|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Oct 9, 2023 8:39:18 GMT
I think when it comes to Middle East inter-state politics, and particularly Israel-Palestinians-Rest of Arab world politics, the phrases that first come to mind when considering most questions are:
- Its complicated
- It depends
- Its a total bloody inhumane mess
And adding to that my personal view:
- The extreme Orthodox parties in Israel, and Netanyahu using them to be and stay in power, have a lot to answer for in recent years in deliberately making the situation worse and any long term resolution even further away. But no I don't stand alongside Corbyn and his appalling anti Semitic positions. You can believe in the right of Israel to exist, and its citizens to be safe at the same time as finding the actions of some of its leadership frankly contrary to that in the long term. As indeed do many Israelis. In the same way you could deplore the actions of Yasser Arafat while believing that Palestinians had a right to a better solution and need hope of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by mostlywrong on Oct 9, 2023 14:07:34 GMT
I blame it all on the Romans. If they had clamped down on that Jesus bloke when he started on the fermentation of wine without a license, we would not be in this mess now.
Ooh, is that my hand-cart? Thank you, kind Sir.
And which way is it? OK, just follow the smoke and the flames...!
MW
Tongue firmly in cheek because the situation is so awful.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Oct 11, 2023 9:43:38 GMT
Corbyn is not just anti-semitic POS, he is a communist and Putin loving POS. Along with an non-existent EU immigration policy HE got the Brexit vote over the 50% by serving his russian master to get the UK out of Europe. Backfired by miscalculating the UK's response to the Ukraine invasion. Looking forward to a Labour government controlled by the unions funded by russia everyone ?!
... It annoys me that our press talk almost exclusively about the suffering of the Israelis as if not much is happening in Gaza.... Is that bit actually true though ? Over the years I have seen plenty of articles, reports etc. about the suffering of people in Gaza, and indeed plenty of reporting of Israeli "behaviours" in the West Bank. The Times right now is carrying plenty of coverage, on live update, with images and reporting from Gaza. I also see the BBC is having to defend itself from criticism that it is refusing/failing to refer to Hamas as "terrorists". Whether they are right or wrong to not use that term historically, or indeed at the moment, is perhaps a moot point*, but I would say that historically has come from them attempting to balance reporting and provide a fuller picture. I think it is simply not right to say that "our press" don't cover these things. Though that may depend on where one tends to get one's news from. Politicians on the other hand have tended to take more black and white positions. With regard to the current coverage, perhaps it is worth keeping in mind that the immediate/first "news worthy" "new news" was the attack on Israeli territory and people. And hence why that is where the coverage would have been very much biased to at that time. *FWIW, given the news of the nature of recent events that is emerging, I suspect they will be changing that long standing editorial guidance PDQ.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,000 
Likes: 5,139
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 11, 2023 11:49:21 GMT
I also see the BBC is having to defend itself from criticism that it is refusing/failing to refer to Hamas as "terrorists". I'm not sure whether the T word has actually been used, but the R4 coverage is fairly unequivocal. I can't think of hearing anybody coming close to defending Hamas's actions in the last few days.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,042
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Oct 11, 2023 15:23:02 GMT
I also see the BBC is having to defend itself from criticism that it is refusing/failing to refer to Hamas as "terrorists". I'm not sure whether the T word has actually been used, but the R4 coverage is fairly unequivocal. I can't think of hearing anybody coming close to defending Hamas's actions in the last few days.I'll give you a starteer fror 10.
- hundreds of Palestinian protestors outside the Isralie embassy in London
- An adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Saturday congratulated Palestinian fighters for launching the biggest attack on Israel
- Pro Palestinian fringe meeting at the Labour party conference
- Mostafa Ezzo
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,000
Likes: 5,139
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 11, 2023 15:28:53 GMT
I'm not sure whether the T word has actually been used, but the R4 coverage is fairly unequivocal. I can't think of hearing anybody coming close to defending Hamas's actions in the last few days.I'll give you a starteer fror 10.
- hundreds of Palestinian protestors outside the Isralie embassy in London
- An adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Saturday congratulated Palestinian fighters for launching the biggest attack on Israel
- Pro Palestinian fringe meeting at the Labour party conference
- Mostafa Ezzo
I meant "anybody on R4", obvs.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,042
Likes: 4,437
|
Post by agent69 on Oct 11, 2023 15:44:01 GMT
I'll give you a starteer fror 10.
- hundreds of Palestinian protestors outside the Isralie embassy in London
- An adviser to Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei on Saturday congratulated Palestinian fighters for launching the biggest attack on Israel
- Pro Palestinian fringe meeting at the Labour party conference
- Mostafa Ezzo
I meant "anybody on R4", obvs. Sloppy posting I'm afraid.
But on a related note 'Russian President Vladimir Putin has said what is happening in Israel is "terrible", as he called on both sides to minimise civilian deaths'.
Pot, kettle, black
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,703
Likes: 2,981
|
Post by michaelc on Oct 11, 2023 17:53:32 GMT
I meant "anybody on R4", obvs. Sloppy posting I'm afraid.
But on a related note 'Russian President Vladimir Putin has said what is happening in Israel is "terrible", as he called on both sides to minimise civilian deaths'.
Pot, kettle, black
His forces also were responsible for quite a lot of atrocities in Ukraine - NW of Kyiv comes to mind - Irpin etc. However, would you describe the Russian army as terrorists ? I wouldn't not least because then the word "terrorist" starts to lose any precision in meaning.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,436
|
Post by registerme on Oct 11, 2023 18:02:15 GMT
However, would you describe the Russian army as terrorists ? I wouldn't not least because then the word "terrorist" starts to lose any precision in meaning. No, I wouldn't. I'd describe them as war criminals.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Oct 11, 2023 18:10:32 GMT
I meant "anybody on R4", obvs. Sloppy posting I'm afraid.
Sorry, but I'd have to disagree with that. The intended meaning was in my reading crystal clear and left virtually no room for misinterpretation. The second sentence is in the context of the one that proceeded it.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Oct 11, 2023 18:38:49 GMT
Sloppy posting I'm afraid.
But on a related note 'Russian President Vladimir Putin has said what is happening in Israel is "terrible", as he called on both sides to minimise civilian deaths'.
Pot, kettle, black
His forces also were responsible for quite a lot of atrocities in Ukraine - NW of Kyiv comes to mind - Irpin etc. However, would you describe the Russian army as terrorists ? I wouldn't not least because then the word "terrorist" starts to lose any precision in meaning.Like registerme I would consider them war criminals. However, there is a legal definition of terrorism in UK law. Many of the acts carried out by Russian armed forces would, on any reasonable reading, readily fit into that legal definition. As well as fitting into the international legal definition of war crimes. Therefore, from a definition of their acts, they are both war criminals, and they have committed acts of terrorism. Of course their is a difference between 'acts of terrorism' and being a member of a proscribed terrorist organisation. You do not have to be the latter to commit the former. Generally UK governments are wary of listing state actors as a proscribed terrorist organisation. The US tends to have a similar policy IIRC. This is because it then places constraints on dealing with them, which may not be smart when it comes to state actors. Hamas is kind of / sort of an exception to that unwritten rule in the UK (if indeed it is a rule). It is a proscribed organisation as well as being what most people would consider some form of "state actor" - I hesitate to fully classify them as such for a variety of reasons.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,703
Likes: 2,981
|
Post by michaelc on Oct 11, 2023 19:05:26 GMT
However, would you describe the Russian army as terrorists ? I wouldn't not least because then the word "terrorist" starts to lose any precision in meaning. No, I wouldn't. I'd describe them as war criminals. The ones that executed civilians etc then definitely yes. Assuming there were other fighters that attempted a raid into Israel without attempting to slaughter the entirely innocent then I would describe those differently as I just did.
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,000
Likes: 5,139
|
Post by adrianc on Oct 11, 2023 19:53:09 GMT
I also see the BBC is having to defend itself from criticism that it is refusing/failing to refer to Hamas as "terrorists". I'm not sure whether the T word has actually been used, but the R4 coverage is fairly unequivocal. I can't think of hearing anybody coming close to defending Hamas's actions in the last few days. R4 Media Show today raised this very question. BBC editorial policy "in line with most major international news organisations" is not to use the T word, unless quoting named individuals, but to describe the act itself - which they have not been shy of doing. www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/war-terror-emergencies/guidelines/#useoflanguageAs for when that was adopted, the PDF of those guidelines - using the same wording as the web version - has intros dated June 2019. They're ascribed to the then-Chair of the BBC Board, who relinquished that position in 2021, and the then Director General, who relinquished his position in 2020. downloads.bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines/pdfs/bbc-editorial-guidelines-whole-document.pdfSeems fair to say those guidelines have therefore been consistent for at least four years, doesn't it?
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,436
|
Post by registerme on Oct 11, 2023 19:59:58 GMT
No, I wouldn't. I'd describe them as war criminals. The ones that executed civilians etc then definitely yes. Assuming there were other fighters that attempted a raid into Israel without attempting to slaughter the entirely innocent then I would describe those differently as I just did. I don't think I disagree, at least not entirely. Essentially I see a continuum between "not a state" on the left hand side, and "very much a state" on the right hand side. The more atrocities are committed by an "actor" towards the left hand side, the more they are legitimately described as terrorists. The closer to the right hand side, the more they are legitimately described as war crimes (/war criminals). It's not an easy subject to discuss, particularly when horrors abound daily, and I don't pretend to be "right", or that anybody else is "wrong". It's just where I'm at, currently.
|
|
|
|
Post by crabbyoldgit on Oct 12, 2023 6:22:13 GMT
I visited Jerusalem some 30 plus years ago as part of this we had one day with a Jewish guide visiting the Wailing Wall, Alexa Mosque, site of the Jewish 1st temple and other religious sites. First thing to say is the close proximity to each other of all these sites, close walking distance.
Approaching the wailing wall from the Jewish area you did not need to be told when entering the Arab area the drop in standard of municipal infrastructure may as well have been marked with a painted line in the road. At the wailing wall above your head a fence prevented the Arabs in the Alexa mosque dropping rocks on your head.Then walking approx 100m to the right we were at a narrow rough path leading up to the Alexa mosque site guarded by Israeli soldiers and just through a small gate mosque officials. Our guide counts out plans of the now ruined 1st temple and explains that for Orthodox Jews the state of Israel will not exist until the 1st temple is rebuilt and the Messiah comes, not Christ. However there is an problem the Alexa mosque is in the the way and will need to be demolished to restore the site. He then carefully counts the plans back and leaves them with the Israeli soldiers explaining the Arabs will not like us turning up with from their point of view sets of builders plans before we enter the mosque site. So when Benjamin Netanyahu turns up with a bunch of orthodox Jews waving plans of the 1st temple forcing entrance with the help of Israeli soldiers he knows exactly how incendiary these actions are.
Later we stopped on the mount of olives looking down on the smart tombs of rich Jews and the older partially wrecked Arab graves, the marble for the Jewish graves had in many cases been acquired from the Arab graves which when the days of of Arab control had been acquired from Jewish graves and probably cycled back and forth over the years.When Christ returns he will ride a donkey down the hill through the graves ,the dead rising to great him and then through the golden gate which now leads into the mosque site and on to the 1st temple. Of course from the Arab point of view this is not going to happen, because.
1 The Christian Messiah is not coming back
2 If he does come back they have completely bricked the gate up , so he's not getting in.
3 If he gets in two large guards stationed inside the gate 24 /7 armed with clubs will beat his head in, I joke not.
I could go on with other examples but these give a taste of the complexity and tensions of Jerusalem and the issues around the religious and political tensions.
|
|
