2023 Israel - Hamas war

[Strathclyder]

I think this is the most difficult question of them all. My own, pie-in-the-sky proposals are this:

1) We establish a four state solution, as follows:

A: State of Israel within the borders of 1967, with some adjustments in the West Bank where there are undeniably Israeli towns on the edge of the pre-1967 State of Israel.
B: West Bank Palestine, internationally recognised and largely within the pre-1967 West Bank borders, minus a handful of exceptions. All settlements deep within the West Bank would be abandoned. Israel would cede control of the West Bank borders, particularly with Jordan.
C: Gaza City State, which would be under Arab control and designed to create a new Singapore in the region. Israel would fully disengage, including economically, with the US Dollar or similar strong currency used. The Arab countries would have responsibility for security and defence, with the goal of normalising relations between Gaza and Israel. The aim would be for independence to be granted within 10 years, but with the strict rule that any sort of political unification between Gaza and the West Bank Palestine state would be explicitly prohibited.
D: Neutral Jerusalem, which would be under UN control and function as a single city. Public services would be provided by separate Jewish and Arab municipalities operating within the city, with the UN acting as a neutral referee and overlord in case of dispute. The city would be legally separate from both Israel and West Bank Palestine, and the UN would be permitted to use force to ensure neutrality. The city itself would have its own legal system, including migration, and would function as a de facto independent city state. There would be no possibility of the city gaining independence, unless a majority of both Jewish and Arab residents consented.

2) A separation barrier is built with international cooperation to put an end to attacks. This should be as secure as possible to ensure both Israeli and Palestinian safety. The UN would provide a strong peacekeeping presence, with a buffer zone built between the two and monitored by UN authorities.

3) Gaza would have a functioning seaport and airport, while the Arab countries would take responsibility for building a new transit road to Gaza via Egypt and Jordan. The same would be with the West Bank.

The question is: what happens if Israel is then attacked despite all this? I don't know the answer.

Fully agreed with all of this. Sadly, the last question is the key to all this and I suspect no-one anywhere knows how to answer it; I certainly don't.

 

[hst43102]

I note that Sunak wants to stop pro-Palestinian protests on Armistice Day.

Bit ironic on the day in which people remember the victims of war. Who are the dead Palestinians in Gaza if they are not victims of war?

See: https://www.itv.com/news/2023-11-03/will-police-stop-pro-palestinian-protests-on-remembrance-day;



No, it isn't. Protests for peace and protests against the killing of innocent civilians are absolutely in harmony with what Armistice Day should be all about, a day to remember the horrors of war and the victims of war.

Far worse than holding the protests on that day is Sunak's attempt to emotionally blackmail people into not protesting, in an apparent attempt to silence them. Make no mistake, Sunak is unambiguously turning into a right-wing authoritarian. Even more ironically he goes on about "freedoms" in his post on Twitter. What about the "freedoms" for people to protest?

It's classic far right divide-and-conquer tactics, and it's absolutely disgusting. If there was ever a day to protest war and call for peace, surely it has to be armistice day?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I note that Sunak wants to stop pro-Palestinian protests on Armistice Day.

Bit ironic on the day in which people remember the victims of war. Who are the dead Palestinians in Gaza if they are not victims of war?

See: https://www.itv.com/news/2023-11-03/will-police-stop-pro-palestinian-protests-on-remembrance-day;

There's a rather big difference between the respectful dignified ceremonies and minutes of silence that we have on Remembrance day and a (likely, noisy and possibly violent at the fringes) demonstration, is there not?

Mostly I think the Government has got it totally wrong on the current Israel/Gaza war: Israel does not deserve our support to carry out the war in the particular way it appears to be doing, without regard to the suffering of the Palestinians, and the UK Government should be protesting to Israel about that. But on this particularly issue, I think Rishi Sunak is probably correct. You don't want protests that might interfere with ceremonies to remember British war dead - which is what Sunak is basically talking about. Any other day or place (within reason), yes, but not this particular day/place.

 

[jon0844]

I expect that by doing this, there's far more chance of violence - which plays into the hands of the right wing nutters who have been goading and promising that any second now, all the immigrants are going to rise up and start killing us. They seem most upset that the marches, often with lots of Jews amongst them, have been mostly peaceful.

 

[Yew]

There's a rather big difference between the respectful dignified ceremonies and minutes of silence that we have on Remembrance day and a (likely, noisy and possibly violent at the fringes) demonstration, is there not?

Mostly I think the Government has got it totally wrong on the current Israel/Gaza war: Israel does not deserve our support to carry out the war in the particular way it appears to be doing, without regard to the suffering of the Palestinians, and the UK Government should be protesting to Israel about that. But on this particularly issue, I think Rishi Sunak is probably correct. You don't want protests that might interfere with ceremonies to remember British war dead - which is what Sunak is basically talking about. Any other day or place (within reason), yes, but not this particular day/place.

Will you be arranging the ceasefire until the other day?

 

[birchesgreen]

I expect that by doing this, there's far more chance of violence - which plays into the hands of the right wing nutters who have been goading and promising that any second now, all the immigrants are going to rise up and start killing us. They seem most upset that the marches, often with lots of Jews amongst them, have been mostly peaceful.

Yes Sunak and Braverman (especially) are probably slavering at the prospect of trouble.

 

[Loppylugs]

There's a rather big difference between the respectful dignified ceremonies and minutes of silence that we have on Remembrance day and a (likely, noisy and possibly violent at the fringes) demonstration, is there not?

Mostly I think the Government has got it totally wrong on the current Israel/Gaza war: Israel does not deserve our support to carry out the war in the particular way it appears to be doing, without regard to the suffering of the Palestinians, and the UK Government should be protesting to Israel about that. But on this particularly issue, I think Rishi Sunak is probably correct. You don't want protests that might interfere with ceremonies to remember British war dead - which is what Sunak is basically talking about. Any other day or place (within reason), yes, but not this particular day/place.

Totally agree. Remembrance Day should be purely to show respect for those who gave their lives to save this country from oppression and to give us the freedom we enjoy today. I don't recollect any such protests last November 11 against Russia murdering Ukrainians.

 

[nw1]

There's a rather big difference between the respectful dignified ceremonies and minutes of silence that we have on Remembrance day and a (likely, noisy and possibly violent at the fringes) demonstration, is there not?

Except that Sunak appears to want the protests not to happen all weekend. Not just at 11am and not just near the Cenotaph.
.
And besides which, the protest leaders are specifically avoiding 11am and staying well away from the Cenotaph. From the BBC (https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-67305535)

Ben Jamal, director of Palestine Solidarity Campaign, said it had "made clear that we have no intention of marching anywhere near Whitehall out of respect for events taking place at the Cenotaph".
He added the march will begin almost two hours after the silence of commemoration for the war dead.
"Each of the protests we have called have been peaceful, orderly, and attended by hundreds of thousands of demonstrators from a diverse cross section of British society," he said, adding that "to suggest that undertaking protests well away from Whitehall is a disrespect for the war dead is an insult to those marching for peace".
Ismail Patel, spokesman for Friends of Al-Aqsa, a pro-Palestinian non-governmental organisation, said: "We definitely will not be at the Cenotaph. We understand the sensitivity of the date."
Responding to Mr Sunak's comment about "disrespectful" protests, Yasmine Ahmed, UK director of the international campaign group Human Rights Watch, called it "cynical, culture war politics and an attack on our democratic freedoms".

Totally agree. Remembrance Day should be purely to show respect for those who gave their lives to save this country from oppression and to give us the freedom we enjoy today. I don't recollect any such protests last November 11 against Russia murdering Ukrainians.

Is it though? I personally consider it a day to remember all victims of war of any nationality and the horrors of war in general, and I know I'm not alone. Maybe there wasn't an anti-Putin, pro-Ukraine march last year, but maybe there should have been. It would have been 100% appropriate.

Mostly I think the Government has got it totally wrong on the current Israel/Gaza war: Israel does not deserve our support to carry out the war in the particular way it appears to be doing, without regard to the suffering of the Palestinians, and the UK Government should be protesting to Israel about that. But on this particularly issue, I think Rishi Sunak is probably correct. You don't want protests that might interfere with ceremonies to remember British war dead - which is what Sunak is basically talking about. Any other day or place (within reason), yes, but not this particular day/place.

Except it's not at 11am and not at the Cenotaph (see above). A protest at 1pm in some other part of London is scarcely going to do any damage.

From the quotes made by the protest leaders above, it is they who are the respectful ones and Sunak who is not.

Yes Sunak and Braverman (especially) are probably slavering at the prospect of trouble.

Well, Braverman has already labelled the Palestine protests "hate marches"; I will move subsequent discussion on this to the Sunak thread (https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...nservative-party.238681/page-174#post-6484155)

 

[farleigh]

I

Totally agree. Remembrance Day should be purely to show respect for those who gave their lives to save this country from oppression and to give us the freedom we enjoy today. I don't recollect any such protests last November 11 against Russia murdering Ukrainians.

Yes I agree. Any protests on November 11 are likely to be unpopular with most people.

Does anybody know a reason why there are regular marches against Israel but not Russia? It does seem rather odd now that I think about it.

 

[nw1]

Yes I agree. Any protests on November 11 are likely to be unpopular with most people.

But not everyone. This is a free country with freedom of speech, so let people protest.

 

[DustyBin]

Is it though? I personally consider it a day to remember all victims of war of any nationality and the horrors of war in general, and I know I'm not alone. Maybe there wasn't an anti-Putin, pro-Ukraine march last year, but maybe there should have been. It would have been 100% appropriate.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that interpretation in my opinion.

The problem as I see it is that a pro-Palestine march is partisan in it’s very nature. That’s not to say that the majority of attendees are Hamas supporting lunatics, but from what I’ve seen of these marches there aren’t many people “remembering” the Israeli victims (I’m happy to be corrected however).

The rest of what you’ve posted looks fair enough; hopefully the traditional Remembrance Day ceremony will be unaffected.

 

[nw1]

Does anybody know a reason why there are regular marches against Israel but not Russia? It does seem rather odd now that I think about it.

There have been plenty of pro-Ukraine protests and marches, have there not?

I suspect in the current situation, though, people are particularly annoyed at the Government's partisan stance on the current conflict, as if Palestinians are in no way victims. With Ukraine, the government's stance aligned with what most sensible people would think.

There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that interpretation in my opinion.

The problem as I see it is that a pro-Palestine march is partisan in it’s very nature. That’s not to say that the majority of attendees are Hamas supporting lunatics, but from what I’ve seen of these marches there aren’t many people “remembering” the Israeli victims (I’m happy to be corrected however).

I suspect the issue is that the Government appear to be ignoring the Palestinian side, so a pro-Palestinian march is highlighting the problems when the Government are doing too little about it.

I agree that a pro-Palestinian march, ignoring the Israeli victims, immediately after the Hamas attacks, and before Netanyahu started bombing Gaza, would have been inappropriate. However, given that the currently ongoing violence is directed against Palestinians, pro-Palestinian marches right now are absolutely appropriate.

 

[Loppylugs]

But not everyone. This is a free country with freedom of speech, so let people protest.

The very reason you have a free country with freedom of speech is because of the sacrifice made by British men and women in the World Wars. November 11 should be to honour them, and them alone, it should be for the country to concentrate on their bravery.

 

[nw1]

The very reason you have a free country with freedom of speech is because of the sacrifice made by British men and women in the World Wars. November 11 should be to honour them, and them alone, it should be for the country to concentrate on their bravery.

You do realise that you are undermining that freedom of speech with that statement, in seemingly being in support of preventing any protest, anywhere in London at any time of day, from happening.

 

[hst43102]

Does anybody know a reason why there are regular marches against Israel but not Russia? It does seem rather odd now that I think about it.

The same reason that there haven't been regular marches attracting 100,000 people in support of civilians in Yemen, or the Congo, or Ethiopia, or in China, or Armenia (many of which have undergone organised genocide, unlike in Gaza) - I wish I could say that it is because people really care about the civilians and innocent lives but the evidence leads me to believe it's more that people want the destruction of the state of Israel.

That being said, people absolutely have a right to protest. I might disagree with some of their points but I see absolutely no reason why protests should be banned on armistice day. In fact it sets a rather ugly precedent when the government can decide which protests are acceptable or not on which day.

 

[nw1]

The same reason that there haven't been regular marches attracting 100,000 people in support of civilians in Yemen, or the Congo, or Ethiopia, or in China, or Armenia (many of which have undergone organised genocide, unlike in Gaza) - I wish I could say that it is because people really care about the civilians and innocent lives but the evidence leads me to believe it's more that people want the destruction of the state of Israel.

I don't think many, aside from alt-left and alt-right extremists, want the destruction of the state of Israel. I suspect more are outraged by Netanyahu's over-the-top response and the British government's lack of condemnation of Netanyahu. People's quarrels are with Netanyahu and Likud, and our own government, not the state of Israel itself.

Also remember that this conflict is constantly on the news. The other conflicts you mention are barely covered. Maybe if they were, more people would protest against them.

That being said, people absolutely have a right to protest. I might disagree with some of their points but I see absolutely no reason why protests should be banned on armistice day. In fact it sets a rather ugly precedent when the government can decide which protests are acceptable or not on which day.

This, however, I absolutely agree with. Regardless of the rights or wrongs of what's going on in Gaza, the fundamental right to protest should absolutely be upheld and there is no way that a march taking place miles away from the Cenotaph, and two hours later, is going to disrupt the memorial service (which AFAIK is on the Sunday anyway, not the 11th). No, it's all part of Sunak and Braverman's authoritarianism and ongoing culture war.

Let's say there was a right-wing protest against immigration taking place at 1pm on November 11th in some other part of London. Or a protest against hunting laws, of the type we saw during the Blair years. Would Sunak and Braverman be concerned? I think we all know the answer to that one.

 

[uglymonkey]

Also I think once a war drops out of the news cycle people forget ( unless personal connection) .Also a case of compassion overload as well. Look what happened to Ukraine coverage once Hamas/Israel started.

 

[GS250]

Let's say there was a right-wing protest against immigration taking place at 1pm on November 11th in some other part of London. Or a protest against hunting laws, of the type we saw during the Blair years. Would Sunak and Braverman be concerned? I think we all know the answer to that one.

That's very hypothetical though. I very much doubt anyone on the 'right' would even contemplate such a thing.

Theres a delicious irony though that two Anglo-Asians are now seen as the facilitator of anti migration protests.

 

[DustyBin]

I don't think many, aside from alt-left and alt-right extremists, want the destruction of the state of Israel.

Along with a significant number of Palestinians, which is where it all gets rather murky.

I should also point out that according to recent (but pre-war) polling, a significant number of Israelis likewise reject the idea of a Palestinian state.

This is why I don’t feel I can take sides in this. I can only wish for peace (which is fanciful, sadly) and condemn individual actions by either side where they are clearly in the wrong.

I suspect more are outraged by Netanyahu's over-the-top response and the British government's lack of condemnation of Netanyahu. People's quarrels are with Netanyahu and Likud, and our own government, not the state of Israel itself.

So what would have been an appropriate response? This is the question that nobody seems able to answer.

As repugnant as the Netanyahu administration is, I honestly don’t think a more moderate government would have reacted any differently under the circumstances.

 

[mr_jrt]

Very late to this thread, but having read a bit I am curious to get some thoughts on something I've been pondering for some time. It's very, very murky ground, but can people give many examples of when ethnic partition has worked long term? It seems to have particularly been the favoured approach of the British when washing their hands of situations towards the end of empire, i.e. India, Palestine, Ireland, Malaysia, etc. and all it ever seemed to create is large amounts of displaced people and generational increased ethnic tensions. In short, I'm not sure a two-three-four or whatever state solution can ever truly work.

To that end, surely integration and multiculturalism has to be the only sustainable solution long-term? It's murky in this particular scenario because it could be construed as calling for the destruction of Israel as it is, but the intent is a suggestion for something more that is both Israel and Palestine, both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, both India and Pakistan, etc. with protections for the minority group to all have secure standing in government. Counter examples of course being things like Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia, et al. where despite being unified, the ethic groups didn't combine and live side by side and (in some cases following vicious conflict) were once again partitioned along ethnic lines.

I obviously don't know what the answer is, but the above has long struck me as the awkward situation we find ourselves in and I was curious to get other people's general thoughts on it.

 

[nw1]

Theres a delicious irony though that two Anglo-Asians are now seen as the facilitator of anti migration protests.

See the Sunak thread for discussion of this: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...nservative-party.238681/page-174#post-6484446

 

[brad465]

Does anybody know a reason why there are regular marches against Israel but not Russia? It does seem rather odd now that I think about it.

There have been plenty of pro-Ukraine protests and marches, have there not?

I suspect in the current situation, though, people are particularly annoyed at the Government's partisan stance on the current conflict, as if Palestinians are in no way victims. With Ukraine, the government's stance aligned with what most sensible people would think.


I suspect the issue is that the Government appear to be ignoring the Palestinian side, so a pro-Palestinian march is highlighting the problems when the Government are doing too little about it.

I agree that a pro-Palestinian march, ignoring the Israeli victims, immediately after the Hamas attacks, and before Netanyahu started bombing Gaza, would have been inappropriate. However, given that the currently ongoing violence is directed against Palestinians, pro-Palestinian marches right now are absolutely appropriate.

Yes I think that when there is a clear case of immorality/injustice, no amount of Government and/or media unity in positioning to support the immorality will stop resentment in the population. Hence why little in the way of contrasting protests have occurred regarding Russia-Ukraine (although some countries in Eastern Europe have had problems here), but large scale ones regarding Israel-Palestine around the world.

 

[glasgowniteowl]

Having just seen the current protest at Waverley Station in Edinburgh, speaking to staff I understand that there has also been protests in at least Glasgow Central, Birmingham New Street and Manchester Piccadilly today some of which are still on going

 

[John Webb]

Protests for or against what?

 

[glasgowniteowl]

Calling for a ceasefire in gaza

The one here in Edinburgh has completely filled the station, I can see the station having to be closed as passengers struggling to access trains

 

[Robski_]

London Charing Cross is exit only due to protesters on the concourse, unsafe for passengers to enter/access platforms.

 

[800001]

Kings Cross last night

 

[_toommm_]

ALT TEXT: The photo below is of the concourse at Manchester Piccadilly, showing a very crowded scene of people protesting with the Palestinian flag and homemade signs.

 

[Cletus]

Liverpool Street the other day too.

They should be outside parliament, but it's hardly ever open for business.

 

[MP33]

I see the leader of Hezbollah has been speaking.

Put him before The Hague and he can follow the pattern of.

Being assigned a legal team and sacking them.

Start his own defence by giving a statement. After about three weeks, the Chief Justice will say I am afraid we will have to stop you. Unless you get to the point.