Israel/Palestine Thread

It's not beyond possibility, there are a few in the Israeli establishment who would want it. But I do think that although a lot of the israeli establishment don't care about what happens to innocent Palestinians, they do care about Israeli lives.

And I'm a big fan of Hanlons Razor, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". There's another similar phrase called Greys law, "Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice"

Basically people make stupid mistakes. They're incompetent. And sometimes it's easy to view these blunders as being so big, that we end up thinking they must have been deliberate because people can't be that stupid. But never underestimate the stupidity of people.

Fair point. Or for example they thought there'd be an attack but not 1000 dead type attack. They might have deemed 100 deaths a worthy sacrifice but underestimated the ability of HAMAS.

Isn’t doing it in this roundabout way even worse? Doesn't it show consciousness of guilt? The bottom line: Israel sought to damage the credibility of secular forces in Palestine because it has never wanted a Palestinian state. Thus it gave money to a fanatical religious rival with horrible consequences for all.

The back and forth on this has a load of vectors. There are still those in Israel and America who would like to hit investment in Ireland, including this lunatic.

Former U.S. National Security Adviser Robert O’Brien sharply criticized Ireland’s growing political split from the United States and its deepening ties to China in a new policy paper from the London-based think tank Policy Exchange.

“Despite its professed neutrality, Ireland pursues an increasingly activist foreign policy that is marked by its divergence from everything the Trump administration stands for, particularly in the Middle East,” O’Brien said. “Ireland is at the forefront of allegations of genocide against Israel and is historically among the most hostile nations towards Israel in the Western world. 

Of course, Israel has its own hands full with PR issues in America and elsewhere at the moment. Social media has opened up a lot of eyes among the under 40 crowd that traditional TV stations kept shut.

UAE are a problem in the Middle East and elsewhere undermining any progress towards regional cohesion.

Israel is behind a secret pact with the United Arab Emirates to destroy Saudi Arabia’s role as the Gulf’s regional powerbroker. The astonishing claim is just one of a series of sensational statements made by a senior Arab royal whistle blower to Middle East Monitor on Tuesday evening.

Will the UK government let the hunger strikers die, are their obligations to Israel that great?

https://thecradle.co/articles/doctors-warn-lives-of-palestine-action-hunger-strikers-at-risk-in-uk-detention

Investment decisions are not made on politics they are made based on omney and risk and thats why US private sector investement is leaving Israel.

So you don't understand what it is, thanks for confriming.

Well, the Suffragettes were considerably more violent than Palestinian Action - staging numerous arson attacks, bomb attacks and even killed several people.

The Suffragettes were only a small part of the women's suffrage movement, and in fact their attention-seeking actions are often considered to have hindered the cause of women's suffrage rather than helped it. It's been portrayed by later generations as having been a romantic and successful movement, but it's not at all clear that this is accurate.

Hundreds of thousands of supporters held meetings and signed petitions. However, some women believed that only direct action could force change. Derisively labelled ‘suffragettes’ by Daily Mail journalist Charles E Hands, they formed a new militant wing of the women's suffrage movement. These women staged headline-grabbing stunts, chaining themselves to railings and attacking property. Yet they risked turning the press and public against their cause.

There is little doubt that in popular memory the Suffragettes are generally given the greatest share of the credit for the vote. However, many historians believe this is unfair.  To begin with, they point to the sheer scale and range of activity of the NUWSS by 1914. Another factor was that the NUWSS leader Millicent Fawcett was in talks with the Labour Party in 1914 with a view to supporting them against the Liberals in elections. This seriously worried the Liberal leaders and it seems likely that some sort of measure might have been passed in 1914 or soon after.

But the other massive difference is that their own violent actions were one thing - but they were carried out in favour of getting the vote for women and nothing else. They were not in any way connected with a terrorist cause that itself attacked innocent women and children around the world.