[RD] War in Gaza: News Thread

There is no doubt that the UK government has been following the US line,
its members and supporters often reluctantly swallowing their own moral qualms.

But on detecting a softening of the US position, they see no reason to continue
to hold that line which they think the US may abandon, and be politically exposed.

It is worth noting that the UK has followed the US in Iraq and Afghanistan and
found itself being subject to ECHR and ICC claims. Whereas the US government
never joined/ratified the ICC etc and was therefore able to simply ignore all that.
Same in Australia.
 
Then the UK electorate is a morally decrepit society that deserves all the misery and depression heaped its way.
The UK electorate did NOT vote to invade Gaza.
And this particular UK elector does not take kindly for being blamed for that.

No one is asking the UK to solve moral problems.

The protest marches in the UK demanded the UK government deliver a ceasefire in Gaza.

But the UK government does not have the power to deliver that.

The rest of the world has had enough of that. But in the deaths of +30k Palestinians the UK is complicit by virtue of its material and moral support of Israel.

The UK is not a participant in this war, and neutral parties are permitted to trade with participants.

Although selling munitions so a participant can bomb/shell UK relief workers does seem rather stupid.

If the UK could do nothing about those Palestinians, then what can they about these Britons?

And if the UK is doing something in response to the deaths of these Britons, then it sure as heck could've done something in response to the deaths of tens of thousands of those Palestinians

I don't think the UK is doing anything about the deaths of those Britons.
 
The UK electorate did NOT vote to invade Gaza.
And this particular UK elector does not take kindly for being blamed for that.
You have no right to be indignant after stating that you and your fellow voters are indifferent to something that their government helped carry out until it affected their own citizens.
The protest marches in the UK demanded the UK government deliver a ceasefire in Gaza.

But the UK government does not have the power to deliver that.
No. Western governments like the UK have an immense amount of power over Israel owing to the amount of aid they supply to Israel, not mention being the only friends Israel has. A serious demand for ceasefire by them would be taken seriously by Israel.
 
It seems to me that supplying Israel with aid was never dependent upon their ability to fight Islamists but as a matter of course for an eventual alliance if ever it came to a Mid East war (if not direct, then holding down the flank of an enemy power). To that end, I doubt very much Israel will suspend its campaign no matter what the threats from the outside world about withholding aid. I suppose you can try some sort of threat, but if you are truly insistent on stopping all of what Israel is doing, I guess you can always just back the other side...
 
You have no right to be indignant after stating that you and your fellow voters are indifferent to something that their government helped carry out until it affected their own citizens.

What is that something?

If it is the delberate slaughter of innocent Palestinian civilians, I doubt that the UK government ever intended that.

Thing is the UK government either permits UK arms exports to Israel or it prohibits them.

Once exported, it has no control on whether Hamas fighters or palestinian civilians get killed with them.

No. Western governments like the UK have an immense amount of power over Israel owing to the amount of aid they supply to Israel, not mention being the only friends Israel has. A serious demand for ceasefire by them would be taken seriously by Israel.

How much aid does the UK supply to Israel?
 
Once exported, it has no control on whether Hamas fighters or palestinian civilians get killed with them.
Who said it did?

If you enable someone to do a thing they can't do without your help, welcome to causality.
 
That is rather strange logic.

In my opinion that Benjamin Netanyahu person is perfectly capable
of organising an invasion of Gaza without any enabling by the UK.
 
That is rather strange logic.

In my opinion that Benjamin Netanyahu person is perfectly capable
of organising an invasion of Gaza without any enabling by the UK.
If we and the US didn't supply him with military aid, he wouldn't be able to prosecute for as long as he has (at least without leaving Israel vulnerability).

I don't think your understanding of the issue is the problem, however :)
 
I believe that what the UK supplies Israel is trivial, compared with what the USA supplies Israel.

Well, picking up on your point re causality.

If the USA didn't supply Israel with conventional weapons, he'd likely have nuked Gaza instead.
And that would be less discriminate regarding killing civilians than what is happening now.
 
It doesn’t matter because the electorate doesn’t actually determine anything for itself, it just rubberstamps the bourgeois party elites and their taking-care-of-their-friends style action. So perhap the only thing to blame on UK voters is that they are an entire culture of cowards who won’t even do something about their own government. Well as the great state of Israel says about Gaza, “they could have done some thing about Hamas. They are all responsible.
 
If we and the US didn't supply him with military aid, he wouldn't be able to prosecute for as long as he has (at least without leaving Israel vulnerability).
Aside from the US, the "we" here is pretty weak.

In 2022 Israel imported 467 million USD worth of weapons – 375 million from the US, and 48 million from India. The rest of the world made up the remaining 44 million, so by comparison they were all pretty negligible from Israel's pov.

 
Aside from the US, the "we" here is pretty weak.

In 2022 Israel imported 467 million USD worth of weapons – 375 million from the US, and 48 million from India. The rest of the world made up the remaining 44 million, so by comparison they were all pretty negligible from Israel's pov.

Shouldn't be a problem, diplomatically, to stop it then! :)
 
Shouldn't be a problem, diplomatically, to stop it then! :)
Using what leverage? Not the general perception of Israel being militarily collectively supported by "the west" at least. India alone has more clout there.

Stopping what a well-armed nation is doing inside what effectively amounts to their borders has proven extremely difficult – diplomatically...

The US is another matter. But the US patience first need to run out. Might be about to though.
 
I believe that technically Gaza is not part of Israel though Israel is the occupying power and maintains tight border controls on Gaza. However Israel's actions as an occupying power come under the jurisdiction of International Law not domestic law.
 
careful now... >_> <_<
Israel de facto has as much control as it wants, and no one is going to stick their hand in, which we all know. It's also why Israel is responsible for the situation. If this was actually some kind of conflict between relatively equitable parties, things would look rather different.
 
Using what leverage?
What leverage is required, if said aid is - in your words - "pretty negligible from Israel's point of view"?

If said aid is important enough to Israel that they get to play hardball over it, by definition it's no longer negligible. The aid is the leverage, which should be being leveraged. Or ideally withheld completely at this point.
 
Anyhow, back to news:
Important development in the case of South Africa v. Israel:   Colombia intervenes in support of South Africa's case, claiming that the case against Israel's violation of the Genocide Convention is compelling.


Direct link to press release: https://tinyurl.com/5jeywudp
 
It seems to me that supplying Israel with aid was never dependent upon their ability to fight Islamists but as a matter of course for an eventual alliance if ever it came to a Mid East war (if not direct, then holding down the flank of an enemy power).
For American geopolitical internationalists, it's even more specific than that: It's about Iran. For a number of American Christians, it's also (or primarily) about Biblical prophecy, to bring about the return of the Messiah.


The Guardian said:
Broadly speaking, some evangelicals believe that Jewish people returning to Israel following the 1917 Balfour Declaration, a British statement which called for “the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people”, was key to end times, when God will purge sinners and Jesus Christ will return.
The Guardian said:
Lee Fang, a journalist, recently asked [U.S.] congressmen and women whether their religion was important to their support for Israel, for the documentary “Praying for Armageddon”.

“This entire matter is based upon the faith of our maker, our creator, but it’s also faith of a chosen people,” Pete Sessions, a Republican congressman from Texas and a Methodist, said.

Fang asked Tim Burchett, a Republican congressman from Tennessee, about evangelical support.

“They’re following the scripture, and what the scripture says about Israel: ‘Those who bless Israel will be blessed,’ they take it literal, and I’m one of those people,” Burchett said.
 
Top Bottom