Tags
(not satire!)
Ever thought it a bit strange how so much expense and effort is being made to bomb a small and relatively defenceless enclave like Gaza?
Have you been wondering why western powers are so keen to turn a blind eye to schools being bombed, civilian homes destroyed and 450 children killed (so far) in Gaza?
Well this map might go some way to explaining it:
The largest triangular shaped block in which hydrocarbons have been found and which also contains huge potential gas fields – belongs to Gaza:
Gas finds in east Mediterranean may change strategic balance
That BBC report was from May 2013. But despite its huge relevance to the situation these days, there’s not much mention of it in the international mainstream press now.
And why specifically Cameron’s silence?
British Gas has concession rights to explore for gas offshore the Gaza Strip – and it would make life so much easier if Israel and not Hamas were in control of it.
But you won’t be reading about that in the Daily Mail.
.
.
Related articles by Tom Pride:
Can’t decide who to hate more – ISIS or ISRAEL? Use this handy guide:
The Most Wanted Middle-Eastern Terrorists
Israel left reeling after Cameron almost criticises it
Explosions at Manchester school kill at least 16 women and children
Syria crisis: the top 10 fashion hits and misses – in pictures
.
Please feel free to comment. And share. Thanks:
Pride's Purge 
It’s Sunday Tom!
Give it a rest….:-)
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Britain Isn't Eating.
LikeLike
Israel owns all the water, so I don’t think much would stop them claiming any oil.
9,260 houses totally destroyed and a blockade in place to prevent supplies going in.
What conclusion can you reach other than they want them gone?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Quel Surprise!
It always comes down to “follow the money” where there is any puzzling inconsistency or hypocrisy.
And Cameron’s coyness shows he couldn’t care less about the humanity and suffering as long as his aim (or the aim of those pulling his strings) is achieved.
LikeLiked by 1 person
postscript: …and aren’t the Russians sniffing around there as well, particularly Syria
LikeLike
I never rest. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Wondering why so much effort to destroy a small...
Not exactly convincing. Israel’s problem is that Gaza is effectively an open prison mostly populated by the descendents of Palestinians who fled, or were driven, from their ancestral properties in 1948 an 1967. More recently we might have called that “ethnic cleansing”.
Given this, it’s difficult to see how a resolution will ever be reached as resentment for what is, by any standards, a historic injustice is surely intrinsic. Quite simply Israel could never afford meaningful concessions as it would undermine the very idea of a Jewish state.
All I can see for the future is that the positions will become more entrenched. We are in a perpetual cycle. Off-shore hydrocarbons reserves are a sideshow and probably of less importance than, say, Israel’s de-facto control of water resources in the West Bank.
LikeLike
Israeli military talk about ‘mowing Gaza’s lawn’… I wouldn’t have thought that there was much lawn in Gaza left? ….Besides they didn’t mention digging it all up and paving it all over!
LikeLike
Pingback: Can’t decide who to hate more – ISIS or ISRAEL? Use this handy guide: | Pride's Purge
Ooooh, I could say such a lot…..but since I am minimal animal……I’ll get back to work!
LikeLike
Steve Jones has got it right, oil is a sideshow, and the issue of Gaza is unlikely to be settled for many years. It will require the USA to apply pressure to Israel and Arab States to apply pressure on HAMAS, neither of which seems likely in the near future.
LikeLike
Ancestral homes? Palestine did not exist before 1920. Under Ottoman rule, it was known as Southern Syria. It ceased to be a county in 1949 when it was swallowed by Jordan and Egypt.
Take a look at the UN map for the division of Palestine and Israel for 1948. War was inevitable with that layout. Also read the Balfour Declaration, which made it clear Palestine was to be the Jewish Homeland.
LikeLike
Indeed it was part of the Ottoman empire, and there wasn’t a sovereign country called Palestine. However,what on earth has that got to do with it? Those people has inhabited villages and farmed lands for dozens of generations. Many held deeds from the Ottoman empire.
Are you seriously arguing that all those people that were not part of some sovereign state do not have the right to occupy land that their ancestors have for centuries? Yes, we can point to massive historical injustices in the Americas, Australia and parts of Africa (and even more ancient ones of in the rest of the World). However, we are surely past those days when it’s considered acceptable to force people from their homes.
LikeLike
Not at all. Many Jews had ancestral homes that were taken as well, but people want to forget that. They also want to forget that Gaza elected a group set on Israel’s destruction. It’s part of Hamas’s charter.
But since you brought up Palestinians fleeing, it is important to note they did so because Syrian forces told them Israel would kill them if they stayed. No one FORCED them to leave, though, unlike The Cherokee people.
It is also important to remember this bout of fighting began right years ago when Hamas was elected in and started lobbing rockets into Israel.
LikeLike
I know that there were Jews in what became Arab lands that lost property, but two wrongs don’t make a right, and the Palestinian Arabs lost more. They were also never allowed to return (breaching several issues of human rights).
The 1948 UN motion did not, of course, envisage forced movement of people from their homes.
In any case, this doesn’t resolve anything, Moshe Dayan himself recognised that Israel would be perpetually having to fight as the dispossessed Arabs looked on as what where their homes were lost to them.
I would invite you to put yourself in the position of such people. How do you think you would react?
Anyway, I’m not proposing a solution. The positions are to embedded. But I can see an injustice when it has occurred. These things have long term consequences and I suspect it will be another addition to the instability of the Middle East.
Simply, it isn’t going away and the discussion of this wound grand issues of identity and legalities hides the issue of what happens to people.
LikeLiked by 2 people
It seems the Balfour Declaration was a major factor in generating spiteful actions over the intervening years. Might this demonstrate the saying about ‘The sins of the father (i.e. Balfour)….? At 25 (30?) years to a generation, that would still give some time for this conflict to run.
LikeLike
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-idiotic-gaza-war-was-for-natural.html
LikeLike
Reblogged this on The Greater Fool.
LikeLike
No, the gas fields are not particularly important. Israel has a its own internal constituency which demands violent force against Gaza, and their (arguably) even more important constituency in the USA which demands the same. The problem for the Israel government is judging how much force they can use without losing support in both regions, and hence their own grip on power. The sad truth is that killing a few thousand civilians is NOT regarded in Israel or the USA (or even in the UK government) as using excessive force.
LikeLike
Steve Jones – “Anyway, I’m not proposing a solution”
Why not? I suggest that if you don’t have any idea about a solution then you might as well just shut the f*ck up. (That’s a challenge by the way…)
LikeLike
Do you seriously think one letter written by one UK politician nearly 100 years ago still has any moral or practical relevance now? Get real. Stuff written by politicians currently in power can’t even be taken seriously!
Next you will be saying that “Our god gave that land to us” is a rational argument!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Considering that Palestine fell under British rule until 1948, yes, it is relevant. But way to assume I believe Jews are The Chosen People.
LikeLike
“But way to assume I believe Jews are The Chosen People.”
That sentence doesn’t quite make grammatical sense. Can you clarify it before respond?
LikeLike
“But way to assume I believe Jews are The Chosen People.”
That sentence doesn’t quite make grammatical sense. Can you clarify it before respond?
LikeLike
“But way to assume I believe Jews are The Chosen People.”
That sentence doesn’t quite make grammatical sense. Can you clarify it before I respond?
LikeLike
I suggest Finkfurst would be more credible if he was more civil to Steve Jones re a solution. Does he have one?
I agree about the excessive force though.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I have suggestions, but I’m offering Steve Jones the first go (if he has a f*cking clue)……
LikeLike
Jonathan and Mary – You were able to ‘like’ another post, but not reply to this one. Would you care to reply, or should I just assume that you’re afraid of a real discussion?
LikeLike
You want a reply? Fine: you seem to assume I believe Jews to be the Chosen People. Way to go!
My phrasing it the way I did is perhaps too American, but it hardly takes a genius to figure out what I meant.
Now why don’t you answer Clive. What is your solution for the problems in Israel and Gaza? Or are you, perhaps, content to just be a rude prick?
LikeLike
Jonathan and Mary – I assumed no such thing. I copied exactly what you wrote (“But way to assume I believe Jews are The Chosen People.”) and asked you what it means, for the exactly the reason I perfectly plainly gave – that I don’t understand what it means! Maybe I don’t understand American grammar, so I will try once more and ask you nicely… please clarify what it means.
If Clive wants an answer from me then he can ask me directly, which he hasn’t. But that’s up to him, not you. If you want to ask me a question then I will try to answer…… but only after you’ve answered my question first.
LikeLike
I did answer your question, and I will do so again. You wrote “That sentence doesn’t quite make grammatical sense. Can you clarify it before I respond?” and I responded with “You want a reply? Fine: you seem to assume I believe Jews to be the Chosen People. Way to go!” My reason for writing this was because you wrote “Next you will be saying that ‘Our god gave that land to us” is a rational argument!'” With that phrase, it seems you assume I believe such nonsense when, in fact, I do not.
Since you will not answer Clive’s question, I pose it to you: what is your proposed solution for what is happening?
LikeLike
Jonathan and Mary – No, I said that because saying that a god gave some land to the Jews many hundreds of years ago is almost as ridiculous as saying that Balfour gave it to them a hundred years ago. I’m glad you think it’s all nonsense.
The ‘solution’ is a long answer and I don’t have very much time right now. If I can restrict it to what my government should do initially then there are a few first actions:
1) End all UK government military and other aid, especially all arms sales to Israel until it conforms to all UN resolutions, especially regarding military action, borders and settlements.
2) Call on the USA to do exactly the same.
3) Plainly call for those responsible for war crimes on BOTH sides to be brought to justice. That means following the chain of command up to and including heads of state. If any such people enter the UK then arrest them.
How about you, do you have any suggestions?
P.S. “Way to go” is a rather meaningless phrase, so it’s best not to use it in English.
LikeLiked by 1 person
P.P.S. Sorry for my error, in my first sentence change it to “even more ridiculous than”.
LikeLike
Jonathan and Mary – How about you, do you have any suggestions?……
Apparently you don’t have a clue. What a surprise!
LikeLike
In fact I do. So don’t be a prick.
1. The UN recognizes Palestine as a Country.
2. Jerusalem becomes an International City that both countries hold as their capital.
3. UN Peacekeepers are placed in Jerusalem to ensure safety of civilian population.
4. All sides agree to mediation before any action is held in the future.
5. If hostilities resume, UN forces step in to end it before it begins.
6. Both sides agree to quarterly inspections of documents and war materials.
7. If either side fails to follow guidelines, they are subject to sanction.
It is far from perfect, but it is the best I have.
LikeLike
Jonathan and Mary
1) I’m a little puzzled – Are you one person or more? You have at least three names, but refer to yourself as “I”.
2) You implied that you live in America, is that right? It of course affects how you might influence your government’s attitude to the conflict, and the possibility of realising your step 1, on which all your other steps depend.
3) Your link and Twitter name (themacjew) implies that you decided on a profile which labels you as Jewish. Is that so, or did you take that name for no particular reason? We might have to revisit your earlier answer if so!
LikeLike
I am only one person, though my wife also uses this account for similar reasons (thus the dual name). My Twitter handle was chosen because I am a Jew with an Irish name.
As for my being an American, it has no more impact on my opinions than your government has on yours. I criticize my government. I criticize the Israeli government, when though I stand behind many of their actions (certainly not all).
Now, I am off to work, so if I do not respond in a time that suits you, please do not get your knickers in a twist.
LikeLike
Jonathan
Thanks for the quick reply. I won’t worry about your response time and I will try to take into account the time difference, which of course you don’t say exists!
I have to disagree very strongly that one’s nationality has no impact on one’s opinions. The first perfectly obvious point is that it DOES have an impact on your opinions of your government! But if you don’t want to say where you live then that’s up to you. I live in Scotland and I have no problem with saying so.
Your step 1 has already essentially failed, therefore so have all your subsequent steps. Do you agree with my steps 1, 2 and 3?
LikeLike
Ironically the NATO-supported junta in Kiev is bombing eastern Ukraine for the same reason – their desire to get at shale gas deposits: http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/8/10/long-before-the-fearofwartherewasfearoffrackinginukraine.html
LikeLike
Jonathan
I’m not sure if you’re intending to reply, but it appears from your “best I have” suggestions that you don’t regard Israel’s legal borders or its military and settlement activities beyond its legal borders as an important issue. Is that what you think?
LikeLike
he reason why my #1 failed is because there are too many meddling countries in the UN. They want to appease Israel, while ignoring everything the plight of the Palestinians.
Worse yet, with General Assembly Resolution 181, the official map (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War#mediaviewer/File:UN_Partition_Plan_For_Palestine_1947.png) laid out made it impossible for either side to be happy. It placed Jerusalem squarely within Palestinian territory, which meant that any Israeli would have to cross into hostile lands to visit their Holy Sites. My idea is different: go back to pre-1967 seven borders (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/images/maps/borders.gif) and keep the city whole, thus allowing both parties to claim it as their Capital.
But back to my first step. If Palestine can secure enough votes, and it will be difficult, the UN can create a separate country in the same way that Israel was created. It may not be ideal, but it seems apparent that neither side can be trusted to budge. After that, it will be necessary to keep UN forces stationed in Jerusalem for the foreseeable future.
Now, I do like your ideas, but you asked for my ideas, so I gave them. Perhaps a combination of ideas would work better.
Regarding the settlements, I view them as important, but in an odd way. Israel has known since 1967 those lands were in dispute. With UN Resolution 242, they were required to remove all forces from Occupied lands. By building the settlements, Israel basically is giving a big Fuck You to the UN. They are using them as a further buffer zone. And their idea the pre-1967 borders are indefensible is ridiculous. They pushed back invaders in 1956 with no help from the US or UK.
LikeLike
Jonathan
You said you “like” my suggestions, but you avoided the moral substance. Let’s take one of them first… Do you agree that war crimes have been committed by both sides, and those responsible should be brought to justice?
LikeLike
Definitely. Try all suspected of war crimes. Sadly, it is unlikely to happen.
LikeLike
I’m very glad you agree. Would you therefore also agree with me that Benjamin Netanyahu should be put on trial for war crimes?
LikeLike
As I said: try all suspected. If enough evidence can be mounted against Bibi, then, yes, put him on trial.
LikeLike
That’s what I’m asking! Do you think there is reasonable evidence? Obviously I don’t expect you to suddenly become an international lawyer and compile a watertight legal case here and now, but as a well-informed person, what is YOUR opinion?
LikeLike