In the news

Have we done Isis ordering the genital mutilation of potentially 4 million iraqi females yet?

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/24/isis-women-girls-fgm-mosul-un?CMP=fb_gu

this world is shit. can we get a new one?

hoping that's a hoax

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2014/07/israeli-shells-hits-un-shelter-gaza-201472413198190287.html

IDF shells a UN school. Phillip Hammond on the telly saying he's 'concerned'. fuck off and find a pair you sack of tory shit.

Hoy IDd for entry to Hoy velodrome....

How many Horsemen of the Apocalypse were there again?

There's an Ebola virus outbreak going down in West Africa thats killed as many so far in 2014 as you'd normally expect to die in 10 years.

And there's the plague of plane crashes...

and people driving into buildings...

/paging o'schick

Isn't that George Michael's job?
Wham!

Third botched execution in 6 months in the US. Long past time to leave this barbarism behind.

I'm not sure whether this got linked in the last few pages
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/20/gaza-occupation-occupier-israelis-peace?CMP=fb_ot

What really is the point of that article? That we should still feel sorry for the Israelis?
Because of the Holocaust? Because of a victim mentality?
Great, well they can just go and kill whoever they want then. Makes perfect sense.
That argument has been rolled out to apologize for continuous war crimes time and time again, but lets flip it.
Over the past 70 years, Palestinians have been utterly, utterly demonised, to the point (as made in the article) that an Israeli sees them as lower than them, and the west conflates them with extremism.
On top of that, the continuous arrests, illegal land grabs, killings and other illegal actitvites Israel carries out leads to a continuous victimisation of the young.
So its perfectly fair, and should be understandable to us all why Hamas still uses rockets, as its the Israelis fault. They bring it on themselves, after all.

Israel should be demonised, for whatever excuse you want to use for their actions, the actions are still illegal, disproportionate and indiscriminate, perpetuating their own atrocity, because 'An eye for an eye' is inherently part of their belief structure, even if that second eye is not the one who damaged theirs in the first place.

What really is the point of that article? That we should still feel sorry for the Israelis?
Because of the Holocaust? Because of a victim mentality?
Great, well they can just go and kill whoever they want then. Makes perfect sense.

No Henry, I think the article says the opposite. It makes many of the points you and other have made in this thread, and rather well. It doesn't excuse Israel, or suggest we should feel sorry for the Israelis. Maybe we read it differently.

One of the joys of reading.
(and of course prejudice on my part).

@ffn- your comment is ignorant and wrong, and approaches apologizing.

I'm sorry you feel that way. Allow me to explain:

My comments were not about the current situation in Gaza or Israel's other activities. As far as those go I will offer a hearty "fuck Israel" and add a "fuck Hamas too". Whatever the cause/justification of Hamas's military actions they are vanishingly unlikely to achieve anything positive and, simply because of the geography of the conflict, leave many thousands of civilians in harms way.

Anti-Islam was used as a useful term, for no term has yet been defined for the racism that continues throughout the UK and the world against Muslims and Arabs (and anyone who looks Muslim or Arabic).
Anti-Semitism no longer has a racial* component
In which case we have used the terms in different ways. I used "anti-semitic" to mean a racial prejudice, whether you believe it has a racial component or not (and I'm not sure how you can claim it doesn't, given that yoe use the words "Semite race"). Frankly the whole concept of race is complete bullshit, but the persecution of people because of their perceived race is very real and sadly facilitates Israel playing the anti-semitism card whenever someone calls them on their vile policies.

"Anti-islam" I used to mean exactly what it sounds like i.e., the criticism of that religion. I have absolutely no truck whatsoever with any religion (including the religion that motivates Zionism) as I think religion is a fundamentally divisive force and gives people what they see to be an unchallengeable basis for action that is outside (and sometimes runs contrary to) our universal, shared humanity.

the racism that continues throughout the UK and the world against Muslims and Arabs (and anyone who looks Muslim or Arabic.
Racism against Arabs does exist and is as abhorrent as any other form of racism. But you can't be racist against Muslims, because "Muslim" isn't a race. People of many races (let's go with the bullshit term for a minute) are Muslims. To be anti-Islam is not to be anti-Muslim, but if you look like a Muslim (through wearing religious dress) then it's reasonable for people to assume that you subscribe to a doctrine with which they might disagree, in exactly the way they could if you wear a crucifix or an anarchist T-shirt.

It's all really fucked isn't it. Personally I'd love to see America tell Israel to get to fuck. They would shit their pants utterly. Not going to happen though.

Between Gaza, Ukraine and Iraq, there's a lot to worry about.

I saw eyebrows' post yesterday and wanted to comment on the whole 'race' discussion - mainly that it's an invented concept, so there are only two factors at play - firstly, does a cultural grouping consider itself a race? Secondly, does a larger national/international community distinguish people of that race. From my point of view, it's a slightly redundant discussion - use 'group' and 'prejudice' instead of race and racism, and there's much less of an issue. I don't think there's any controversy in acknowledging that jews identify as a distinct group, nor that they've been discriminated against on the basis of that identity. I don't think it's productive to debate whether an Arab racial identity is any more legitimate than a jewish one.

On the more pressing issue of Israel and Palestine. Violence is not going to solve this. As one facebook post I saw went: "here comes operation same shit, different name". A repeat of the annual assault on Gaza, with the same outcomes. The only positive I've taken from this, is that diaspora jews, and moderates in the US (who previously swallowed the media line on Israel) are starting to realize quite how horrific the occupation is. http://www.jeremiahhaber.com/2014/07/when-palestinians-live-up-to-israels.html summed up how I felt about the situation.

The only issue I have, as an anti-zionist, deeply irreligious jew (hence my position on identity) is that while I would like to protest, and add my voice to people calling for Palestinian statehood and an end to the violence - I don't want to march alongside people who don't distinguish between jews and zionists, or are making anti-semitic remarks. Nor do I think that Israel is akin to the Nazis, or that it's in any way helpful to demonize them as such. Dialogue is key, and dehumanizing one another only furthers conflict.

It's all really fucked isn't it. Personally I'd love to see America tell Israel to get to fuck. They would shit their pants utterly. Not going to happen though.

There's a big problem with the AIPAC lobby in the US, and how afraid politicians are of criticizing Israel. That's part of the problem too - The Israeli state feels it has almost carte blanche in how it behaves. Completely isolating them would probably cause greater problems though - no matter how much it might feel just.

That's exactly it. At a geopolitical level it would be satisfying to see them have have to stand alone, but of course for all the ordinary Israelis it would be frightening to say the least. A flippant thing to say, I'm aware of that. But I'm sure many know what I mean. (I can't think or write today, I'm sooo hungover).

^^ Agree completely, but:

Israel feels it has almost carte blanche in how it behaves.

This sort of language makes me uncomfortable, Israel is not a person. I assume you mean "those few who are in charge in Israel", but it could also be taken as "everyone who lives in Israel, collectively".

It's all really fucked isn't it. Personally I'd love to see America tell Israel to get to fuck. They would shit their pants utterly.

I'm not so sure. My impression (and it's based on relatively little, Nth-hand information) is that many Israeli's feel the need to appear strong and independent and that this is partly driven by a sense (justified or otherwise) of isolation and victimhood. If Israel were further isolated by the international community, the hard-line religious right would push for even more extreme action. Having said that, I'm amazed that anyone in the international community has any time for Israel at all given its past actions.

Dialogue is key, and dehumanizing one another only furthers conflict.

^^ Agree completely, but:

This sort of language makes me uncomfortable, Israel is not a person. I assume you mean "those few who are in charge in Israel", but it could also be taken as "everyone who lives in Israel, collectively".

^this. There's far too much "they did this" and "their actions" (from far too many writers) when describing the actions of a minority or the actions of a state that are supported by only a minority of its population.

Out of all the things to worry about, the accepted use the name of a nation as a signifier for the actions of its government is probably pretty low on the list of importance.

But the fact that is is a point of discussion says a lot about the collective nervousness we all have when discussing issues around Israel.

^^ Agree completely, but:

This sort of language makes me uncomfortable, Israel is not a person. I assume you mean "those few who are in charge in Israel", but it could also be taken as "everyone who lives in Israel, collectively".

Yep - You're absolutely right - I'll edit it accordingly. It's shorthand, but especially in a debate as emotive as this one, it's important that one is entirely clear about their meaning.

I would add however, that as someone with a lot of Israelis/Zionists on their facebook feed as well as having spent a significant amount of time there, the populations is ever more hard line, isolationist and prejudiced against Arabs. Moreover, this right-wing coalition (particularly Lieberman and Bennet) is representative of their people. If the state justifies the suffering of the people of Gaza with the line "They elected Hamas" then the Israeli populace has to acknowledge its choice in electing a cabinet of hardline hawks.

I'm not so sure. My impression (and it's based on relatively little, Nth-hand information) is that many Israeli's feel the need to appear strong and independent and that this is partly driven by a sense (justified or otherwise) of isolation and victimhood. If Israel were further isolated by the international community, the hard-line religious right would push for even more extreme action. Having said that, I'm amazed that anyone in the international community has any time for Israel at all given its past actions.

Just on a tangent - there's not really much in the way of morality in the international sphere. Ignoring the fact that almost no state would be considered 'moral' were they judged as an individual (that's without getting into the debate as to whether the state as a concept is moral), international politics is about expediency and self-interest, not doing the right thing.

I was at university with an Israeli chap - nice guy, and forgave us for not being able to pronounce his name.

He'd done military service, which he absolutely had not wanted to do, his father was a heart surgeon in Tel Aviv so he was fairly (whatever the Israeli equivalent is) middle class, well educated etc.

He had no idea how to resolve the situation, which I got the impression was common - but possible the greater issue was that to those who thought they DID know how to resolve the situation the thinking was along the lines of "a good Palestinian is a dead Palestinian".

I'm not sure whether this got linked in the last few pages
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/20/gaza-occupation-occupier-israelis-peace?CMP=fb_ot

Excellent article for me. Not meant flippantly but the illustration is also very good, as is the choice to use one instead of a photo.

I think it's worth trying to understand the historical context of this conflict, but it seems to me nobody in a position of power ever learns from history. It's not surprising the Holocaust has fixed an identity for many Israelis, or that its horror has led directly to later generations 'defending themselves' to an extent matching the excessive nature to that which tried to wipe them out entirely. Both are over the top reactions, one feeding the other until they beome the same disgusting thing. That is a tragedy. Maybe when the world changes, as the Holocaust achieved, it stays changed for longer than we dare hope. Another tragedy.

None of which excuses what they're doing right now, but you have to know your enemy.