2023 Israel - Hamas war

[Mogster]

Other than the US and UK I don’t really see who else could have performed this operation at short notice. The US have the Eisenhower in theatre, the UK have Eurofighters and tankers deployed to Akrotiri. The UK response was quite limited and a big stretch.

HMS Diamond will be leaving soon it seems and there are no other T45 available to replace her in the dedicated air defence role.

 

[uglymonkey]

We've only got 6 T45's and just laid up 2 frigates, so "stretch" is the thing - each year despite increasing threats UK forces seem to get smaller and smaller.

 

[DustyBin]

But why on earth is dropping a few bombs ever the right answer to anything.

It’s the only way to get through to some people, sadly.

The haste at which this was done with no chance of even parliament saying anything is disgusting.

Providing the enemy with advance notice of your intended actions isn’t always desirable.

Other than the US and UK I don’t really see who else could have performed this operation at short notice. The US have the Eisenhower in theatre, the UK have Eurofighters and tankers deployed to Akrotiri. The UK response was quite limited and a big stretch.

HMS Diamond will be leaving soon it seems and there are no other T45 available to replace her in the dedicated air defence role.

Exactly.

 

[Bantamzen]

Perhaps the issue there is that the West does not manufacture enough of its own products. Something as basic as a kettle could surely be manufactured in the UK, or if that really wasn't possible, continental Europe or the USA.

Maybe we should be manufacturing more, however there are reasons why so much is made in places like China. They have the resources to be able to produce them on a larger scale for less cost. Shifting that scale of manufacturing to the west would result in much higher prices and/or pressure to drive wage down.

Or, would it be viable to do more imports via air? Aeroplanes can of course more easily divert away from conflict areas.

Air transportation is significantly more expensive, and very, very limited compared to shipping.

 

[brad465]

A plot to disrupt the London Stock exchange was uncovered with news of six arrests in connection with it from the Palestine Action group, and there are suggestions the next week will see plenty of attempted action in connection with pro-Palestine movements:

Six held over plot to disrupt London Stock Exchange

Police said the arrests were made in London, Liverpool and Brighton over a "disruptive and damaging stunt".

www.bbc.co.uk

Six people have been arrested on suspicion of a plot to disrupt the London Stock Exchange.
The Met Police said information suggested activists from the Palestine Action group were intending to target the exchange on Monday,
The force said it was believed those involved were planning to cause damage and "lock on" in an effort to stop the building opening for trading.
Arrests were made in London, Liverpool and Brighton on Sunday.
All six people are currently in custody.
The Met said it was "mindful of the suggestion that this was one part of a planned week of action".
It said it was in contact with other forces, including City of London Police, to ensure any further disruption could be dealt with.

'Significant arrests'​

The Met said the arrests were prompted by information shared by the Daily Express.
Det Supt Sian Thomas said: "These are significant arrests. We believe this group was ready to carry out a disruptive and damaging stunt which could have had serious implications had it been carried out successfully."
A 31-year-old man from Liverpool was arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to cause criminal damage by officers from Merseyside Police in the early hours of Sunday.
Five others were arrested over the same offence later in the day, including a woman, 29 from Brent in north London, a 23-year-old man from Tower Hamlets in east London, two women, aged 28 and 26, from Liverpool and a 27-year-old man in Brighton.
"I'm grateful to the Express for their willingness to provide the information gleaned from their own investigation," Det Supt Thomas said.
"It was instrumental in helping us intervene successfully. Having only been provided with the material on Friday afternoon we had limited time to act."
She said it was thanks to the "determined efforts" of the Met's public order crime team and colleagues in Merseyside that officers "were able to identify, locate and arrest those we suspect to be involved in this plot".

 

[DerekC]

I am very disappointed (but not surprised) that our government has suspended payments to UNRWA. The fact that staff paid by this agency appear to have participated and supported the October 7th attack is shocking and they should be punished. However it is the only agency supporting the survival of two million residents of Gaza in any effective way. Israel has grabbed this as a wonderful additional way of getting the US and its western allies even more visibly on its side. It has swept the ICJ's interim judgement, which was building further pressure on Israel to agree to a ceasefire, out of the news.

I have a strong suspicion that Netanyahu sees continuing and expanding the war as his only route to political survival and today's headlines suit him very nicely.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-68104203

UNRWA claims: UK halts aid to UN agency over allegation staff helped Hamas attack​

By Sarah Fowler & Lipika Pelham
BBC News

Several countries including the UK have paused funding for the UN agency for Palestinian refugees, UNRWA.
It comes after the agency announced the sacking of several of its staff over allegations they were involved in the 7 October Hamas attacks.
The UK government said it was "appalled" by Israel's allegations.
The US, Australia, Italy, Canada, Finland, the Netherlands, Switzerland and Germany have also suspended additional funding to the UN agency.
Created in 1949, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, is the biggest UN agency operating in Gaza.
It provides health care, education and other humanitarian aid to Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. It employs around 13,000 people inside Gaza.
Since Israel began its offensive in response to the 7 October attacks, UNRWA has used its facilities across Gaza to shelter hundreds of thousands of displaced civilians.
It says it has ordered an investigation into information supplied by Israel.
Israel has long accused different branches of the United Nations including UNRWA of bias and even of antisemitism.
Speaking to the BBC, the organisation's former chief spokesperson, Christopher Gunness, said that the suspension of aid to UNRWA was disproportionate and can only lead to further suffering in Gaza.
Mr Gunness believes UNRWA has demonstrated its zero-tolerance policy by sacking the staff members before their internal investigation was complete.
"One million displaced people are currently taking refuge in and around UNRWA buildings. They are the ones who will suffer as a result of this decision," said Mr Gunness, adding: "The curtailing of UNRWA services will also destabilise the region at a time when Western governments are trying to contain a regional conflagration."
On Friday, an adviser to the Israeli prime minister told the BBC that the 7 October Hamas attacks had involved "people who are on their [UNRWA] salaries"

 

[DustyBin]

I am very disappointed (but not surprised) that our government has suspended payments to UNRWA. The fact that staff paid by this agency appear to have participated and supported the October 7th attack is shocking and they should be punished. However it is the only agency supporting the survival of two million residents of Gaza in any effective way. Israel has grabbed this as a wonderful additional way of getting the US and its western allies even more visibly on its side. It has swept the ICJ's interim judgement, which was building further pressure on Israel to agree to a ceasefire, out of the news.

The words “baby” and “bathwater” come to mind.

If that organisation as a whole is deemed unfit to receive funding then something else needs to replace it, which I can’t see happening for a multitude of reasons.

I have a strong suspicion that Netanyahu sees continuing and expanding the war as his only route to political survival and today's headlines suit him very nicely.

Whilst I believe any Israeli leader would have responded the same way to such an horrific attack, we’re now three months in and Netanyahu doesn’t appear to have an end game (beyond destroying Hamas). I’d like to see Hamas gone, but Netanyahu is the other half of the problem. At least he can be removed by democratic means, and hopefully will be sooner rather than later.

 

[DerekC]

The words “baby” and “bathwater” come to mind.

If that organisation as a whole is deemed unfit to receive funding then something else needs to replace it, which I can’t see happening for a multitude of reasons.

Agreed.

Whilst I believe any Israeli leader would have responded the same way to such an horrific attack, we’re now three months in and Netanyahu doesn’t appear to have an end game (beyond destroying Hamas). I’d like to see Hamas gone, but Netanyahu is the other half of the problem. At least he can be removed by democratic means, and hopefully will be sooner rather than later.

The problem is that (as some Israeli government members have said) it is simply not possible to destroy Hamas. And if somehow they managed to do that, the way they are doing it simply creates the foundation for Hamas Mark II in the next generation of young Palestinians. Hopefully you are right about Netanyahu. It was obvious from his first day in office that his premiership would simply drive a continuing conflict, and it has.

 

[Loppylugs]

Can someone explain to me how South Africa has the gall to bring a case of genocide against Israel when it openly trades with Russia, supplying Putin with money to buy weaponry to do the same act of genocide against Ukraine. Don't get me wrong, I abhor what Netanyahu is doing, but to me, South Africa should look at itself in the mirror. It's attitude of great friendliness towards Russia appals me.

 

[DustyBin]

The problem is that (as some Israeli government members have said) it is simply not possible to destroy Hamas. And if somehow they managed to do that, the way they are doing it simply creates the foundation for Hamas Mark II in the next generation of young Palestinians.

This is the difficulty; how do you simultaneously defeat Hamas militarily and ideologically? There is (possibly) a small window of opportunity to install some kind of new administration in Gaza post-Hamas, but for that to have any chance of success the Palestinian people need to see a better future.

Hopefully you are right about Netanyahu. It was obvious from his first day in office that his premiership would simply drive a continuing conflict, and it has.

When he returned to office I remember thinking no good would come of it. His popularity had declined prior to the October attack, and there were widespread anti-government protests. The danger, as you previously stated, is that he sees conflict as a route to political survival, or even as a way to dismantle democracy within Israel (as he appeared to be trying to do anyway).

 

[Ediswan]

I am very disappointed (but not surprised) that our government has suspended payments to UNRWA. The fact that staff paid by this agency appear to have participated and supported the October 7th attack is shocking and they should be punished. However it is the only agency supporting the survival of two million residents of Gaza in any effective way. Israel has grabbed this as a wonderful additional way of getting the US and its western allies even more visibly on its side. It has swept the ICJ's interim judgement, which was building further pressure on Israel to agree to a ceasefire, out of the news.

Israel has long claimed that some UNWRA staff are members of Hamas. They have waited until now to supply names

 

[geoffk]

I am very disappointed (but not surprised) that our government has suspended payments to UNRWA. The fact that staff paid by this agency appear to have participated and supported the October 7th attack is shocking and they should be punished. However it is the only agency supporting the survival of two million residents of Gaza in any effective way. Israel has grabbed this as a wonderful additional way of getting the US and its western allies even more visibly on its side. It has swept the ICJ's interim judgement, which was building further pressure on Israel to agree to a ceasefire, out of the news.

Suspending payments to UNRWA is a bit like defunding the NHS because Harold Shipman and Lucy Letby killed some their patients.

 

[nw1]

I don't know why the west (apparently US, UK and Germany as well as several others) are suspending payments to UNRWA. @geoffk has made a very good point here.

Should the organisation be liable for the actions of its members, and should ordinary Gazans suffer as a result?

It still seems to me that the West is being too partisan, and not firm enough on Netanyahu, in this conflict. If Netanyahu will not listen to simple requests from the West, to be honest it needs to escalate, and he needs to be threatened by the West with (economic) sanctions if he will not stop the bombing.

This would also of course be in the West's interests because it sounds like the Houthis violence is reprisal for the West's insufficient condemnation of Netanyahu and insufficient sympathy for Gazans. Come down hard on Netanyahu and I suspect the Houthis violence would end.

 

[DerekC]

It still seems to me that the West is being too partisan, and not firm enough on Netanyahu, in this conflict. If Netanyahu will not listen to simple requests from the West, to be honest it needs to escalate, and he needs to be threatened by the West with (economic) sanctions if he will not stop the bombing.

This would also of course be in the West's interests because it sounds like the Houthis violence is reprisal for the West's insufficient condemnation of Netanyahu and insufficient sympathy for Gazans. Come down hard on Netanyahu and I suspect the Houthis violence would end.

You are right, but it won't happen because the US (and the UK and most EU countries as well) have governments that are politically vulnerable to the antisemitism charge with which the Israeli government labels everyone who stands in their way, or even criticises their actions. It's not fair and it's not right, but it's a fact of post-WWII reality. That won't change if Labour wins the coming UK election and anyway the UK doesn't have much leverage with Israel. It's the US that matters. If Biden wins in November he might get a bit braver if it's not too late by then. If Trump wins, God help the whole of the Middle East (and the rest of us as well).

The only hope is that Netanyahu falls and is replaced by someone more moderate.

 

[eldomtom2]

The only hope is that Netanyahu falls and is replaced by someone more moderate.

The problem is that it comes to Palestine the "moderates" really aren't too different from Netanyahu...

 

[Falcon1200]

Should the organisation be liable for the actions of its members

Yes they should, absolutely; If the reports about UNRWA members are true, support for that organisation is, indirectly, support for Hamas.

It still seems to me that the West is being too partisan, and not firm enough on Netanyahu, in this conflict.

Agree, after Israel's continuing actions what hope is there for peace, ever, between Israel and the Palestinians?

 

[Typhoon]

Agree, after Israel's continuing actions what hope is there for peace, ever, between Israel and the Palestinians?

Not in my lifetime that is for certain. Anyone who endured the repeated pounding, the destruction, the arrests. the repeated moving on of even the wounded, the lack of even the basic resources - food and water, and the death of those known or unknown are unlikely to be advocating peace - ever.

Many weeks ago I thought there might be a faint glimmer of hope, Israeli Jews who were protesting for peace; maybe that movement would grow, maybe some Palestinians would see that, and reach out to them. That was quickly extinguished. We now have calls for the complete removal of Palestinians from Gaza.

We will never know but I wonder how many of the hostages have been (or will be) killed by friendly fire?

 

[nw1]

Meanwhile it sounds like the US military is carrying out attacks on targets in Iraq and Syria.

What we know about US retaliatory strikes in Iraq and Syria

More than 85 targets were struck in 30 minutes with bombers flown from the United States.

www.bbc.co.uk

US forces have bombed 85 targets in Iraq and Syria as retaliation for an attack that killed three US troops at a base in northern Jordan last month.

When will they learn that their constant interfering in the Middle East is probably one of the main reasons why there are so many problems there, and why there is widespread anger towards the West?

If a foreign country thousands of miles away starts bombing your own country, even the most mild-mannered, middle of the road, tolerant-of-other-cultures resident is going to start feeling a bit peeved.

The less interference, the lower the risk of terrorism towards all of us.

It's time the US military pulls out of the Middle East for all purposes other than peace-keeping. The US military, just like Netanyahu, seem to be very fond of violent militaristic "solutions" to problems which only make things worse.

Flip the whole argument on its head and it would be the same, basically, if Country X bombs targets in the US in retaliation for some US militants killing Country X residents in nearby Country Y. And I'm sure there are very few people who would support that.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

The problem is that when it comes to Palestine the "moderates" really aren't too different from Netanyahu...

I am afraid I think you are correct. In my 60 odd years on earth I have not seen moderate Israeli PMs be that much different than Netanyahu.

 

[DustyBin]

Meanwhile it sounds like the US military is carrying out attacks on targets in Iraq and Syria.

When will they learn that their constant interfering in the Middle East is probably one of the main reasons why there are so many problems there, and why there is widespread anger towards the West?

If a foreign country thousands of miles away starts bombing your own country, even the most mild-mannered, middle of the road, tolerant-of-other-cultures resident is going to start feeling a bit peeved.

The less interference, the lower the risk of terrorism towards all of us.

It's time the US military pulls out of the Middle East for all purposes other than peace-keeping. The US military, just like Netanyahu, seem to be very fond of violent militaristic "solutions" to problems which only make things worse.

Flip the whole argument on its head and it would be the same, basically, if Country X bombs targets in the US in retaliation for some US militants killing Country X residents in nearby Country Y. And I'm sure there are very few people who would support that.

I sort of agree with much of what you say, but the US aren’t the bad(dest) guys here.

The region would be a mess without Western interference, or any outside interference at all for that matter. As it happens, Russia has a significant military presence in Syria and also conducts operations in the area. (Syria in particular is a powder keg; the US, UK, Russia, Israel, Turkey, Iran, and numerous terrorist organisations all operate in close proximity which makes for a volatile situation).

For all it’s failings in the Middle East, and setting aside wider geopolitics, if the US walked away things could get a lot worse…

 

[nw1]

I sort of agree with much of what you say, but the US aren’t the bad(dest) guys here.

The region would be a mess without Western interference, or any outside interference at all for that matter. As it happens, Russia has a significant military presence in Syria and also conducts operations in the area. (Syria in particular is a powder keg; the US, UK, Russia, Israel, Turkey, Iran, and numerous terrorist organisations all operate in close proximity which makes for a volatile situation).

For all it’s failings in the Middle East, and setting aside wider geopolitics, if the US walked away things could get a lot worse…

I'm really not so sure, to be honest.

I get the strong impression (throughout the period of my life when I was aware of world events) that the US Government and military interfering in the Middle East, including their partisan attitude towards the Israel/Palestine conflict and attacks on foreign countries, has stoked up a lot of anger and resentment towards the West in many countries in this region, and not just from the governments, but the people too.

Even if the US military and government don't care that much about the local residents, they ought to care about their own. I suspect that interference in the Middle East by the US state apparatus has been the number one motivation behind terrorist attacks by Islamic militants in the West.

And of course non-US countries are targets too, even though a number of Western countries are much more sceptical about militarism. The US military and government are giving the whole of the West a bad name through their actions

I'm not saying violence would end if the US pulled out, but I suspect a number of things would be defused. I should also say that I would still support the West being in the region as non-partisan peacekeepers.

 

[DustyBin]

I'm really not so sure, to be honest.

I’m not sure myself; in reality I think we can only speculate.

I get the strong impression (throughout the period of my life when I was aware of world events) that the US Government and military interfering in the Middle East, including their partisan attitude towards the Israel/Palestine conflict and attacks on foreign countries, has stoked up a lot of anger and resentment towards the West in many countries in this region, and not just from the governments, but the people too.

There have certainly been some completely inappropriate interventions (the Iraq War being a standout example) that have understandably stoked anger and resentment towards the West. If you take the Gulf War however someone needed to act, and as the “world’s policeman” it was always going to be the US (in coalition to be fair to them).

I’m not naive; the US puts its geopolitical and economic interests first which has led to some of the more questionable actions. Having seen Russia’s style of intervention in Syria however, it’s probably the lesser of two evils. Again though, that’s not to defend every US /Western action by any means.

Even if the US military and government don't care that much about the local residents, they ought to care about their own. I suspect that interference in the Middle East by the US state apparatus has been the number one motivation behind terrorist attacks by Islamic militants in the West.

And of course non-US countries are targets too, even though a number of Western countries are much more sceptical about militarism. The US military and government are giving the whole of the West a bad name through their actions

You’re undoubtably correct in that we’ve made ourselves targets in this regard. The counter argument however is that if we let the nutters take over we’d all be at risk anyway.

Ignoring the reality of geopolitical and economic self-interests, if we left the region to it’s own devices I’m honestly not sure what would happen. One could argue that it’s the US (just about) keeping the current situation under control and avoiding a catastrophic regional war.

I'm not saying violence would end if the US pulled out, but I suspect a number of things would be defused. I should also say that I would still support the West being in the region as non-partisan peacekeepers.

As I’ve alluded to above, the danger is that if the US pulls out other (more nefarious) actors will step in. What it really needs is for these countries to get their own house(s) in order, but that’s not going to happen any time soon as too many of the major players have competing interests and religious differences (the latter can’t be blamed on the West!).

Whilst a non-partisan peacekeeping force is a great idea, in reality I think they’d end up being drawn into a conflict which is why nobody will touch Gaza with a bargepole. There’s no peace to be kept unfortunately, not yet anyway.

 

[brad465]

I've often wondered what will happen once the world has largely kicked out Middle East oil? On the one hand the most unstable part of the world being where the world's most valuable commodity is most abundant can't be a coincidence, so you'd think ditching reliance on it would stabilise it. However if these countries don't find a way to reinvent themselves in future, a dire economy would result which is in itself a recipe for instability.

 

[DustyBin]

I've often wondered what will happen once the world has largely kicked out Middle East oil? On the one hand the most unstable part of the world being where the world's most valuable commodity is most abundant can't be a coincidence, so you'd think ditching reliance on it would stabilise it. However if these countries don't find a way to reinvent themselves in future, a dire economy would result which is in itself a recipe for instability.

I’ve thought about this myself. I think it could go either way (if the situation actually materialises).

 

[RT4038]

Can someone explain to me how South Africa has the gall to bring a case of genocide against Israel when it openly trades with Russia, supplying Putin with money to buy weaponry to do the same act of genocide against Ukraine. Don't get me wrong, I abhor what Netanyahu is doing, but to me, South Africa should look at itself in the mirror. It's attitude of great friendliness towards Russia appals me.

The African National Congress , during its 'liberation struggle' , received a lot of support from the Palestine Liberation Organisation. I suspect that this a 'quid pro quo' ?

 

[nw1]

The African National Congress , during its 'liberation struggle' , received a lot of support from the Palestine Liberation Organisation. I suspect that this a 'quid pro quo' ?

Liberation struggle in quotes, any reason?

But the problem with South Africa in any case is not support for Palestine (which many of us would go along with) but continuing to trade with Russia. It's the latter that it needs to explain.

 

[RT4038]

Liberation struggle in quotes, any reason?

One man's 'liberation struggle' is another man's 'terrorism'. Depends which side you are on.....

But the problem with South Africa in any case is not support for Palestine (which many of us would go along with) but continuing to trade with Russia. It's the latter that it needs to explain.

The ANC received support from that direction too, I believe, which might well explain their stance now?

 

[renegademaster]

Most third world countries dont have the spare money to be picky with wether they want to trade with one of the biggest food exporters. Hence why they tend "to play both sides". Cheap Russian grain is what keeps hundreds of millions alive

 

[ainsworth74]

Cheap Russian grain is what keeps hundreds of millions alive

Just a shame that they invaded Ukraine and drove grain and similar prices through the roof by assaulting one of the breadbaskets of the world contributing to massive food insecurity for the most poor which has only recently begun to ease now that Ukraine is able to get around the Russian blockade more effectively.

 

[renegademaster]

Just a shame that they invaded Ukraine and drove grain and similar prices through the roof by assaulting one of the breadbaskets of the world contributing to massive food insecurity for the most poor which has only recently begun to ease now that Ukraine is able to get around the Russian blockade more effectively.

Im not trying to excuse Russia.
Im excusing poor countries that havent got the resources to start boycotting Russia over it.