Analysis The Gaza diplomacy of Biden, Sunak and co seems to be heading for failure

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

I have been detecting an undercurrent in your posts of anger and a desire for revenge.

 

This IMHO is the problem with Israel’s response to 7/10.

 

The response has not been inline with their stated objective, it has been revenge.  The world has seen it despite Israel’s failed attempt to control the narrative.

 

The former head of HRW puts it this way

 

 

 

 

You've said earlier you have no relevant military experience. How would you know?

That something 'seems like' doesn't make it so.

There's no pretty way to conduct an aerial bombing campaign in urban areas.

As for speaking for 'the World' - I doubt you do.

[observer90210]

It is amazing and rather distressing how the war and hate of the countries involved, their dirty plans, get imported in peaceful or neutral nations, causing arguments,  discussions getting heated up. Friendships are sometimes broken in non concerned countries just for their wasr...theirs wars that is or are of no concern to us here....except for all the oil price hikes, they are again going to create. 😡

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

 

You can detect what you want from me, it does not change my feelings in the slightest or how I chose to articulate what I say.

 

We can both carry on batting with quotes:

 

"Speaking alongside him, Mr Sunak told reporters the UK "absolutely" supported Israel's "right to defend itself, in line with international law". "I know that you are taking every precaution to avoid harming civilians, in direct contrast to the terrorists of Hamas," he added."

 

 

You quoting sunak on telling netanyahu how to behave has no relevance at all to the post you're replying to.

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, stevenl said:

You quoting sunak on telling netanyahu how to behave has no relevance at all to the post you're replying to.

 

Why would you say that? He quoted Kenneth Roth? Explain in details?

[JBChiangRai]

7 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

 

You've said earlier you have no relevant military experience. How would you know?

That something 'seems like' doesn't make it so.

There's no pretty way to conduct an aerial bombing campaign in urban areas.

As for speaking for 'the World' - I doubt you do.

I have experience of judging motives in the capacity of a magistrate.  Motive makes a big difference. If the motive is Justice then most observers and some perpetrators accept the punishment, if it’s Revenge then usually nobody accepts it and the cycle continues.

 

Again you put words in my mouth, I never said I speak for the world, I said the world is watching and judging.

 

As for Sunak, I failed to see the relevance, perhaps you might like to quote Macron or Modi?

 

 

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

 

Why would you say that? He quoted Kenneth Roth? Explain in details?

It is your quote that has no relevance. Sunak was telling netanyahu how to behave and keep an way open for less support.

[Bkk Brian]

1 minute ago, stevenl said:

It is your quote that has no relevance. Sunak was telling netanyahu how to behave and keep an way open for less support.

I disagree with your hyperbole one liners, 

Edited October 28, 2023 by Bkk Brian

[Morch]

33 minutes ago, stevenl said:

You quoting sunak on telling netanyahu how to behave has no relevance at all to the post you're replying to.

 

I think it was towards the world-supports thing?

[Morch]

32 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

I have experience of judging motives in the capacity of a magistrate.  Motive makes a big difference. If the motive is Justice then most observers and some perpetrators accept the punishment, if it’s Revenge then usually nobody accepts it and the cycle continues.

 

Again you put words in my mouth, I never said I speak for the world, I said the world is watching and judging.

 

As for Sunak, I failed to see the relevance, perhaps you might like to quote Macron or Modi?

 

 

 

 

No disrespect, but this isn't a magistrate court, and that's not quite how things are judged or decided. Nations are not individuals. 

 

To quote from your previous post:

 

"The response has not been inline with their stated objective, it has been revenge.  The world has seen it despite Israel’s failed attempt to control the narrative."

 

You certainly seem to suggest how 'the world' sees things. That's what I was responding to.

 

While I'm not the one who quoted Sunak, I think it was an instant demonstration of how your comment is incorrect. 

 

 

[JBChiangRai]

I don’t have any connections towards Palestine or the Arab world.  I do have connections with Israel having worked with them for several years in the UK at Cxx level including 2 years in Bangkok as a director at Loxley overseeing their Israeli-Loxley joint venture.  One of my good friends in Chiang Rai is an Israeli Jew and I have celebrated Hanukkah with him the last 2 years.

 

I am more predisposed towards Israel than Palestine and I was appalled as was the world on 7/10.

 

I like to think I am fairly balanced and to use a wholly inappropriate simile, I don’t have a horse in this race.

 

I get the distinct impression some of you do and because of it you have lost your objectivity and your motivation is revenge and not justice and it certainly appears to me that’s the motive of the Israeli Government.

[Bkk Brian]

6 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

I don’t have any connections towards Palestine or the Arab world.  I do have connections with Israel having worked with them for several years in the UK at Cxx level including 2 years in Bangkok as a director at Loxley overseeing their Israeli-Loxley joint venture.  One of my good friends in Chiang Rai is an Israeli Jew and I have celebrated Hanukkah with him the last 2 years.

 

I am more predisposed towards Israel than Palestine and I was appalled as was the world on 7/10.

 

I like to think I am fairly balanced and to use a wholly inappropriate simile, I don’t have a horse in this race.

 

I get the distinct impression some of you do and because of it you have lost your objectivity and your motivation is revenge and not justice and it certainly appears to me that’s the motive of the Israeli Government.

I get the distinct impression some of you do and because of it you have lost your objectivity and your motivation is revenge and not justice

 

Wrong, I have no Jewish friends that I know of or can remember, I do know a couple of Jewish parents via my daughters school. I don't think I know anyone from Palestine either. So again your impression is wrong.

Edited October 28, 2023 by Bkk Brian

[Nick Carter icp]

4 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

I don’t have any connections towards Palestine or the Arab world.  I do have connections with Israel having worked with them for several years in the UK at Cxx level including 2 years in Bangkok as a director at Loxley overseeing their Israeli-Loxley joint venture.  One of my good friends in Chiang Rai is an Israeli Jew and I have celebrated Hanukkah with him the last 2 years.

 

I am more predisposed towards Israel than Palestine and I was appalled as was the world on 7/10.

 

I like to think I am fairly balanced and to use a wholly inappropriate simile, I don’t have a horse in this race.

 

I get the distinct impression some of you do and because of it you have lost your objectivity and your motivation is revenge and not justice and it certainly appears to me that’s the motive of the Israeli Government.

 

   The Israelis Governments objective is to kill the people who participated in the terror attack and to also kill the people who organised the attack .

  The Terrorists are hiding among the general population in Gaza and thus they will get caught in the crossfire and the debris from Israel bombing terrorists enclaves .

   "Revenge" is what Bomber Harris and the R.A.F did in Dresden in 1945

 

 

[JBChiangRai]

11 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   The Israelis Governments objective is to kill the people who participated in the terror attack and to also kill the people who organised the attack .

  The Terrorists are hiding among the general population in Gaza and thus they will get caught in the crossfire and the debris from Israel bombing terrorists enclaves .

   "Revenge" is what Bomber Harris and the R.A.F did in Dresden in 1945

 

 

Because the UK bombed Dresden it doesn’t mean it was right or legal by today’s standards. IMHO that was revenge too.

 

The post I gave from HRW stated the legal position, you can’t bomb indiscriminately and unacceptable collateral damage is illegal.

 

Bombing entire apartment blocks looks a lot like unacceptable collateral damage to me.

[JBChiangRai]

20 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

I get the distinct impression some of you do and because of it you have lost your objectivity and your motivation is revenge and not justice

 

Wrong, I have no Jewish friends that I know of or can remember, I do know a couple of Jewish parents via my daughters school. I don't think I know anyone from Palestine either. So again your impression is wrong.

Thank you for that.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, JBChiangRai said:

Because the UK bombed Dresden it doesn’t mean it was right or legal by today’s standards. IMHO that was revenge too.

 

The post I gave from HRW stated the legal position, you can’t bomb indiscriminately and unacceptable collateral damage is illegal.

 

Bombing entire apartment blocks looks a lot like unacceptable collateral damage to me.

 

   That is where Hamas are located or where they fire rockets from .

The buildings are specific Hamas targets .

They are not random targets .

This is a war against Hama terrorists , rather than Israel seeking revenge .

Israel informs the Palestinians which buildings will be bombed , making their actions legal 

[JBChiangRai]

11 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   That is where Hamas are located or where they fire rockets from .

The buildings are specific Hamas targets .

They are not random targets .

This is a war against Hama terrorists , rather than Israel seeking revenge .

Israel informs the Palestinians which buildings will be bombed , making their actions legal 

I don’t agree telling them you are going to bomb somewhere makes it legal.  Normal laws apply.

 

Let’s be realistic, if you tell Hamas Government you are going to bomb a specific building to get the civilians out, do you not think Hamas will leave with them?

[Nick Carter icp]

Just now, JBChiangRai said:

I don’t agree telling them you are going to bomb somewhere makes it legal.  Normal laws apply.

 

Let’s be realistic, if you tell Hamas Government you are going to bomb a specific building to get the civilians out, do you not think Hamas will leave with them?

 

   We are not talking about normal laws here , this isn't a magistrates  Court in the U.K 

Under international rules of war , its not a war crime to bomb enemy military targets if the enemy are in certain civilian buildings .

   Israel tells the public to get out the building before its bombed , meaning that its fully legal to bomb the building .

   If Hamas keep moving from building to building, soon there will be no buildings left , which isnt Isreals problem 

[JBChiangRai]

17 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   We are not talking about normal laws here , this isn't a magistrates  Court in the U.K 

Under international rules of war , its not a war crime to bomb enemy military targets if the enemy are in certain civilian buildings .

   Israel tells the public to get out the building before its bombed , meaning that its fully legal to bomb the building .

   If Hamas keep moving from building to building, soon there will be no buildings left , which isnt Isreals problem 

informing they are going to be bombed is irrelevant, this is the actual law

 

To be legal, aerial operations must comply with the principles of humanitarian law: military necessity, distinction, and proportionality:^[1] An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy; it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to civilians or civilian propertymust be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, JBChiangRai said:

informing they are going to be bombed is irrelevant, this is the actual law

 

To be legal, aerial operations must comply with the principles of humanitarian law: military necessity, distinction, and proportionality:^[1] An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy; it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to civilians or civilian propertymust be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.

 

  That doesn't disagree with what I said .

The buildings targeted are targeted for military reasons and they inform the public to vacate the areas so that there isn't  disproportionate amount of civilian causalities and so Israel will not be accused of bombing civilians 

[JBChiangRai]

12 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

  That doesn't disagree with what I said .

The buildings targeted are targeted for military reasons and they inform the public to vacate the areas so that there isn't  disproportionate amount of civilian causalities and so Israel will not be accused of bombing civilians 

Informing you are going to bomb does not make it ok, unless you are certain that by doing so the civilians will leave.

 

If the civilians refuse to leave and you know or have reason to believe that, then bombing is illegal.

 

The specific law makes no mention of informing making it ok.

 

Current civilian casualty numbers are suggesting that it is reasonable to believe that informing you’re going to bomb makes no difference and could be illegal if civilian casualties are not promotional to military advantage.

Edited October 28, 2023 by JBChiangRai

[Nick Carter icp]

3 minutes ago, JBChiangRai said:

Informing you are going to bomb does not make it ok, unless you are certain that by doing so the civilians will leave.

 

If the civilians refuse to leave and you know or have reason to believe that, then bombing is illegal.

 

 

 

   That is incorrect .

You inform the civilians that the area will be bombed and ask them to vacate the area .

You have then  complied with your legal requirements

Its then up to the civilians to decide what they want to do 

If they stay in the area and get hit by a bomb, then its on them (Literally) as they are defending military targets and are then legitimate targets themselves 

Its their own fault for staying 

 

[JBChiangRai]

5 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

 

   That is incorrect .

You inform the civilians that the area will be bombed and ask them to vacate the area .

You have then  complied with your legal requirements

Its then up to the civilians to decide what they want to do 

If they stay in the area and get hit by a bomb, then its on them (Literally) as they are defending military targets and are then legitimate targets themselves 

Its their own fault for staying 

 

I have given the exact law, notification is irrelevant, it’s not mentioned.

 

You have to reasonably believe proportionality, and if you have reason to believe the civilians will ignore you then you are at risk.

 

There is a principle in law, you cannot force an agreement by saying something unilaterally, it has to be agreed by both parties, and whilst I am quoting civilian law, I suspect it applies to international humanitarian  law equally.

[Nick Carter icp]

1 minute ago, JBChiangRai said:

I have given the exact law, notification is irrelevant, it’s not mentioned.

 

You have to reasonably believe proportionality, and if you have reason to believe the civilians will ignore you then you are at risk.

 

There is a principle in law, you cannot force an agreement by saying something unilaterally, it has to be agreed by both parties, and whilst I am quoting civilian law, I suspect it applies to international humanitarian  law equally.

 

  I have been listening to an International  Lawyer who advises Countries on the legalities of war and what is legal and what isn't and what constitutes a war crime and what isn't ,

  A declaration or war doesn't need to be agreed to by both sides , it can be done unilaterally 

   I doubt whether Israel will be up before a UK magistrates Court any time soon 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, JBChiangRai said:

Because the UK bombed Dresden it doesn’t mean it was right or legal by today’s standards. IMHO that was revenge too.

 

The post I gave from HRW stated the legal position, you can’t bomb indiscriminately and unacceptable collateral damage is illegal.

 

Bombing entire apartment blocks looks a lot like unacceptable collateral damage to me.

 

Disregarding the expected knee-jerk reactions from HRW -

 

There are legal concepts governing what 'indiscriminate', 'collateral damage', 'targeting', and other terms tossed about, are.

This is different than how things may 'seem', 'look like' and so on.

 

If you examine previous instances of this war, or indeed other campaigns in the ME and elsewhere, you'll often find HRW, and various UN bodies (often supposedly dealing with human rights etc.) issuing such wide brush statements. This does not always translate to legal terms, actions and so on afterwards. The reason being, as far as I understand, that information regarding operations is not provided during the fighting (for obvious reasons), and so claims of violations cannot be analyzed, weighted, and legally decided on the spot. Doesn't work this way.

 

There is a certain shift in this, though, seen also on this war - where armies involved release more detailed information than in the past. I think this indicates acknowledgement that the public opinion (or PR) front matters as well.

 

 

[bobbin]

This current conflict in Israel is different from the Russia/Ukraine conflict, the other conflict engaging the World's attention.. The Russians are using WW2 tactics.. Indiscriminate missile and artillery attacks on civilians and vital infrastructure. Not to influence Ukrainian population, but to destroy lives and morale.. And Israel is using a modified version of the same..

 

The following is not original to me but comes from Thomas Friedman. A Jewish American reporter for the New York Times..

 

He suggests calling the Israeli response "Save the Children".  Hamas is holding hostages to shield themselves but most people do not look favorably on this tactic, so Israel should take advantage of this..

 

Call on Hamas to engage seriously on hostage/prisoner exchange. Attempting to rescue the Hamas hostages militarily will not end well for the hostages or those attempting to rescue them.

 

The following is my own input.. The previous exchange of 6000 Palestinians for 1 Israeli soldier, was a stupid move by Netanyahu, and by extension Israel. It completely ignored the future security implications for Israel. I believe many of the released Palestinians are active Hamas now, including several senior operatives. Plus it's not a good look... 6000 Palestinian lives are the equivalent of 1 Israeli life? No no..

 

Offer a maximum of 3 to 1. And that looks magnanimous on Israel's part. No senior Hamas or other big fish.  The hostages are a cross-section of Israeli society.. including many children and old people. Also known peace proponents who have helped Palestinian civilians with access to advanced medical care.  People for people..

 

Back to Friedman. He says that despite decades of experience, he does not know, and has never heard of, several far-right members of Netanyahu's cabinet. They are there to help Bibi remain on top and to stay out of jail.. but they want to absorb the West Bank and other anti-Arab initiatives. He goes on to say that all senior leaders of the military and intelligence apparatus have apologized to the Israeli people.. with the glaring exception of Netanyahu, the man ultimately responsible to the Israeli people. He has to go, and go quickly. That is not his plan. He is still hoping to stay on top and out of prison..

[billd766]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I agree with that, but to be pedantic it's the West bank.

Whatever they say, their "encouragement" of the settlers to attack Palestinians ( with military backing ) indicates that is what they want.

They have not said what their plan is for the Palestinians if they can't live in the West Bank. Perhaps they are intending to use the white Sth African apartheid policy of Bantustans, which would keep a captive supply of workers to build settlements.

I know that it should have been the West bank,

but 1   I was too lazy to change it, 

and 2  I remembered that you did it and got abused by some numpty for doing it.

 

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Agreed that they abandoned their "principles" and just abandoned the Palestinians to their fate.

I wonder if the current mob in Parliament realise that their predecessors are responsible for the current fiasco?

Had they not backstabbed the Arabs and allowed them to have the independence they promised when they needed them, modern israel would never have existed, and the current problem would not have occurred. One wonders how much guilt Lawrence felt for his part in the deception.

 

T E Lawrence died in 1935 so had no idea what happened but if he did know he would probably be spinning in his grave at the betrayal.

[bobbin]

The above of course is not the end-game merely a good first step..

 

Why doesn't the Israeli military not focus on the tunnels? That's where Hamas lives, and it avoids the extreme dangers of fighting in an urban environment..

 

Drones. Equipped with infra-red and night vision cameras..and bombs. The tunnels are key infrastructure for Hamas and all connected. Not much point in dead-end tunnels.

 

This obviously would reduce significantly civilian casualties..

[thaibeachlovers]

10 minutes ago, bobbin said:

The above of course is not the end-game merely a good first step..

 

Why doesn't the Israeli military not focus on the tunnels? That's where Hamas lives, and it avoids the extreme dangers of fighting in an urban environment..

 

Drones. Equipped with infra-red and night vision cameras..and bombs. The tunnels are key infrastructure for Hamas and all connected. Not much point in dead-end tunnels.

 

This obviously would reduce significantly civilian casualties..

Good question, but perhaps killing Hamas isn't the only point of the assault on Gaza.

I have an idea of what the plan might actually be, but it might just get the post deleted if I wrote it on here.

[Morch]

58 minutes ago, bobbin said:

This current conflict in Israel is different from the Russia/Ukraine conflict, the other conflict engaging the World's attention.. The Russians are using WW2 tactics.. Indiscriminate missile and artillery attacks on civilians and vital infrastructure. Not to influence Ukrainian population, but to destroy lives and morale.. And Israel is using a modified version of the same..

 

The following is not original to me but comes from Thomas Friedman. A Jewish American reporter for the New York Times..

 

He suggests calling the Israeli response "Save the Children".  Hamas is holding hostages to shield themselves but most people do not look favorably on this tactic, so Israel should take advantage of this..

 

Call on Hamas to engage seriously on hostage/prisoner exchange. Attempting to rescue the Hamas hostages militarily will not end well for the hostages or those attempting to rescue them.

 

The following is my own input.. The previous exchange of 6000 Palestinians for 1 Israeli soldier, was a stupid move by Netanyahu, and by extension Israel. It completely ignored the future security implications for Israel. I believe many of the released Palestinians are active Hamas now, including several senior operatives. Plus it's not a good look... 6000 Palestinian lives are the equivalent of 1 Israeli life? No no..

 

Offer a maximum of 3 to 1. And that looks magnanimous on Israel's part. No senior Hamas or other big fish.  The hostages are a cross-section of Israeli society.. including many children and old people. Also known peace proponents who have helped Palestinian civilians with access to advanced medical care.  People for people..

 

Back to Friedman. He says that despite decades of experience, he does not know, and has never heard of, several far-right members of Netanyahu's cabinet. They are there to help Bibi remain on top and to stay out of jail.. but they want to absorb the West Bank and other anti-Arab initiatives. He goes on to say that all senior leaders of the military and intelligence apparatus have apologized to the Israeli people.. with the glaring exception of Netanyahu, the man ultimately responsible to the Israeli people. He has to go, and go quickly. That is not his plan. He is still hoping to stay on top and out of prison..

 

There is, apparently, a swap deal arranged by Qatar - not there yet, but maybe close. Previous negotiations in hostage situations took months and years, though. Need to wait and see.

 

One correction and one anecdote - it was actually a bit over 1000 Palestinians who were released, among them one Yahya Sinwar....

 

 

[Morch]

40 minutes ago, bobbin said:

The above of course is not the end-game merely a good first step..

 

Why doesn't the Israeli military not focus on the tunnels? That's where Hamas lives, and it avoids the extreme dangers of fighting in an urban environment..

 

Drones. Equipped with infra-red and night vision cameras..and bombs. The tunnels are key infrastructure for Hamas and all connected. Not much point in dead-end tunnels.

 

This obviously would reduce significantly civilian casualties..

 

The tunnels run under residential areas, hospitals, schools etc.

Not sure what you meant.