9 hours ago, Hummin said:

I think that point is largely past now. Too much time has passed, too much suppression, dispossession, and suffering have accumulated for “two states” to still sound like a serious answer without a complete change in the reality on the ground.

At the same time, this has to be approached honestly and with balance. Israel exists in a geographically toxic landscape, surrounded by enemies and shaped by repeated wars, attacks, and real security fears. Continuous attacks on Israeli civilians have not helped the Palestinian cause; if anything, they have hardened Israeli society, strengthened its most extreme politics, and made the Palestinian situation even worse.

Both sides have fed this catastrophe in different ways, even if the balance of power between them is not equal.

Part of the problem is also that some of Israel’s most extreme justifications are framed in religious terms, tied to the idea of reclaiming the promised land. 1 Samuel 15:3 is one example: it contains a command to kill men, women, children, and infants. There are other passages with similar annihilatory logic. That is a fact about the text. Ancient scriptural war commands are not a moral or legal basis for modern politics. Using them to justify present-day violence does not create security; it normalizes collective punishment and exterminationist thinking.

And if I had been born Israeli and Jewish, or Palestinian, I would most likely have been radicalized myself in one direction or the other. That is the honest truth.

The only reason I can see two evils instead of only one is because I have the luxury of distance: I have not been emotionally formed by this conflict, and I have not personally suffered loss because of it.

That distance makes it easier to see that endless historical grievance, religious entitlement, terror, occupation, and collective punishment are all pushing this in the wrong direction.

So repeating “if only both sides accepted a two-state solution” is not enough anymore.

The reality now is much darker and much more damaged than that slogan admits.

History matters, but if it is only used as a weapon, it will justify even greater horrors. The future is what matters, and that requires a political path based on equal dignity, equal rights, and ending the logic that one people’s safety must come through the permanent domination or destruction of the other.

The ICJ ruled in July 2024, and now it is up to the world to make it happen: withdrawal to the 1067 lines. It is no longer feasible to have a negotiated solution.

If the Iran war causes a major shortfall of oil and other commodities for an extended period due to damaged facilities, the world will endure serious and prolonged harm. Blame should and will be placed on Netanyahu and his foolish American colleague.

5 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Saying a country has “lost its right to exist” isn’t a serious argument - it’s rhetoric. Countries don’t lose their existence because of war or accusations, otherwise half the world wouldn’t exist. You can criticise Israel’s actions - and many people do - but that’s very different from arguing the country itself shouldn’t exist - then you are Hamas, Hezbollah, PLO, Iran.... and agree with their methods to remove Israel from the map.

Also, context matters. Israel hasn’t been operating in a vacuum - groups like Hamas and Hezbollah, along with Iran, have launched thousands of rockets, missiles, and attacks against it. That’s not disputed. A more accurate way to describe the situation is that Israel’s military actions are largely responses to ongoing threats - sometimes controversial or disproportionate, but not happening “for no reason”...

If those attacks had never happened, the scale and frequency of Israel’s military response would look very different. That doesn’t make everything Israel does right - but it does mean this is a cycle of conflict with cause and effect, not a one-sided campaign that appeared out of nowhere.

In terms of scale, the imbalance is stark. Since October 2023:

Hamas and allied groups have fired ~10,000–20,000+ rockets fired into Israel. Mostly unguided, short-range projectiles - the vast majority intercepted by systems like Iron Dome, resulting in over a thousand Israeli deaths overall (including the October 7 attacks).

In contrast, Israel has carried out 50,000+ airstrikes / munitions drops (widely cited estimates) Including bombs, missiles, artillery, and drone strikes on targeted sites.

The human cost reflects that imbalance. Israeli casualties are in the hundreds to low thousands, while in Gaza, health authorities report tens of thousands of deaths, along with widespread destruction of infrastructure. Whatever position people take politically, the raw numbers show a conflict defined by massive disparity in firepower, impact, and loss of life on each side.

So yes - both sides have launched tens of thousands of attacks. But Israel has carried out more strikes, and each one tends to be far more destructive. The question is: does being more effective mean Israel should stop defending itself? Or does it mean the situation is more complex than simply counting numbers?

The conflict has become heavily politicised, especially in places like London, where we’ve seen large protests focused on Israel. But that raises a fair question about consistency - where were the same scale of protests against the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran over its own crackdowns, which have led to ~30,000 deaths just last year? allegedly there have been more domestic deaths in Iran at the hands of the Islamic Republic of Iran (a student was hung yesterday), than there have been in Gaza - where is the outrage there ?

Why no protests against the Houthi movement, whose war in Yemen has contributed to hundreds of thousands of deaths (~400,000), many of them civilians?

None of that justifies or excuses civilian harm anywhere - but it does highlight that global outrage can be selective - and that selective outrage is clearly being carried over into threads like this due to poltiical bias by those lacking the capacity to stand back....

If the standard is about protecting civilians, then it should be applied consistently, not only when it fits a particular political narrative or because someone 'hates Trump'...

Well, the Genocide Convention includes unspecified punishment. In the case of counries committing aggression, some have ended up losing territory. The attack on Iran was an opportunistic war of choice, and Trump was convinced that it would be over in a few days. I believe that he was suckered by Netanyahu.

14 minutes ago, placnx said:

The ICJ ruled in July 2024, and now it is up to the world to make it happen: withdrawal to the 1067 lines. It is no longer feasible to have a negotiated solution.

Let’s see the mighty Euros do it.

7 minutes ago, placnx said:

Well, the Genocide Convention includes unspecified punishment. In the case of counries committing aggression, some have ended up losing territory.

The only Genocide is in Africa.

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Who is going to oblige them or the Palestinians to do anything? You?

If the world goes through a recession over the Iran adventure, there will be a solution.

2 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

Would needs to be done to put an end to apartheid ?

What does Israel need to do ?

Have a head change, introduce a constitution incorporating democratic norms, etc.

8 minutes ago, TedG said:

Let’s see the mighty Euros do it.

That's not enough.

8 minutes ago, TedG said:

The only Genocide is in Africa.

There should be a decision in a year or so. It will be problematical for American politicians since there are so many American laws providing consequences for genocide. It would be helpful if Israel gets regime change in the meantime and puts Netanyahu in jail.

40 minutes ago, GammaGlobulin said:

10 Million is fine.

The USA can easily accommodate that tiny number.

All will be welcome in Michigan.

Or, if they prefer Miami and Florida...then that is FINE BY ME....for sure.....

Just get them out of the ME, so that the world can feel a heck of a lot safer, and happier....PDQ....

Such a dumbed down, myopic and outright idiotic comment...

Are you aware of the volume of conflict that exists in the Middle East that has nothing to with Israel ?

You claim to be an educated man - drop the, trolling, the rhetoric and educate yourself.

15 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

“Does Israel Have a ‘Right to Exist’?”

Not on my taxes, no.

Pull the plug already.

I consider weapons for Israel to be the best possible use of my tax dollars. Truly bang forf the buck.

12 minutes ago, placnx said:

If the world goes through a recession over the Iran adventure, there will be a solution.

The world was already slowing - that doesn’t change. If anything, this conflict just accelerates what was coming.

But scale matters. If Iran crosses the nuclear threshold and begins to leverage the Strait of Hormuz, you’re no longer talking about a normal recession.

Roughly a fifth of global oil flows through that corridor - disrupt it and you hit energy, shipping, and inflation in one move.

From there, it cascades fast. Gas drives ammonia - and ammonia underpins global fertiliser production. The Gulf is a major hub for both. Disrupt energy or strike ammonia plants and you don’t just get higher costs - you hit crop yields months later. That’s how food inflation turns into shortages, and shortages into real famine risk in import-dependent regions.

You don’t need nuclear war for this to bite. Targeted strikes on tankers, ports, energy facilities, or desalination plants would be enough to fracture supply chains, water security, and food production simultaneously.

That’s the shift people miss. This isn’t about a downturn - it’s about a systemic shock across energy, fertiliser, food, water, and trade - all of which Iran have been threatening when wanting to monetize the straits of Hormuz.

Dismissing that risk isn’t pragmatism - it’s short-sightedness. If you can’t see second- and third-order effects this obvious, you’re not analysing the situation - you’re reacting to it from a political anti-trump perspective.

The man himself (Trump) should be muted, gagged, locked up - but the actions being taken are still necessary for tomorrows security.

32 minutes ago, placnx said:

Well, the Genocide Convention includes unspecified punishment. In the case of counries committing aggression, some have ended up losing territory. The attack on Iran was an opportunistic war of choice, and Trump was convinced that it would be over in a few days. I believe that he was suckered by Netanyahu.

Quite possible. But Iran isn’t just a background irritant - it’s a regional actor whose activity has been steadily escalating.

In the past three years alone, I was in three different Middle Eastern countries when they were hit by Iranian missiles. That was before Trump returned to power, and those strikes had nothing to do with Israel. This isn’t new, and it isn’t reactive - it’s patterned behaviour.

On the point about opportunism, I think you may be right. I also expected that once the senior players of the IRGC and the Iranian leadership - the Ayatollahs and the Supreme National Security Council - had been taken out internal fracture and uprising would be triggered.

What’s striking is the regime’s resilience. Whether that’s genuine stability or simply the continued reach of coercion is another question. It may be that dissent is broader than it appears, but fear remains stronger than the will - or ability - to act.

31 minutes ago, placnx said:

If the world goes through a recession over the Iran adventure, there will be a solution.

Not following the logic there.

26 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Such a dumbed down, myopic and outright idiotic comment...

Are you aware of the volume of conflict that exists in the Middle East that has nothing to with Israel ?

You claim to be an educated man - drop the, trolling, the rhetoric and educate yourself.

I am aware that the USA must do Israel the kindness of allowing Israel to fight whenever it likes, and COMPLETELY on its own.

Without USA support, which is unjustified, then people living in Israel will begin to leave in droves.

Israel requires a huge dose of reality.

Israel and its citizens are the addict/addicts, and the USA and Lobby-run Washington are the enablers.

This must come to an end.

Before it is too late.

22 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

I consider weapons for Israel to be the best possible use of my tax dollars. Truly bang forf the buck.

Let that be a voluntary tax - tick a box on your tax return. Just did a back of a fag packet Gemini calculation the US taxpyers opt in to the Isarel tax - it works out at $800 per willing donor. "Heimi - sorry to be a schnutzl - I know but times are hard at the moment , next year , I promise next year " So lets make Evil grub up his extra $725 for the "cause".

43 minutes ago, placnx said:

The attack on Iran was an opportunistic war of choice, and Trump was convinced that it would be over in a few days. I believe that he was suckered by Netanyahu.

Trump was certain the Iranian people or top military would overthrow the mullahs. He underestimated the level of control the Iranian government had over any possible opposition. Bush made the same mistake with Saddam Hussein. He thought the Iraqi generals would kick out Saddam rather than suffer a crushing defeat by U.S. forces. Both Bush and Trump bet on the wrong horse and it's turning out to be a much tougher race.

51 minutes ago, placnx said:

Have a head change, introduce a constitution incorporating democratic norms, etc.

Have Democratic norms where the population all vote ?

That already exists .

You do seem to be advocating removing the democratic vote and forcible removing the democratically elected leader

@beautifulthailand99

I hope you are just pounding a keyboard and won't be driving after whatever it is you've been drinking. Seems like really strong stuff, as your comment makes no sense.

15 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Let that be a voluntary tax - tick a box on your tax return. Just did a back of a fag packet Gemini calculation the US taxpyers opt in to the Isarel tax - it works out at $800 per willing donor.

A.I says

Based on current search results, there is no evidence of a formal "opt-in" mechanism for US taxpayers to pay a specific Israeli tax that works out to $800 per donor.

The provided search results indicate the following regarding US taxpayer money and Israeli taxation:

• Average Taxpayer Contribution: One report estimates that the average US taxpayer paid approximately $11.25 to $25.25 a year toward arms sales to Israel.

3 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

A.I says

Based on current search results, there is no evidence of a formal "opt-in" mechanism for US taxpayers to pay a specific Israeli tax that works out to $800 per donor.

The provided search results indicate the following regarding US taxpayer money and Israeli taxation:

• Average Taxpayer Contribution: One report estimates that the average US taxpayer paid approximately $11.25 to $25.25 a year toward arms sales to Israel.

Of course there isn't I was hypothetically suggesting that and then using AI's at best 15% of taxpayers would want to pay that tax so they will obviously pay a lot more and they have been paying lot more since 2024 so my point such as it is (and not drinking yet for the record) still stands.

8 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

@beautifulthailand99

I hope you are just pounding a keyboard and won't be driving after whatever it is you've been drinking. Seems like really strong stuff, as your comment makes no sense.

I can't be responsbile for your cognitive abilities I'm afraid - there are supplements you can take.

19 minutes ago, beautifulthailand99 said:

Of course there isn't I was hypothetically suggesting that and then using AI's at best 15% of taxpayers would want to pay that tax so they will obviously pay a lot more and they have been paying lot more since 2024 so my point such as it is (and not drinking yet for the record) still stands.

USA selling weapons to Israel

The money goes straight back into the USA economy , supporting the USA weapons manufactures

Jobs for Americans

23 minutes ago, Nick Carter icp said:

USA selling weapons to Israel

The money goes straight back into the USA economy , supporting the USA weapons manufactures

Jobs for Americans

Broken window theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

The Broken Window Fallacy (coined by Frédéric Bastiat) argues that if a boy breaks a shopkeeper's window, people might say "it's good for the economy" because the glazier gets paid to fix it.

The Flaw: They forget that if the window hadn't been broken, the shopkeeper would have spent that same money on new shoes or upgrading his shop.

• The Glazier (the weapons manufacturer) gains a job.

• The Cobbler (the teacher, the builder, or the tech innovator) loses a job they would have had if that taxpayer money had been spent elsewhere.

To a "Trustee" of a nation's wealth, there is a massive difference between these two types of spending:

• Productive Investment: If the US spent that $12 billion on a new high-speed rail system or medical research, they would have the jobs AND a valuable asset that improves their lives.

• Military Spending: If the US spends it on a missile that is fired and explodes, they have the jobs but the asset is gone. It is "destruction as an economic driver."

4 hours ago, GammaGlobulin said:

Israel requires a huge dose of reality.

You'd do well to accomodate just a dash of reality - and I'm not referring to this thread as an attempt to point score in an argument I'm struggling to engage with - but in general - your trolling is ridiculous, and if its not trolling then just stick to the pub part of the forum and continue asking whether Y-Fronts are as comfortable as regular boxer shorts - its easier to skip over your banal idiocy there.

8 hours ago, Evil Penevil said:

Trump was certain the Iranian people or top military would overthrow the mullahs. He underestimated the level of control the Iranian government had over any possible opposition. Bush made the same mistake with Saddam Hussein. He thought the Iraqi generals would kick out Saddam rather than suffer a crushing defeat by U.S. forces. Both Bush and Trump bet on the wrong horse and it's turning out to be a much tougher race.

Trump followed Nethanyahu into this war.

Trump’s after the act excuses, of which there have been many, do not hide the fact the tail is wagging the dog.

7 hours ago, Nick Carter icp said:

USA selling weapons to Israel

The money goes straight back into the USA economy , supporting the USA weapons manufactures

Jobs for Americans

The money comes from the U.S.

https://www.cfr.org/articles/us-aid-israel-four-charts

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The money comes from the U.S.

https://www.cfr.org/articles/us-aid-israel-four-charts

Its not actual money , its credit to buy USA weapons

Netanyahu tried to the same game on multiple previous presidents.

But they were smart enough not to fall for it.

To blame this war or Trump's actions on Netanyahu is intellectually dishonest.

Trump as president of the USA has agency to make his own decisions. He is responsible his decisions and actions.

Similar to the way Putin influences Trump. It's not Putin's fault what Trump does in response to that. It's on Trump.

1 minute ago, Jingthing said:

Netanyahu tried to the same game on multiple previous presidents.

But they were smart enough not to fall for it.

To blame this war or Trump's actions on Netanyahu is intellectually dishonest.

Trump as president of the USA has agency to make his own decisions. He is responsible his decisions and actions.

Similar to the way Putin influences Trump. It's not Putin's fault what Trump does in response to that. It's on Trump.

It’s not at all dishonest to observe that Netanyahu lead Trump into this illegal Israeli/US war of aggression, that figuratively speaking the tail is wagging the dog.

I might be argued Trump lacks agency in the matter, events are repeatedly demonstrating this to be true.

Why Trump lacks agency on the matter is something that is definitely in need of some honesty.

9 hours ago, placnx said:

Israel is fast losing it's relationships in the Middle East. This special military operation in Iran has predictably brought huge damage to the GCC, and it's not over yet.

The GCC welcomes any move to change the current regime in Tehran.