Wednesday, 28 January 2009

Problems in Gaza

After an uneasy ceasefire there's a danger that the war will restart. According to the BBC, an attack on an Israeli patrol force, which left one soldier dead, was followed by air attacks and a tank incursion. One Palestinian was apparently killed in the original incident. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7852745.stm and http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7853803.stm for more information. A resumption of open hostilities would be terrible for both Gaza and Israel, let us hope the ceasefire holds.

26 comments:

  1. Can see anything to object to here. It even makes clear that it was Hamas or a related group which initiated it by tweaking the nose of the I.D.F. If I were protecting my countrymen, I wouldn't risk a devastating response from a more powerful neighbour which would leave me alone otherwise; but that's just me.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unfortunately, decisions out there are based as much on ideology as on strategy or the objective of peace. Much, I dare say, like the motivation for kicking up this stink in the Law Fac.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "Problems in Gaza"

    What a strange way to headline a Hamas attack.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm not sure that this was necessarily a matter of ideology over tactics. After all, it is in Hamas' interests to see a resumption of combat and more Palestinian corpses - then Israel are the baddies and they get away with murder. Literally.

    ReplyDelete
  5. When Israel stops occupying Palestinian lands and subjecting the populace to subhuman conditions only then can it expect an end to the resistance.

    the only Ideology these occupations subscribe to is a belief in the right of humanity - something which has been so long denied to the Palestinians.

    Free Palestine

    Queen Mary Occupation

    ReplyDelete
  6. >> the only Ideology these occupations subscribe to is a belief in the right of humanity - something which has been so long denied to the Palestinians.

    Then they should be prepared to suffer a bit of university discipline or, at the very least, restricted access to the tuck shop. Freedom, but only until tea-time.

    ReplyDelete
  7. QMO, you might do well to consider that condoning Hamas aggression is not a great way to encourage opposition to Israeli aggression.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Occupiers - do you really want to be associated with Hamas supporters like QMO?

    Will that hurt or harm your cause do you think?

    ReplyDelete
  9. all occupied peoples have the right to resist. this attck was on a military target and was probably not ordered from on high. QMO supports hamas as far as they are the elected government of Gaza.
    as for alecs comment on suffering, i'm not sure that the mass protest against he iraq war consisted of us spliting up 80 20 and shooting at each other.
    I was involved in the occupation and I will be again and I am not a university student. it is not university discipline that I or any of the other occpiers from outside the university are thratened with, it is legal reprocussions and I am more than happy to be arrested or charged in the name of a cause i deem to be just.
    somehow i don't think you have the guts to say the same

    ReplyDelete
  10. keep in mind qmo (and apparently sam wade) think that starbucks sends money to the idf.

    are you _that_ surprised they'd support hamas?

    ReplyDelete
  11. sorry mate just where in any of my post did i say i think starbucks supports the IDF.
    had you bothered to ask i would have staed that i apposeany boycott as the damage is done to the working class and not tto the rulers who are the problem.
    I also said catagorically that i do not supposrt Hamas but i do recognise tham as the elected government
    get some glasses and sort yourself out

    ReplyDelete
  12. "QMO supports Hamas"

    Well your Cambridge comrades are not quite so foolish. Even if they agree with you, they don't admit it publicly.

    ReplyDelete
  13. the sad thing is that qmo actually makes pretty reasonable demands. except for the starbucks thing which is not only silly, but shows a serious lack of research into a topic these guys are putting at the front of their action.

    this is not to say i support occupying university facilities. i do not. on the other hand, i certainly have no problem with ethical investment or sending surplus equipment to people who need it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. >> all occupied peoples have the right to resist.

    What a disgraceful contempt for human life this represents. One Israeli has died and, even without considering the particular response, such attacks inevitably result in greater deaths of Palestinians.

    Yet you cheer on greater bloodshed. Did Father Christmas not give you a copy of Grand Theft Auto? That's how 'normal' people sate their blood-lust by proxy.

    >> sorry mate just where in any of my post did i say i think starbucks supports the IDF.

    In the Queen Mary thread in which, you dispute my calling it a lie. Dyslexia is no excuse for twattishness.

    >> QMO supports hamas as far as they are the elected government of Gaza.

    And I support bank-robbers right to a steady-job, but not when they gun-down tellers. They and you have both said they also support the bit where they behave like Hamas. I don't know which is worse, doing so or not having the intellectual courage to admit to it.

    Beside, in 2006 Hamas received the largest vote for the legislative election. That is, neither a majority vote nor to *executive* control. Yet, they proceeded to seize 100% of all control in Gaza. Try to imagine West Dunbartonshire Council kicking out any governance from the Scottish Executive.

    >> as for alecs comment on suffering, i'm not sure that the mass protest against he iraq war consisted of us spliting up 80 20 and shooting at each other.

    I have no idea what that's supposed to mean.

    ReplyDelete
  15. It's interesting that none of the pro-Israeli's address the issue that that the Israeli's are living on stolen land. Also, Israel is hardly democratic: 40 Hamas parliamentarians are imprisoned in Israel; many anti governments protests are banned and individuals arrested and imprisoned; Arabs are not allowed to enter Israel, even if the are legally married to an Arab Israeli; the Arab Israeli parties have been banned from participating in next month's election. Does this mean that Israel are terrotists?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Tams, as Sam Wade has been so keen to say, what is your personal investment in this?

    ReplyDelete
  17. you forgot to mention that they eat babies and control the world with their money.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I think these auld fools might all be Harry Pollitt's friends. Ignore them, they're Stalinists.

    ReplyDelete
  19. "Tams, as Sam Wade has been so keen to say, what is your personal investment in this?"

    Wrong answer: answer the points Alec. They are valid. Oh wait, are you struggling to come up with an answer...?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Same for you, Owen. What do *you* stand to loose to encourage the continuation of this?

    ReplyDelete
  21. "It's interesting that none of the pro-Israeli's address the issue that that the Israeli's are living on stolen land."

    1) learn to punctuate 2) *all* israelis?!

    "Also, Israel is hardly democratic: 40 Hamas parliamentarians are imprisoned in Israel"

    lol @ hamas parliamentarians

    "many anti governments protests are banned and individuals arrested and imprisoned"

    would need specific instances; i'm not saying israel is paradise, but i suppose, on the whole, individuals are arrested and imprisoned in all sorts of countries.

    "Arabs are not allowed to enter Israel, even if the are legally married to an Arab Israeli"

    if true this is interesting.

    "the Arab Israeli parties have been banned from participating in next month's election."

    *some* have been, yeah; again, not ideal, but not without reason. these parties were linked with hamas.

    ReplyDelete
  22. "It's interesting that none of the pro-Israeli's address the issue that that the Israeli's are living on stolen land."

    This could mean either that Israel itself is stolen, or that some individual properties in Israel were stolen, or both.

    Israel's foundation was mandated in the aftermath of the First World War, along with those of, inter alia, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Gulf States and Turkey. Previously the entire region had been provincial, not national, and subject to one or other empire whose rule began in and was maintained by force. Israel is no more stolen than is, say Jordan. Unless, that is, you are a religious supremacist who believes that once territory is conquered by a Muslim army it must remain Muslim for all time. Hamas are certainly such (read their Charter). But right minded people treat religious supremacy with the same contempt as racial supremacy, for the same reason.

    In the sense that individual properties were stolen from individual Palestinians, that's true. It's also true that individual properties were stolen from some of the 900,000 Jews who were forced to flee oppression in Muslim countries and who made their way to Israel during the first half of the 20th century. The land area thus lost has been calculated to have been almost ten times the land area of modern Israel.

    Obviously, things can't be set back. Israelis (up to Cabinet level) have expressed a willingness to agree compensation, though, so long as it works both ways. There has been little obvious enthusiasm for this in Arab countries.

    "Also, Israel is hardly democratic"

    Israel is a fully democratic country.

    "40 Hamas parliamentarians are imprisoned in Israel;"

    This is irrelevant to the question of whether or not Israel is a democratic. It might be justified, it might not, but it's irrelevant to this context.

    "many anti governments protests are banned and individuals arrested and imprisoned"

    There is no question of dissenting protest under Hamas in Gaza. Even playing music at a wedding can get you and your guests murdered. There have been anti-war protests in Israel.

    "Arabs are not allowed to enter Israel, even if the are legally married to an Arab Israeli;"

    Many Arabs live in Israel as full citizens. There are Arab members of the Knesset and one Arab Cabinet Minister.

    "the Arab Israeli parties have been banned from participating in next month's election."

    This ban was overturned by judicial appeal, because Israel is a secular democracy in which such things can happen.

    "Does this mean that Israel are terrotists?"

    No. They're completely irrelevant to the question of terrorism. It's arguable that terror tactics were used in Gaza by Israel. It's definite that Hamas are terrorists.

    Your comment was ignorant gibberish. I really hope you're not a student. Standards, and all that.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Let me second Underthought. I await accusations from Infinity that Peter is a troll.

    ReplyDelete
  24. "I really hope you're not a student. Standards, and all that."

    I share your sentiment, Peter. Seems when the intellectual ceiling is reached in these threads, nothing further bounces off. The 'behemoths of social justice' have nothing to offer when confronted with intelligent retorts.

    ReplyDelete