news & politics:discussion

[lazyred]

48 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

It should be quite clear to anyone who has been paying attention, that unless we make massive changes to an unprecedented level and ASAP, then we are doomed.

The problem is that the majority of the population would be against a lot of the necessary changes.

 

Being apocalyptic is part of the problem. All the extinction nonsense and Just Stop Oil hypocrisy puts people off. We're in transition to net zero but oil and gas won't disappear. It looks like we can get to net zero by 2050 and limit the temperature rise to 2 degrees. Its not great and it wil have big effects on people but its not the end of the world.

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, lazyred said:

 Its not great and it wil have big effects on people but its not the end of the world.

famous last words.

[lazyred]

2 minutes ago, fred quimby said:

I think you answered it in your following post. 

Well yeah. I suppose the difference between us is timescales. I have a diesel van and a gas boiler. If I'm using gas and oil I'd rather it came from the  north sea than import it.

[Skip997]

1 minute ago, lazyred said:

Being apocalyptic is part of the problem. All the extinction nonsense and Just Stop Oil hypocrisy puts people off. We're in transition to net zero but oil and gas won't disappear. It looks like we can get to net zero by 2050 and limit the temperature rise to 2 degrees. Its not great and it wil have big effects on people but its not the end of the world.

Which will be disastrous. It will result in the deaths and displacement of millions, if not billions. Which will lead to wars over land and resources.

I really don't think many understand just where we're going or how quickly.

By the way what is your made up accusation of hypocrisy?

[steviewevie]

been following this guy for a while...most western journalists are blocked from going in there...

 

[steviewevie]

collect their flesh

[steviewevie]

Anyway...hate to bring it back to british politics but shows what a different world we are in compared to 97 and that lovely Blair. Despite horrific news stories from former Yugoslavia and Rwanda...there was a general feeling of optimism. Economy was on the up and we had brit pop and club culture and decent drugs and lads and laddettes and big brother, but also globally western liberal capitalism had defeated evil communism, berlin wall had fallen, S Africa apartheid had come to an end, Good Friday agreement in N Ireland, Oslo accords, sexy third way economics...there was definitely a positive vibe or maybe that was the drugs? Anyway, all different now, public services are f**ked, economy is stagnating, everyone is exhausted, and elsewhere there are big existential wars on the edge of europe, China is a thing and flexing its muscles, the west is riven with right wing populism...and shadowing everything is this climate change thing which looks like is going to f**k us and our fellow species good and proper.

[Guest]

 

[lazyred]

20 minutes ago, Skip997 said:

Which will be disastrous. It will result in the deaths and displacement of millions, if not billions. Which will lead to wars over land and resources.

I really don't think many understand just where we're going or how quickly.

By the way what is your made up accusation of hypocrisy?

The hypocrisy is because Just Stop Oil rely on energy to function. It isn't possible to replace oil and gas at the rate they demand and there are economic and securtiy reasons to exploit our own resources.

Also acheiving net zero will affect people and economies. There will be winners and losers and will also lead to wars over land and resources. It has to be done but its not easy. Each COP disappoints but get us closer to the goals.

[Neil]

corbyn supporter - previously suspended for anti-Semitism - at it again

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-67659271

Edited December 8, 2023 by Neil

[steviewevie]

and there we have it

what will it actually take?

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

and there we have it

what will it actually take?

Hamas to stop breaking ceasefires probably. 

[steviewevie]

shameful really. Yes Israel is angry and wants revenge and to destroy Hamas, but international community can't stand by and allow this to just happen. Sorry Biden, you're a c**t here (and UK is so lame, what a pathetic excuse of a country). 

[steviewevie]

3 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

Hamas to stop breaking ceasefires probably. 

both sides can break ceasefires, still doesn't stop the UN calling for one, and then imposing one via whatever measures. Too much finger pointing going on.

[steviewevie]

Can't see the point of this UN security council. Waste of time when you have US, Russia and China who just veto anything and everything. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

both sides can break ceasefires, still doesn't stop the UN calling for one, and then imposing one via whatever measures. Too much finger pointing going on.

Didn’t Hamas break the last 2 ‘ceasefires’?

Even so this motion was pointless and would’ve done nothing anyway. 

[Neil]

4 hours ago, Skip997 said:

It might be workable if they actually enforced their resolutions.

Up until 10 years ago Israeli had ignored round about 40.

countries might be more positive towards the Palestinians if the Palestinians were a reliable partner for peace. when it looked like they were serious for peace (oslo) the USA was right there with them.

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Rufus Gwertigan said:

f**kers. Seriously as a nation we should hang our heads in shame. f**k Barry and calling Hamas terrorists the IDF are still targeting civilians. If we had done the same in Northern Ireland it would have been a real shitshow. Yes I know we went in hard but the courts are pulling all that up.

it'll take us realising that we can't solve this complex issue with a binary vote without muscle behind any decision  and then its about who's kids we're sending to be sacrificed.

[Rufus Gwertigan]

38 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

You are the problem if can't call Hamas the terrorists they are.

IDF can behave like c**ts sometimes but that shouldn't stop anyone calling out Hamas for what they are.  They raped and mutilated women and shot babies in the head at point blank range.

If Hamas don't anger you as much as IDF do, then you are the problem not me.

What about the past violence of the IDF? What about their complicity in Sabra and Shatila where kids where murdered and women raped?

[Neil]

1 hour ago, Barry Fish said:

This   Large sections of the Palestinians do back Hamas, do not want war.  They aren't all passive bystanders.  I do feel deeply for the innocent ones.

they back Hamas only as far as its a protest of not accepting what has happened. which makes it difficult as there's a real grievance there.

[steviewevie]

There is so much nonsense spouted about this disaster in the middle east, a lot of it is racism. On one side you hear it is a violent muslim problem, the other there is a lot of blatant antisemitism, jews controlling everything, although it is convenient to call them zionists now. Both jews and arabs have legitiimate claims to the land, for peace they both need self determination, and that means a two state solution. We seem very distant from that at moment, but that is the only show in town if ever want peace. A one state solution won't happen, Jews want a Jewish state, Arabs want an Arab state. Hamas need to go, Netenyahu and his right wing coalition friends need to go, but how?

UN call for ceasefire was simple, end all hostilities, all hostages released. How that ceasefire is enforced would be a lot more complicated.  I guess some sort of international political/military body would need to go in in some form? If ceasefire and hostage release did actually happen then moves to resolution involving surrounding countries would need to be found, probably helped along with carrot/stick policies from US involving cash/grants/sanctions. US would be key, but so would Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Gaza would need to be rebuilt. Jewish settlements and settler violence in West Bank would need to stop. They need to go back to the Oslo accords and go from there.

Not sure just calling the other terrorists and war criminals helps at moment even if totally true, need to hear from more moderate voices if there are any left.

Surely US patience with Israel can't last much longer. They keep publicly calling for Israel to stop targeting civilians, Israel keep ignoring them, who knows what is being said behind the scenes. Maybe Israel are saying they need a bit more time and want to get top brass in Hamas, but every day is a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, and we are not even getting the full story, I expect it is a lot worse than we think.  I am disappointed US (and lapdog UK of course) did not vote for this ceasefire, but maybe/hopefully they will soon. 

Edited December 9, 2023 by steviewevie

[Guest]

2 hours ago, steviewevie said:

There is so much nonsense spouted about this disaster in the middle east, a lot of it is racism. On one side you hear it is a violent muslim problem, the other there is a lot of blatant antisemitism, jews controlling everything, although it is convenient to call them zionists now. Both jews and arabs have legitiimate claims to the land, for peace they both need self determination, and that means a two state solution. We seem very distant from that at moment, but that is the only show in town if ever want peace. A one state solution won't happen, Jews want a Jewish state, Arabs want an Arab state. Hamas need to go, Netenyahu and his right wing coalition friends need to go, but how?

UN call for ceasefire was simple, end all hostilities, all hostages released. How that ceasefire is enforced would be a lot more complicated.  I guess some sort of international political/military body would need to go in in some form? If ceasefire and hostage release did actually happen then moves to resolution involving surrounding countries would need to be found, probably helped along with carrot/stick policies from US involving cash/grants/sanctions. US would be key, but so would Jordan, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. Gaza would need to be rebuilt. Jewish settlements and settler violence in West Bank would need to stop. They need to go back to the Oslo accords and go from there.

Not sure just calling the other terrorists and war criminals helps at moment even if totally true, need to hear from more moderate voices if there are any left.

Surely US patience with Israel can't last much longer. They keep publicly calling for Israel to stop targeting civilians, Israel keep ignoring them, who knows what is being said behind the scenes. Maybe Israel are saying they need a bit more time and want to get top brass in Hamas, but every day is a humanitarian disaster in Gaza, and we are not even getting the full story, I expect it is a lot worse than we think.  I am disappointed US (and lapdog UK of course) did not vote for this ceasefire, but maybe/hopefully they will soon. 

There was a pause in the fighting which kept getting extended but then Hamas broke that and we are backing to fighting again. That will keep on happening most likely. Hamas are a terrorist organisation that won’t care what a UN motion says. 

[steviewevie]

4 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

There was a pause in the fighting which kept getting extended but then Hamas broke that and we are backing to fighting again. That will keep on happening most likely. Hamas are a terrorist organisation that won’t care what a UN motion says. 

That's no reason to not have a UN motion, and with that will come pressure on Hamas to apply from partners in Qatar etc. Also, not sure about blame game for who broke the recent ceasefire, all sorts of allegations were being thrown around.

Also...some times you need to negotiate and do deals with the worst sort of people.

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, steviewevie said:

That's no reason to not have a UN motion, and with that will come pressure on Hamas to apply from partners in Qatar etc. Also, not sure about blame game for who broke the recent ceasefire, all sorts of allegations were being thrown around.

Also...some times you need to negotiate and do deals with the worst sort of people.

No it isn’t a reason to not have one but it shows how pointless it is really, Hamas aren’t a governing party they are a terrorist organisation that will most likely not abide by a ceasefire as has been shown recently.

They were able to get a pause in the fighting last time round without a motion so hopefully they can do that again.

[steviewevie]

6 minutes ago, Ozanne said:

No it isn’t a reason to not have one but it shows how pointless it is really, Hamas aren’t a governing party they are a terrorist organisation that will most likely not abide by a ceasefire as has been shown recently.

They were able to get a pause in the fighting last time round without a motion so hopefully they can do that again.

They did abide mostly, both sides accused the other for breaking it.

They are recognised as a terrorist organisation by many western countries, but they also govern Gaza, this can't be ignored. Israel can say they want to destroy Hamas, but as has played out that means destroying Gaza.

All those young people in Gaza, the ones that survive, will be full of hate and revenge, they will not forget this. They will be the Hamas of the future. Maybe Israel just wants to kill everyone.