Maybe, just maybe the Hamas attack is blessing in disguise for the Palestinians long term. One can only hope.'

Poorly worded rather than clumsy, I'd say. Best that why considering what I read by the pro Israeli's and Zionists on this thread.

I knew what you'd meant, was merely suggesting that posts like that may be the basis for Julian and others (incorrect in my opinion) assertions.

[JJJ.]

biggbn said:

JJJ. said:

biggbn said:

I think JJJ post before yours almost attempts to justify it....perhaps clumsily worded but -

'Maybe, just maybe the Hamas attack is blessing in disguise for the Palestinians long term. One can only hope.'

Poorly worded rather than clumsy, I'd say. Best that why considering what I read by the pro Israeli's and Zionists on this thread.

I knew what you'd meant, was merely suggesting that posts like that may be the basis for Julian and others (incorrect in my opinion) assertions.

Oh, I understand you entirely. Excuse the expression but it's like one has to walk on fking egg shells around here to put across a counter view to pro Zionists and anyone else of that ilk.
That I'm not willing to do but will try to moderate my strong views by toning down the language just to prove that supporters of the Palestinians (like myself) don't need to shout like most Israeli's when they try defending the indefensible or make some spurious point to enhance their righteousness.
Ever notice them on TV, always shouting over the interviewer when being asked a specific question they don't like?
That's a rhetorical question.

Edited by JJJ. on Friday 29th March 18:32

[M1AGM]

911hope said:

You are entitled to your opinion, but before you accuse someone of supporting Hamas, you need a solid basis. You already seem to acknowledge that you don't have this supporting information.

In the decades before the attacks, Israel had established a substantial lead in terms of inflicting harm on their enemy.This is a demonstrable fact.

How do you choose to interpret me mentioning this?

I think to be fair to andymadmac there was some posting very early on about rumours that the IDF opened fire on Israelis, and the inference was that there was a general conspiracy to make things look much worse than it was by not allowing media into the areas etc.

I suspect that was what triggered him and has done ever since.

I’m pleased he has stopped posting the ‘pregnant woman who had the baby cut out of her by hamas’ story as an example of the barbarism on the 7th October as that has been shown to be false.

Andymadmac is one of the few posters on this thread who has taken a moderate view and I hope he can see that the vast majority of posters here are the same, even if they dont always present themselves as clearly.

[andymadmak]

M1AGM said:

I think to be fair to andymadmac there was some posting very early on about rumours that the IDF opened fire on Israelis, and the inference was that there was a general conspiracy to make things look much worse than it was by not allowing media into the areas etc.

I suspect that was what triggered him and has done ever since.

I’m pleased he has stopped posting the ‘pregnant woman who had the baby cut out of her by hamas’ story as an example of the barbarism on the 7th October as that has been shown to be false.

Andymadmac is one of the few posters on this thread who has taken a moderate view and I hope he can see that the vast majority of posters here are the same, even if they dont always present themselves as clearly.

Thank you, sincerely.
One minor correction, the story I was most vexed about was the story about Israeli Children being bound to their parent by wire and then the pair of them set on fire. Sadly, this has been shown to be true. I don't recall commenting on the pregnant woman story much (if at all) but the first one really got to me, along with the rapes and mutilations. I also was triggered by the assertions of one particular poster that allegations of Israeli soldiers verbally abusing and urinating on Palestinian prisoners was as bad as anything that Hamas did on the 7th I fully accepted at that time that the Israeli soldiers absolutely should not have behaved in that way and they should be subject to justice accordingly, but to see any equivalence between that and the worst of what Hamas did on the 7th just turned my stomach. The poster lied and edited his post subsequently btw, but enough had already seen it to be able to verify that I was telling the truth.
Anyway, this thread is not one I visit as frequently as I used to - its not good for my blood pressure!

[isaldiri]

M1AGM said:

Andymadmac is one of the few posters on this thread who has taken a moderate view and I hope he can see that the vast majority of posters here are the same, even if they dont always present themselves as clearly.

If someone calling posters on this thread anti semitic supporters of the final solution is moderate to you, I'd quite like to know what you'd consider an extreme view........

[andymadmak]

911hope said:

andymadmak said:

ok, so on the 7th October, the first day of this thread, it was appropriate for posters to simply criticise Israel without any reference to the atrocities being committed on that day by Hamas, and its unreasonable of me to draw the conclusion from that such posters support Hamas actions?
I'm specifically not talking about what's going on today, I'm pointing to what posters were saying on the day of the atrocity and in the days following, BEFORE Israel began its reprisals, and I'm saying that those posters, in my opinion, appear to support Hamas, even of they don't overtly say so.

You are entitled to your opinion, but before you accuse someone of supporting Hamas, you need a solid basis. You already seem to acknowledge that you don't have this supporting information.

In the decades before the attacks, Israel had established a substantial lead in terms of inflicting harm on their enemy.This is a demonstrable fact.

How do you choose to interpret me mentioning this?

I interpret your comment as you justifying the attack of the 7th in some way, but refraining from openly supporting Hamas. Had the 7th just been another one of those rocket attacks that killed a few Israelis I doubt anything much would have happened . After all, both sides had blood on their hands prior to the 7th. But what happened on the 7th, the horror of those atrocities, crossed a line. That is the point I am making, and on that day, some posters couldn't even say "Aww thats an awful thing thats happened. Hamas shouldn't have done those things" Instead from some poster all we got was criticism of Israel. No condemnation of the rapes, no condemnation of the mutilations, no condemnation of the murders, no condemnation of the kidnappings....... Why might that be?
In the news today you have stories of Israeli soldiers playing with underwear they found in Palestinian homes, and the usual suspects rush to post the story and express their criticism of IDF/Israel. Now go and see if you can find any comments from them regarding the 7th..... Its a pattern. Only one side is worthy of criticism from some, no matter what inhuman acts Hamas perpetrates
Now, let me be clear, it's wrong for IDF soldiers to behave in this way. I sincerely hope they are sanctioned appropriately.
I challenge you to go back and read the first few days of this thread and then tell me honestly that you don't see the things I set out above?