Israeli and Palestinian conflict

[leicsmac]

2 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

That was my question. What evidence would satisfy? What is it the evidence people want to see?

Speaking purely for myself, debris that can be tied to an explosive device or rocket used by non-Israeli sources, and (this is the important part) verified by a third party with no established ties to either side.

 

In fact, any third part empirical verification of a similar type would likely do.

[bmt]

7 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Speaking purely for myself, debris that can be tied to an explosive device or rocket used by non-Israeli sources, and (this is the important part) verified by a third party with no established ties to either side.

 

In fact, any third part empirical verification of a similar type would likely do.

Agreed. I think on balance the Israeli account makes sense but you would expect it to. I also found Rishi's (paraphrasing) 'we are working independently with our allies to work out what happened' to be a bit worrying when one of our allies is Israel who were the initial alleged perpetrator. I don't think it's reached the burden of proof required to say conclusively one way or the other.

[breadandcheese]

19 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Speaking purely for myself, debris that can be tied to an explosive device or rocket used by non-Israeli sources, and (this is the important part) verified by a third party with no established ties to either side.

 

In fact, any third part empirical verification of a similar type would likely do.

I think that's fair. So I think we can agree it's odd that Hamas haven't done this to counter Israel and show it was an Israeli missile as per their assertion.

 

I guess my original question is predicated on the dismissal that accompanied Israeli first responders talking about babies being mutilated during the Hamas terrorist attack. They eventually put out photos of dead babies (horrific photos, I wouldn't recommend searching them). Despite this, many people popped up saying these were AI generated photos and were fakes. Which leads me to wonder whether there is any proof that will satisfy.

 

Edit: that last point wasn't aimed at you

Edited 18 October 2023 by breadandcheese

[leicsmac]

6 minutes ago, bmt said:

Agreed. I think on balance the Israeli account makes sense but you would expect it to. I also found Rishi's (paraphrasing) 'we are working independently with our allies to work out what happened' to be a bit worrying when one of our allies is Israel who were the initial alleged perpetrator. I don't think it's reached the burden of proof required to say conclusively one way or the other.

 

4 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

I think that's fair. So I think we can agree it's odd that Hamas haven't done this to counter Israel and show it was an Israeli missile as per their assertion.

 

I guess my original question is predicated on the dismissal that accompanied Israeli first responders talking about babies being mutilated during the Hamas terrorist attack. They eventually put out photos of dead babies (horrific photos, I wouldn't recommend searching them). Despite this, many people popped up saying these were AI generated photos and were fakes. Which leads me to wonder whether there is any proof that will satisfy.

Fair points both.

 

Honestly, I think a lot of it comes down to the source, too. One side or the other presenting even what appears to be hardcore evidence may be looked on sceptically, as both have reasons to lie and misinform on this matter. But having that information verified and presented by a trustworthy third party, that would mean more. 

[MPH]

24 minutes ago, breadandcheese said:

That was my question. What evidence would satisfy? What is it the evidence people want to see?

 

 

 

Im not sure if you realize what you're asking... but you are basically asking us to determine what happened and for the correct footage/ data to be there to support what we think happened.

 

People just want to see evidence of whatever happened to  give conclusive proof of such events

[breadandcheese]

1 minute ago, leicsmac said:

 

Fair points both.

 

Honestly, I think a lot of it comes down to the source, too. One side or the other presenting even what appears to be hardcore evidence may be looked on sceptically, as both have reasons to lie and misinform on this matter. But having that information verified and presented by a trustworthy third party, that would mean more. 

I don't disagree it is good to have a third party source to verify. But you know that's not in Israel's control. The crime scene is in the Gaza Strip under Hamas control and has already been partially cleaned up.

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, breadandcheese said:

I don't disagree it is good to have a third party source to verify. But you know that's not in Israel's control. The crime scene is in the Gaza Strip under Hamas control and has already been partially cleaned up.

Yep, but an inevitable corollary of that is that there will be scepticism - justified scepticism - of evidence presented by either side in this conflict because they both have very, very good reason to subvert the truth to suit their own ends.

 

That's just something that should be accepted, not criticised, as it is simply is true.

[foxy boxing]

1 hour ago, breadandcheese said:

Can I ask those doubting it as a failed Palestinian rocket launch what they need to see to believe the Israeli explanation?

Surely you'd be able to tell the difference between a failed rocket and an air or missile strike!. I'd imagine an air/missile strike would cause way more damage than a failed rocket.

[Paninistickers]

41 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Out of interest, why do you put ‘Vanderbilt University’ in inverted commas? Do you not believe it is an actual university? And what makes you think this academic’s views can’t be trusted? Is it because he works at an American university or something else? 
 

Your suggestion that the ‘Jewish lobby’ is effectively bullying the BBC into citing dodgy academics, without any evidence to back it up, comes dangerously close to being an antisemitic conspiracy theory. 

I'll take this on. The inverted commas not my best bit of grammar...but intended to highlight the employer of the academic being quoted is from Israel's staunchest (only) ally in a uni sponsored by one of the very wealthiest and connected families in the US. It ain't a source that can be entirely taken as perfect, whether you like that or not. 

 

I didn't use the word bully. I used lobby. You're as smart as they come in here, but you'd be naïve not to believe that freinds of Israel would not campaign strongly on their behalf. 

 

Having a critical mind is not anti semetic. Fwiw, I take everything  Palestinian sympathisers say with a huge pinch of salt too. 

[LCFCCHRIS]

So they accidentally struck their own hospital car park… 

[HighPeakFox]

I want to contribute but find the whole spectacle too ghastly for words.

 

So instead, I will simply wish every one of you peace & happiness.

[ClaphamFox]

18 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I'll take this on. The inverted commas not my best bit of grammar...but intended to highlight the employer of the academic being quoted is from Israel's staunchest (only) ally in a uni sponsored by one of the very wealthiest and connected families in the US. It ain't a source that can be entirely taken as perfect, whether you like that or not. 

 

I didn't use the word bully. I used lobby. You're as smart as they come in here, but you'd be naïve not to believe that freinds of Israel would not campaign strongly on their behalf. 

 

Having a critical mind is not anti semetic. Fwiw, I take everything  Palestinian sympathisers say with a huge pinch of salt too. 

Thanks for the explanation. But don’t you also think that pro-Palestinian groups would have been lobbying just as hard? You seemed to imply the journalist was particularly susceptible to pro-Israel lobbying, which seemed quite an assumption without knowing any more about the journalist in question and his methodology when putting this story together. 

 

FYI I wasn’t suggesting that you personally are antisemitic (which I don’t believe), but one of the most beloved tropes of actual antisemites is that the jews control the media - I just think such suggestions should be treated with caution. 
 

 

Edited 18 October 2023 by ClaphamFox

[Paninistickers]

3 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

Thanks for the explanation. But don’t you also think that pro-Palestinian groups would have been lobbying just as hard? You seemed to imply the journalist was particularly susceptible to pro-Israel lobbying, which seemed quite an assumption without knowing any more about the journalist in question and his methodology when putting this story together. 

 

FYI I wasn’t suggesting that you personally are antisemitic (which I don’t believe), but one of the most beloved tropes of actual antisemites is that the jews control the media - I just think such suggestions should be treated with caution. 
 

 

Yes, I do - but with less success than they'd have in influencing, say, al jazeera.

 

Israeli groups would have far more effect in the US / West than Palestinian campaigners

[Wymsey]

22 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

I want to contribute but find the whole spectacle too ghastly for words.

 

So instead, I will simply wish every one of you peace & happiness.

Love and respect are two things that are severely lacking in this world.

 

Don't really want to blame politics and religion as the reason behind this, as not one person is the same etc.

Edited 18 October 2023 by Wymsey

[ClaphamFox]

12 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

Yes, I do - but with less success than they'd have in influencing, say, al jazeera.

 

Israeli groups would have far more effect in the US / West than Palestinian campaigners

If we were talking about the Daily Express or Telegraph I’d be inclined to agree, but I’m not convinced the BBC has an inherent pro-Israeli bias. I certainly didn’t get that impression last night when they were directly accusing Israel of being behind hospital explosion when evidence for that view was pretty much non-existent. 

[bmt]

11 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

If we were talking about the Daily Express or Telegraph I’d be inclined to agree, but I’m not convinced the BBC has an inherent pro-Israeli bias. I certainly didn’t get that impression last night when they were directly accusing Israel of being behind hospital explosion when evidence for that view was pretty much non-existent. 

I've mentioned this earlier but I'd say they had a pro-Israel bias when they labelled people protesting against the shelling of Gaza as "supporting hamas" the other day.

 

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/bbc-apology-palestine-protesters-uk-hamas-terrorists-082323645.html

 

Just to confirm I'm playing devils advocate more than anything

Edited 18 October 2023 by bmt

[Paninistickers]

I've listened to five live the last couple of mornings and I got the impression they bend over backwards to be even handed in its coverage and terminology. 

[MPH]

11 minutes ago, Paninistickers said:

I've listened to five live the last couple of mornings and I got the impression they bend over backwards to be even handed in its coverage and terminology. 

 

 

even so, their even handed approach can still miss key events/ evidence.. i'd still recommend getting your news from more than one source..

[bmt]

As an update bbc verify has now said there are more opinions of experts:

 

Justin Bronk, senior research fellow at the UK-based Royal United Services Institute, agrees. While it is difficult to be sure at such an early stage, he says, the evidence looks like the explosion was caused by a failed rocket section hitting the car park and causing a fuel and propellant fire.

Mr Gannon says it is not possible to determine whether the projectile struck its intended target from the footage he has seen. He adds that the flashes in the sky likely indicate the projectile was a rocket with an engine that overheated and stopped working.

Valeria Scuto, lead Middle East analyst at Sibylline, a risk assessment company, notes that Israel has the capacity to carry out other forms of airstrike by drone, where they might use Hellfire missiles. These missiles generate a significant amount of heat but would not necessarily leave a large crater.But she says uncorroborated footage shows a pattern of fires at the hospital site that was not consistent with this explanation.

[leicsmac]

"A short while ago in New York, the US vetoed a UN Security Council draft resolution calling for humanitarian pauses in Gaza.

 

Put forward by Brazil, the text also condemned "the heinous terrorist attacks by Hamas"; called for the release of hostages and urged all parties to comply with their obligations under international law.

 

Speaking after Joe Biden's visit to Israel today, United States Ambassador Linda Thomas Greenfield said Americans believe "diplomacy has to play out".

 

The United States has exercised its veto dozens of times in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This time, the US ambassador also said the country was disappointed the resolution made no mention of Israel's right to self-defence, a view shared by the UK, which abstained in the vote."

 

..............really?

[Thefox81]

Im so glad that i live in a reletively safe country. But i feel so sorry for the deaths of innocent civilians. Ive learnt so much from this thread. Need the leaders to have their heads banged together

[weller54]

22 minutes ago, Thefox81 said:

Im so glad that i live in a reletively safe country. But i feel so sorry for the deaths of innocent civilians. Ive learnt so much from this thread. Need the leaders to have their heads banged together

Won't help.. they're all Nutters!!

[MPH]

40 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

"A short while ago in New York, the US vetoed a UN Security Council draft resolution calling for humanitarian pauses in Gaza.

 

Put forward by Brazil, the text also condemned "the heinous terrorist attacks by Hamas"; called for the release of hostages and urged all parties to comply with their obligations under international law.

 

Speaking after Joe Biden's visit to Israel today, United States Ambassador Linda Thomas Greenfield said Americans believe "diplomacy has to play out".

 

The United States has exercised its veto dozens of times in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This time, the US ambassador also said the country was disappointed the resolution made no mention of Israel's right to self-defence, a view shared by the UK, which abstained in the vote."

 

..............really?

 

 

 

Id imagine the excuse will be that they have Hamas on the run and want to keep it that way..

[leicsmac]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 

 

 

Id imagine the excuse will be that they have Hamas on the run and want to keep it that way..

Something like that, I'm sure. Gotta "win" and that collateral damage is regrettable but necessary and all that.

Edited 18 October 2023 by leicsmac

[MPH]

9 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Something like that, I'm sure. Gotta "win" and that collateral damage is regrettable but necessary and all that.

 

and that’s what I can’t stand about all this.. sure.. make every effort to avoid civilian casualties, but Israel don’t seem to want to do that., in fact, they don’t even seem to care if civilians get killed, just as long as they get their target..