Exploding Pagers - Lebanon

[Fergie 307]

It is what Netanyahu seems to want, and to draw USA in with him.

And what leads you to that conclusion? Netanyahu wants to eliminate the threat from Hamas and Hezbollah.
Whether you agree with the way he is going about it or not what he has amply demonstrated is that they can go after these people wherever they may be, without meaningful consequences, and I would suggest that includes not starting a major war.
Even when they are eliminated in another country, there will be protests from that country but no action.
I suspect the reason is that whilst many of Israel's neighbours may abhor their conduct in Gaza and elsewhere, and have some sympathy for the Palestinian cause, their enthusiasm for the cause is not sufficient for them to be prepared to go to war over it.
Many have previously fought Israel, with outcomes such that they are unlikely to want to do it again.
It is the nation states in the area that are important, not the likes of Hamas and Hezbollah.
None of them appears anywhere remotely close to going to war, and I would suggest none are likely to do so unless directly attacked by Israel.
If no one has gone to war over 30,000+ deaths in Gaza, what makes you think they are more likely to do so over a few Hezbollah fighters, or the civilians caught up in it?
The fact is that in the context of escalation to a "full scale war in the middle east" Hezbollah and Hamas are pretty much an irrelevance.
Iran will continue to meddle using Hezbollah as a proxy, but I don't doubt they would drop them like a hot brick if it started to have direct consequences for their own interests.
The only nation that has ever been able to curb Israel is the US, and the current administration is clearly unwilling to do so.
To be honest I get the impression that Biden was completely unprepared for the idea that an Israeli Prime Minister would essentially ignore him and carry on regardless.
He needs to put his foot down and stop supplies of war material as a wake up call, but is clearly not keen to take that step.
So things look set to continue as they are, and thousands more will die.

 

[TRITON]

The ball actually is in the Western court.

All they need to do to end this is tell israel that all weapons and financial aid stops until a ceasefire is initiated and a two state solution is implemented.

After that the funding can restart, but while we keep supplying them with all the weapons to prolong this conflict and genocide, it will go on

 

[Terry - Somerset]

Netanyahu has two objectives, neither of which he is delivering:

• there are ever fewer hostages to bring home as time goes by
• the overwhelming superiority of Israeli forces has failed to eliminate Hamas

He is increasingly unpopular in Israel and seems resistant to any ceasefire or peace process. The suggestion he is widening hostilities to prolong his premiership, avoid the courts, and retain power by keeping the right wing happy is speculation..

The displacement of ~2m Gazans, deaths of 30k+ civilians, and destruction of infrastructure will not eliminate Hamas, Hezbollah etc, but promote hate and expands the pool of new extremists.

Taken at face value this all suggests an acceptance of a permanent conflict which will no doubt peak every 5-15 years as new generations of terrorists re-arm and try again.

There is no certainty Israel will forever have a superior better equipped and trained military. The quality of weapons available to terrorist groups has increased (eg: longer range more accurate rockets) and with external support may in 15+ years prove an existential threat.

Therefore I wonder whether Netanyahu's intransigence is part of a plan to fully engage others in effective action to support longer term stability - UN, US, other Arab states. This requires:

• an independent Palestinian state - but where, borders,
• borders policed by UN - possibly for decades,
• multi Arab state support for new structures,
• lots of money to fund infrastructure and jobs - make sure terrorism does not pay
• the capacity to ensure rogue states - like Iran - are unable to disrupt the process

Those players who could make a difference will also realise the very high costs and risks involved and are understandably reluctant to step forward. In their absence the probability of a stable solution is close to zero.

 

[Terry - Somerset]

The ball actually is in the Western court.

All they need to do to end this is tell israel that all weapons and financial aid stops until a ceasefire is initiated and a two state solution is implemented.

After that the funding can restart, but while we keep supplying them with all the weapons to prolong this conflict and genocide, it will go on

It takes two to agree a solution. The fighting would also stop if terrorists were denied weapons.

The risk of cutting off weapons to Israel is that (a) the terrorists would be less motivated to come to the negotiating table, and (b) Israel, if they seemed to be close to annihilation, may decide on a nuclear option to bring hostilities to a close.

It should be noted that the actions of Hamas in seeking through conflict to eliminate Israel is genocide, the actions by Israel in defending itself by eliminating the threat is not - although I have no doubt atrocities have been committed by both sides.

The carrot, not the stick may be a better bet - provide the Palestinians with a secure independent state, initial funding to provide a decent infrastructure (jobs, education, health etc) and support a leadership whose goals are focussed on civilian needs rather than settling old scores.

 

[Scruples]

Geez, all the pussy cat cat footing around discussing a UK government defined terrorist group. What is all the ‘without taking sides’? To me it’s like saying your not taking sides discussing a convicted child molester, or the Nazis, there is only one morale stand point.

In your world, perhaps, I suppose morals are clear cut, but in the Middle East morals are defined by religion and/or the need to exist. When you believe that God is on your side, there is nothing you can't do, and that changes a person's moral compass somewhat.

 

[Fergie 307]

This is just the sort of situation where you could wish for some real power on the part of the UN, including a large and well equipped standing army.
They could potentially go in to stop the fighting and secure everyone's safety, whilst all the leaders involved got their heads banged together to negotiate a settlement.
Never going to happen of course.

 

[Scruples]

Netanyahu has two objectives, neither of which he is delivering:

• there are ever fewer hostages to bring home as time goes by
• the overwhelming superiority of Israeli forces has failed to eliminate Hamas

He is increasingly unpopular in Israel and seems resistant to any ceasefire or peace process. The suggestion he is widening hostilities to prolong his premiership, avoid the courts, and retain power by keeping the right wing happy is speculation..

The displacement of ~2m Gazans, deaths of 30k+ civilians, and destruction of infrastructure will not eliminate Hamas, Hezbollah etc, but promote hate and expands the pool of new extremists.

Taken at face value this all suggests an acceptance of a permanent conflict which will no doubt peak every 5-15 years as new generations of terrorists re-arm and try again.

There is no certainty Israel will forever have a superior better equipped and trained military. The quality of weapons available to terrorist groups has increased (eg: longer range more accurate rockets) and with external support may in 15+ years prove an existential threat.

Therefore I wonder whether Netanyahu's intransigence is part of a plan to fully engage others in effective action to support longer term stability - UN, US, other Arab states. This requires:

• an independent Palestinian state - but where, borders,
• borders policed by UN - possibly for decades,
• multi Arab state support for new structures,
• lots of money to fund infrastructure and jobs - make sure terrorism does not pay
• the capacity to ensure rogue states - like Iran - are unable to disrupt the process

Those players who could make a difference will also realise the very high costs and risks involved and are understandably reluctant to step forward. In their absence the probability of a stable solution is close to zero.

The tension in the Middle East ramps up. The Israeli settlers have, with government support, been land-grabbing and killing off those who complain. Hamas, a declared terrorist organisation by the West, has grown,and seen the need to, not only defend themselves, but to take on the might of Israel and its even mightier support from the US and UK.
The British, with pressure from the US created the Jewish state without consideration for others in the region. The two-state option would have been better resolved prior to 1948 with suppport for all parties. Stability in the Middle East has always been difficult and one tribe appears to be the central cause.
Too late now for peace talks...
It would be better if the West cound concentrate their support on Ukraine rather than be distracted by tribal wars.

 

[Superduner]

Newark Crossing on the East Coast Main Line (the Nottingham to Lincoln line is the other route), just north of Newark North Gate station, for example?

OK, I'll give you that. The only one in the UK. They have been trying to replace it for years but the site constraints make it very difficult.
My other comments about the programme, however, stand.

 

[Chubber]

I once had the opportunity to talk about age-old enmities with an elderly Muslim cleric. He explained that a common vow to avenge an insult or wrongdoing would be to visit revenge on the offender's 'children's children's children' before it was considered eligible for discontinuing.

We are (probably) looking at all this from the perspective of western Europeans, our ideologies differ enormously from the Arab cultures who weigh the value of human life on a different set of scales.

This was never more forcefully brought home to me than on the occasion of the a visit of HMS Amazon to Basra shortly after the Iraqi regime had ejected Russian delegations and the accompanying military forces over 'cultural' (religious) differences. A very strange visit.
On the first day a number of pro-communist agitators assembled outside the dockyard gates with signs saying 'Go home British!', heckling libertymen as they were escorted by armed guards in groups of six, on sightseeing tours.
In order to save 'embarrassing' the Captain and by implication the British Government anxious to do an oil deal, they were dispersed, the ring leader shot dead and brought to the ship on the bonnet of a jeep for him to decide what should be done with his body....

Sobering in an already allegedly teetotal state.

 

[Jacob]

..........And what leads you to that conclusion?

......commentaries from a number of experts in the field who have followed the whole history of zionism and Palestine.
Here's one from an Israeli Jew, ex IDF, historian, Omer Bartov: a long read but essential IMHO.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/aug/13/israel-gaza-historian-omer-bartov
/Can be listened to as a podcast
It's a similar sort of craziness which set Nazi Germany off to destroy Russia as well as all Jews.
It's helped by a residue of Islamophobia infecting Israeli allies in the west, including the UK; Muslims/Arabs often portrayed in a very negative and distorted fashion.
Ilan Pappe is another Israeli Jewish expert essential reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilan_Pappé
https://www.versobooks.com/en-gb/products/370-ten-myths-about-israel

 

[Spectric]

the overwhelming superiority of Israeli forces has failed to eliminate Hamas

Look at history, the might of the American forces could not defeat the north Vietnamese.

an independent Palestinian state - but where, borders,

As originally laid out in 1948.

The British, with pressure from the US created the Jewish state without consideration for others in the region.

Yes another British created mess that they were not bright enough to see the long term implications of, we only do short term thinking.

The first step in middle east peace is to get rid of old netty nu nu as he is just a warmonger who seems to think he is better than the rest of us yet will be the first to bring up the holocaust to justify there need for being just a militarised state.

 

[niall Y]

Conflict, on and off , has been a part of this regions, history for over 2000, years. It isn't going to go away overnight. The unilateral setting up of a Jewish state through conflict has led to the constant need to defend the borders, if it is to continue to survive..

What has to change is the mind-set of the protagonists. Israel did itself no favours by lurching to the right and keeping Netanyahu in power. There was a far better chance of peace before the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin.

If a two state option is really the only solution then Jordan is probably going to be an integral part of the new Palestinian territory.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I was friendly with a few Jordanians in the late '70s who were here at college - they always said they were Palestinian not Jordanian.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

It takes two to agree a solution. The fighting would also stop if terrorists were denied weapons.

The risk of cutting off weapons to Israel is that (a) the terrorists would be less motivated to come to the negotiating table, and (b) Israel, if they seemed to be close to annihilation, may decide on a nuclear option to bring hostilities to a close.

It should be noted that the actions of Hamas in seeking through conflict to eliminate Israel is genocide, the actions by Israel in defending itself by eliminating the threat is not - although I have no doubt atrocities have been committed by both sides.

The carrot, not the stick may be a better bet - provide the Palestinians with a secure independent state, initial funding to provide a decent infrastructure (jobs, education, health etc) and support a leadership whose goals are focussed on civilian needs rather than settling old scores.

Terry, while I largely agree with what you have written, there is one glaring fact that cannot be taken lightly: the radical Islamists do not want "a secure independent state". They want all of the land, including the land of Israel. It is a genocidal motive. The Arab population were offered "a secure independent state" in 1945, and chose to go to war instead (followed by other wars). The stated vow of Hamas and other radical Islamists (led by Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khameneh) is the eradication of Israel, and then Jews around the world, followed by all who are not Muslim. Good luck to getting Hamas and other radical Islamists to agree to living peacefully alongside Israel.

Now doubt the purpose of sabotaging the pagers was partially to send a message ("Don't mess with us"), and partially to disrupt planning by Hezbollah.

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Jacob]

Terry, while I largely agree with what you have written, there is one glaring fact that cannot be taken lightly: the radical Islamists do not want "a secure independent state". They want all of the land, including the land of Israel. It is a genocidal motive. The Arab population were offered "a secure independent state" in 1945, and chose to go to war instead (followed by other wars). The stated vow of Hamas and other radical Islamists (led by Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khameneh) is the eradication of Israel, and then Jews around the world, followed by all who are not Muslim. Good luck to getting Hamas and other radical Islamists to agree to living peacefully alongside Israel.

Now doubt the purpose of sabotaging the pagers was partially to send a message ("Don't mess with us"), and partially to disrupt planning by Hezbollah.

Regards from Perth

Derek

"Palestine, which yearns for peace and stability for over a century, saw its longest period of peace during the 401 years of Ottoman rule, from the conquest of Jerusalem in 1516 to the dawn of the British Mandate in 1917."
https://www.trtworld.com/turkiye/ho...man-palestine-a-story-of-coexistence-15612345

 

[selectortone]

The stated vow of Hamas and other radical Islamists (led by Seyyed Ali Hosseini Khameneh) is the eradication of Israel, and then Jews around the world, followed by all who are not Muslim

Jacob, you gloss over that part in your many lectures on this subject.

While I agree with you that the carnage in the Middle East is appalling, I can't really summon up much sympathy for terrorists with the above objectives being targeted by these devices.

 

[Jacob]

Terry, while I largely agree with what you have written, there is one glaring fact that cannot be taken lightly: the radical Islamists do not want "a secure independent state".

Except that it isn't a "fact".
In fact the opposite is true - the Israelis want all of Palestine, with Palestinians either expelled, killed or subjugated under an apartheid regime.
This has been on the agenda, to varying degrees, covert or overtly, since the advent of Zionism, which was itself a reaction to the worldwide antisemitism which culminated in the holocaust.
"Radicalisation" of Islamist factions is just part of an inevitable reaction to Zionism i.e. not antisemitic in itself.
You've picked up some very weird extremist opinions Derek! Easily done - you just need to read around the topic a bit more.

 

[Derek Cohen (Perth Oz)]

You've picked up some very weird extremist opinions Derek! Easily done - you just need to read around the topic a bit more.

Jacob, you're really barking up the wrong tree. I am extremely well researched. My views are not extremist, actually very balanced - you need to read more widely than Turkish newspapers or watch the BBC news. You are welcome to disagree with me ... but then, I would take that as a compliment since you tend to disagree with everyone

Regards from Perth

Derek

 

[Stanleymonkey]

Israel from the sea to the river - speech at the UN
Netanyahu's party have a stated aim of removing the land and people of Palestine. Officially documented and openly shared at the highest levels.

 

[Spectric]

We need to be careful with who is classed as a terrorist, it seems to be very loosely used these days to pigeon hole anyone who does not agree with western values or fails to agree with some idea. So if the UK was suddenly invaded and taken over by some other nation and we were forced to live under there rule and live a very basic life of survival, would some of us be classed as terrorist if we decided that this is not right and we want to live as a free country again ?

We call out Putin because he invaded Ukraine and some believe he has bigger ambitions but Netty Nu Nu wants to expand israel by openly using genocide and the west are just looking on as spectators using terrorism as an excuse not to intervene.