Palestine 🇵🇸 = Ukraine 🇺🇦 ?

In a “limited and specific way” I suppose.

In the sense that they train their soldiers about what is legally defensible and what is not. It’s like coaches training footballers about offside rules. Players are coached to play to the letter of the law and have plausible deniability if they offend.

The Russian approach is to murder the referee, put his head on a pike, rape his wife, sell his children into slavery, then dare the next referee to penalize a foul.

Throwing rocks at armed border guards isn’t a harmless kid’s prank and the kids doing that know exactly what they’re doing.

Kid with rock “I’ve got a lock on the target”

In the sense that they train their soldiers about what is legally defensible and what is not. It’s like coaches training footballers about offside rules. Players are coached to play to the letter of the law and have plausible deniability if they offend.

Now who can argue with that?

It accepts that there is international law and that it chooses to ignore it?

It accepts that there is international law and that it chooses to ignore it?

You must be anti-Semitic(*)

(* I know this is a complete non sequitur, but it’s de rigeur to label criticism of Israel as being anti-Semitic on a regular basis, and we haven’t done so for a while)

Given that all images can be propaganda including barefooted Palestinian boys, shall we have this one to balance it out a bit?

They look like soldiers to me, how ’bout you?

Now, obviously they’re not anything like as well equipped the Israeli military, but neither are they wee kiddies throwing rocks. I doubt either that one of these Hamas lads pictured against the tank would elicit the same response. Would Israeli soldiers have legitimate claim to attack them? certainly British Army soldiers would. If it dresses like a soldier, acts like a soldier, treat it like a soldier…

How did that geezer get a NATO helmet? And why has he got much more ammo than anyone else?

If we’re swapping pictures, how about these lovely cuddly boys?

how about these lovely cuddly boys?

Well they look proper hard, they apparently don’t need helmets – they are that hard.

 And why has he got much more ammo than anyone else?

He drew the short straw probably.

Why not post up pictures of the casualties then ?. Oh wait, theres none on the Israeli side and all on the Palestinian side, many of them children.

Why not post up pictures of the casualties then ?. Oh wait, theres none on the Israeli side and all on the Palestinian side, many of them children.

Those “children” are just terrorists in a cunning disguise. I know that’s true cos the Israelis say so.

Why not post up pictures of the casualties then ?

Don’t Israeli troops regularly target photographers?

Apparently they are quite camera shy.

Perhaps cameras are some of the best tools to bring about peace in the region:

Though of course, those peddling arms are unlikely to welcome that outcome

Perhaps cameras are some of the best tools to bring about peace in the region:

Unlikely, Israelis see someone pointing a camera at them as even more of a threat than someone throwing stones.

Saw five broken cameras back when it was released. Absolutely brilliant documentary.

Imagine getting a night time visit from the army because your pre teen child had allegedly thrown a rock. I’m afraid the argument that Israeli army follows the law in a limited, specific or indeed any kind of way is nonsense.

They shoot camera operators and children as that documentary shows quite clearly.

16 kids in the last few days.

Why is it that if Irael is the baddie that Egypt also has a virtually closed border with Gaza?

You mean the Egypt that until recently has consistently been one of the largest recipients of US military aid?

So whilst Palestine is effectively prohibited from forming an army to protect itself, Israel continues to receive vast amounts of military aid…

Why is it that if Irael is the baddie that Egypt also has a virtually closed border with Gaza?

What a strange question. Israel’s appalling treatment and repression of the Palestinians does not preclude other governments from also behaving in an appalling way. Did you think it did?

Israel is the main aggressor against the Palestinians, stealing their homes and lands and imprisoning them on Gaza. The behaviour of other governments who ignore justice for the Palestinians and support Israel, including western governments, is also deplorable.

The plight of the Palestinians is the great injustice of modern times, quite simply because so few governments care.

The Palestinians are expected to pay the price for horrendous crimes committed by Europeans.

Pretty much sums it up Ernie 👍

Well, this thread is about whether Palestine is the same as Ukraine. It spilled over from the Ukraine thread, where it was proposed that the U.S. should supply Palestinians with HIMARS rocket launchers because they are being supplied to Ukraine.

The short answer is that Palestinians are deliberately firing rockets at Israeli civilians but Ukraine is not deliberately targeting Russian civilians. That’s a very important difference, so the two situations are not identical. If the U.S. supplied Palestinians with weapons, they would almost certainly be used against Israeli civilians. The U.S. and other NATO countries are not going to do that or support anyone who supplies weapons used to attack Israeli citizens.

That doesn’t mean that Israeli policy is justified or correct. It’s just the answer to the question that kicked this thread off – why not send HIMARS to Palestinians?

From the Ukraine thread:

jivehoneyjive
Free Member
Strange how NATO are not sanctioning apartheid Israel & arming the Palestinians…

DrJ
Free Member
Maybe if the US supplied Palestine with tanks and HIMARS the Palestinians would not be reduced to attacking civilians. Note also that the attacks on civilians produce far fewer casualties than “surgical” attacks on Palestinians.

If the U.S. supplied Palestinians with weapons, they would almost certainly be used against Israeli civilians.

Why do you think that – because as I pointed out earlier Israel in violation of the Geneva Convention uses civilians as instruments of conquest?

If the Palestinians were provided with accurate weapons with which to defend themselves and drive out foreign invaders from their occupied lands the very obvious targets would military. Are you assuming that because the Israelis target civilians the Palestinians would do the same?

And if that really was a cause for concern then the solution would be very easy – the US and NATO could take on the responsibility of driving out the occupying forces from Palestinian lands. Everyone trusts NATO not to kill civilians when they fight wars in the Middle East – do they not? They certainly have plenty of experience of fighting “liberation” wars in the region, if not directly indirectly.

However the huge problem for the Palestinians is that not only is land wanted by people fleeing persecution from places such as New York, but very few Palestinians are heads of global banks or oil-rich Sheikhs so western governments don’t give a **** about them.

Are militants in Palestine using IDF tactics and intentionally targetting civilians?

Or is it merely that they only have access to primitive weaponry to counter the regular bombardments they face from occupying forces who are more heavily armed to an exponential level?

Whatever the truth may be on that front, I’m not convinced Hamas are Palestine’s best hope of liberation; especially as their formation can be traced back to funding by Israel’s security services, in much the same way that Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State were spawned from covert training and weapons trafficked on behalf of Western Intelligence agencies (Though Israel were involved in both Operation Cyclone and Timber Sycamore, it would be unfair not to include the arguably larger roles played by the CIA, MI6, Saudi Intelligence etc etc)

It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that flooding weapons into a situation is never the best solution (unless you’re in the ‘defence’ industry, or a shareholder thereof)

A CBS News documentary reveals that up to 70% of Western aid for Ukraine falls into a black hole of corruption and doesn’t make it to the front lines.

Are you surprised? pic.twitter.com/o4E1pvZDLZ

— Ignorance, the root and stem of all evil (@ivan_8848) August 7, 2022

Are you assuming that because the Israelis target civilians the Palestinians would do the same?

It’s not an assumption. Palestinian groups have a long history of targeting Israeli civilians, it’s their policy. Palestinian rockets are crude unguided weapons that are pretty much useless for hitting any military target. They are launched at Israeli cities to terrorize the civilian population. So it’s not that “the Palestinians would do the same”, it’s that Palestinians have been doing exactly that for decades. That’s why Israel is critical of human-rights groups – attacks on Israeli civilians are ignored but Israeli responses are condemned.

Sending any weapons to Palestine is a terrible idea. Palestinian militants are not going to defeat the Israeli army. Israel defeated Arab armies in multiple wars and nobody seriously thinks that Palestinians are going to do any better. If somebody did send tanks and GPS guided missiles into Palestine, those weapons would automatically become legitimate targets for the Israeli military and they would be quickly destroyed because they would be very difficult to hide, unlike the home-made rockets the Palestinians currently use. Condemning Israel for shooting at teenagers throwing rocks is one thing, but it would take some pretty serious mental gymnastics to argue that someone with a tank is an unarmed civilian. So, sending weapons to Israel would not lead to Palestinians overthrowing Israel, it would just give Israel more justification to bomb Palestinians. Really, really silly idea.

It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that flooding weapons into a situation is never the best solution (unless you’re in the ‘defence’ industry, or a shareholder thereof)

For info, that is now an old figure but still a current problem, albeit one being worked on.

Back in April, he estimated that just “30-40%” of the supplies coming across the border reached its final destination. But he says the situation has significantly improved since then and a much larger quantity now gets where it’s supposed to go.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-military-aid-weapons-front-lines/

That CBS story has been widely criticized as misinformed. It refers to supplies, not weapons. The weapons that the U.S. and NATO are supplying are very carefully documented. They aren’t just taken across the border and handed to whoever shows up, they are formally transferred to the Ukrainian military and signed for. The big-ticket stuff like HIMARS is easy to track and is not being diverted to black market operators. Doesn’t mean that stuff won’t get stolen, but it’s not credible that 70% of the weapons supplied have been stolen.

The short answer is that Palestinians are deliberately firing rockets at Israeli civilians but Ukraine is not deliberately targeting Russian civilians.

That may change when Russian “settlers” arrive; it is probably already be the case that Ukrainians are killing pro-Russian civilians in Donbas.

As you say, sending HIMARS to Palestine would be militarily ineffective, but that’s not the reason they are not sent. The US and friends are content to ignore the vile outrages perpetrated by the Israelis on a daily basis because it is strategically and politically convenient for them to do so.

Palestinian militants are not going to defeat the Israeli army. Israel defeated Arab armies in multiple wars and nobody seriously thinks that

You have selective memory. Hezbollah was specifically formed to fight Israel’s illegal occupation of South Lebanon.

Eventually Hezbollah defeated Israel and her Lebanese fascist allies and 22 years after UN Resolution 425 calling for Israel’s immediate withdrawal from South Lebanon Israel was humiliatingly forced to comply.

One crucial reason why Hezbollah was able to force Israel to comply with UN Resolution 425 was because they had, through Iran, access to modern and effective weapons. Otherwise Israel would still undoubtedly be in South Lebanon – Western governments would not have forced Israel to end her illegal occupation. It took Iranian backed militants to do that.

Mornin’ thols, hope you slept well old chap!

The CBS report has been criticized by those responsible for the failings exposed, because they’re generally used to gushing PR, rather than scrutiny for their actions. Reading between the lines it sounds like they shat themselves at being discovered and rushed a high ranking General out to tidy things up pronto.

I’ve extracted the only indisputably true bit I can find in your ramblings…

Palestinian rockets are crude unguided weapons that are pretty much useless for hitting any military target

The reasons for this have already been covered

The Lebanon invasion was a catastrophic mistake on the part of Israel. Their military is very effective at beating regular armies in open warfare. Trying to occupy another country is a different matter. Utterly stupid of them.

The problem for Palestinians is that militarily defeating Israel would require invading Israel with tanks and soldiers. That’s exactly the type of battle that Israel excels at. Sending tanks and HIMARS to the Palestinians would not help them at all, it would just give Israel more targets to bomb. The Palestinians cannot defeat Israel militarily and no Arab country is going to try invading again.

Clearly I was wrong to even consider comparing the plight of Palestinians with that of Ukrainians…

quite aside from their being prevented from access to any significant arms to defend themselves from the constant onslaught of Israeli military might on the civilian population and the collective punishment bought about by regular cuts to both electricity and more shockingly water, they also have to contend with increasing levels of racism.

When you're definitely not an apartheid state… pic.twitter.com/AjkShnGkxa

— Alan MacLeod (@AlanRMacLeod) August 9, 2022

they also have to contend with increasing levels of racism.

To be pedantic, the racism might not be increasing. Israel was founded as a Jewish state, that’s the core of many of their problems, it’s a very small step from that to apartheid. Having Israel defined as a Jewish state makes a one-state solution to the Palestinian problem impossible (because it would have to be a secular state with a majority Palestinian population), but a two-state solution is not possible without both Israel and Palestine extremists backing off from their demands. Palestinian extremists would have to stop calling for the destruction of Israel and sign a peace treaty with it and Israeli extremists would have to accept a viable Palestinian state, which would mean returning land annexed in 1967, as well as bulldozing the settlements built since then.

That actually looked possible back in the 1990s, but extremists on both sides sabotaged the peace process with brutal attacks on civilians. Those attacks were deliberately intended to stop any peace settlement by brutalizing civilians, they weren’t aimed at military targets.

So, now the moderate Israelis and Palestinians who wanted to negotiate a peace deal have been discredited by both the Israeli and Palestinian extremists, and the view of Israel as a Jewish homeland fighting to prevent a second holocaust is what unites hard-line Israelis. Westerners who refuse to acknowledge that Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians are terrorism and who suggest supplying weapons to Palestinians just make it easier for Israeli extremists to discredit moderates who push for a peace settlement.

And what do you think refusing to acknowledge that the IDF uses terrorist tactics achieves?

But the reality is that Israel and her backers aren’t interested in peace at all. Why should they be – it is the Palestinians who pay the price for the continuous violence, not the Israelis.

The murder rate in the United States is 2 times higher than it is in Israel. So an American Jew immigrating to Israel is actually moving to a substantial safer place.

There is absolutely no incentive for Israel to seek peace.

There is absolutely no incentive for Israel to seek peace.

This is what Israeli right-wing extremists say to moderate Israelis who do want peace. A peace deal would have to be based on Palestinian recognition of the state of Israel, just as the neighboring countries have done over the last few decades (plus it would require Israeli recognition of a Palestinian government and territory.) Any group that calls for the destruction of Israel cannot be part of any peace process, so attacks against Israeli civilians have to stop before any peace is possible. That’s not just a moral argument, it’s a pragmatic one – every time Palestinians launch an attack against Israeli civilians, right-wing Israelis say, “I told you so, you can never trust Palestinians to live in peace.” If a Palestinian government can’t prevent extremists from attacking Israel, it means that Palestinians don’t recognize the legitimacy of their own government. In turn, that means that Israel would be foolish to recognize it as a legitimate government.

Sending weapons to Palestinians gives Israel legal cover to search for and destroy those weapons. The weapons are militarily ineffective, they are used to target civilians, not military targets. The extremist Palestinians do that for propaganda reasons – they need to keep up support among their supporters as defenders of the Palestinian cause. For them, any peace deal is just as politically unacceptable as it is for Israeli hardliners. A peace deal would mean the militant groups would have to cede power to a civilian Palestinian government.

This means that it is in the interests of both Palestinian and Israeli hardliners to keep the conflict going as a low-intensity thing that furnishes propaganda for their side. Westerners who call for sending weapons to Palestinians and refuse to acknowledge that Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians are crimes are not contributing to any peaceful solution, they are just handing right-wing Israelis the best propaganda they can possibly ask for.

This means that it is in the interests of both Palestinian and Israeli hardliners to keep the conflict going as a low-intensity thing that furnishes propaganda for their side.

There’s every chance there’s some truth in that, in much the same way, it’s in NATO’s interest to ensure conflicts and threats continue, to ensure funding and increase membership…

Maybe if Israel stopped occupying Palestinian land first Thols? Shouldn’t that be the first step?

Maybe if Israel stopped occupying Palestinian land first Thols? Shouldn’t that be the first step?

If you want a peaceful resolution, that would have to be part of a package of actions on the part of both sides.

Just imagine if Israel did that unilaterally. Say they withdrew to the pre-1967 boundaries and recognized a Palestinian state. The reality is that there is no single authority over all of those Palestinian territories and there are militant groups that vow to destroy Israel. Those groups would continue to launch attacks on Israel. However, instead of having the status of illegal combatants (because they aren’t fighting for a sovereign state), they would now be considered by Israel to be soldiers fighting for a sovereign state. That means that Israel and Palestine would be at war (because an attack on Israel was launched from the Palestinian state) and Israel could legitimately blockade the Palestinian state and bomb any site used to manufacture, store, or fire weapons from. They would also be entitled to invade Palestinian lands and occupy them until a peace treaty was signed because that’s perfectly legal when two countries are at war. The Palestinian authorities would have to disarm any militia groups and recognize Israel as a legitimate state before any peace treaty could be negotiated.

So, if Israel did unilaterally recognize a Palestinian state and withdrew from Palestinian lands, the situation would instantly revert to what it is now, except that Israel would have legal cover that they were fighting a defensive war against another country. The reality is not going to change until Palestinian leaders recognize Israel as a legitimate state and are able to disarm militant Palestinian groups. Hard-liners on both sides know this and deliberately sabotage any attempts at meaningful peace deals. Sending weapons to Palestinian groups would make things worse for Palestinians, not better.

Edit: Also, if Israel recognized Palestine as a sovereign state and captured Palestinians who had deliberately fired rockets at Israeli cities, they could demand that they were tried for war crimes because they are no longer just outlaws, they are soldiers who are subject to the laws of war. What that means is that the Palestinian leaders would have to disarm those groups themselves. If they endorsed indiscriminate attacks on civilians, the Palestinian leaders would also be liable to be tried for war crimes.

So the fact that for whatever murky reason the international community fails to recognize Palestine as a sovereign state is the reason Israel can continue a campaign of war crimes with impunity?