Israel / Palestine

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Ian H

Ian H

Squire
Even a verbal recognition of Palestine angers the genociders in DC and Israel. It means very little in concrete terms for the Palestinian people. And that obnoxious twerp Lammy was saying today that Hamas can not be allowed to be part of a Palestinian government. In the first place who the hell is he or Starmer to lay down any conditions. They're only gesturing to deceive and win back public opinion. Netanyahu is well aware of this but still wants to rub their noses in his excrement. [Tariq Ali]
 
C R

C R

Guru
Ian H said:
Even a verbal recognition of Palestine angers the genociders in DC and Israel. It means very little in concrete terms for the Palestinian people. And that obnoxious twerp Lammy was saying today that Hamas can not be allowed to be part of a Palestinian government. In the first place who the hell is he or Starmer to lay down any conditions. They're only gesturing to deceive and win back public opinion. Netanyahu is well aware of this but still wants to rub their noses in his excrement. [Tariq Ali]
Click to expand...

I'm happy with the call for hamas to not be part of any future Palestinian government. So long as there's a parallel call for Smotrich, Netanyahu and the rest to not be part of any future Israeli government.
 
secretsqirrel

secretsqirrel

Active Member
C R said:
The world has gone absolutely stark raving mad (in case you didn't know). Blair in the frame to run transitional Gaza authority.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3drmk95xlzo
Click to expand...

Honest question, but why not Blair and who else should do it?

“The proposal, which is said to have backing from the White House, would see Blair lead a governing authority supported by the UN and Gulf nations - before handing control back to Palestinians.”
 
CXRAndy

CXRAndy

Squire
Those days have gone I think. Israel gave full autonomy to the people in Gaza. They royally foooked it up. Destroyed what was left, in the way of huge fresh produce growing greenhouses. Instead built a network of terror tunnels to plan and wage endless war against Israeli
 
C R

C R

Guru
secretsqirrel said:
Honest question, but why not Blair and who else should do it?

“The proposal, which is said to have backing from the White House, would see Blair lead a governing authority supported by the UN and Gulf nations - before handing control back to Palestinians.”
Click to expand...

The problem with Blair is his personal back story of going into Iraq with evidently false pretenses just to suck up to Bush. He will never be seen as an impartial or fair broker. I don't know who an impartial or fair broker would be, but Blair definitely isn't.
 
secretsqirrel

secretsqirrel

Active Member
C R said:
The problem with Blair is his personal back story of going into Iraq with evidently false pretenses just to suck up to Bush. He will never be seen as an impartial or fair broker. I don't know who an impartial or fair broker would be, but Blair definitely isn't.
Click to expand...

I think that is what puts a lot of people, including me off Blair.

On the other hand, I would concede that he has a lot of experience now in this area, he would not be taking this on singlehandedly, and he has to be able to liaise with all the different parties, most difficult being the White House.

If he pulls it off, he may go some way to redeem himself, although with some he will never be able to achieve that, which is understandable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: C R
matticus

matticus

Legendary Member
C R said:
That's not what I said.
Click to expand...

Well obviously; If you had, there would be no need for my post!

You're welcome to have your opinion about Blair; but the wider point is that EVERY candidate will have some kind of criticism levelled against them, and every candidate that goes thru vetting (and fails) is wasting more time.

Honestly, if he helps get things moving, I don't care if he's on the Epstein list.
 
Psamathe

Psamathe

Veteran
C R said:
The problem with Blair is his personal back story of going into Iraq with evidently false pretenses just to suck up to Bush. He will never be seen as an impartial or fair broker. I don't know who an impartial or fair broker would be, but Blair definitely isn't.
Click to expand...
Plus it's an area of the world where religion is important to much of the population. And Blair is very religious, just the wrong religion for that part of the world.

Plus, UK sort of has a "track record" in the region (and many other regions of the world).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom