Kier still doing his damnedest to give Israel diplomatic cover to continue the slaughter in Gaza. All in the face of calls from the UN and humanitarian aid agencies for a ceasefire.
Yes labour, you are the baddies.
Awkward timing. Hamas’s infrastructure underneath the Al-Shifa hospital has been exposed overnight, patients are being evacuated to Egypt and the idea that Israel might give up and go home *today*, of all days, is ludicrous.
Hamas have been clear that they will never abide by a ceasefire, either. Have any of these players heard of Starmer, an opposition leader 3.5 thousand miles away, let alone heard of Stephen Flynn? It’s pointless.
>The party plans to table a Commons motion reflecting concerns over the civilian death toll, and urging longer pauses in the fighting to deliver aid.
>But it will echo the Labour leader’s position, and stop short of urging an immediate ceasefire in the conflict.
Concerns? Slow down there Sir Starmer. You ought to be careful using such strong language.
But apparently not concerned enough to think the killing should stop. What a guy.
Give the civvies some tucker, get some new doctors and journalists in, and get bombing again.
Usual Tory shit we’ve come to expect from this particular Tory.
Isn’t opposition to a ceasefire in a conflict where more than 10,000 Palestinian women and children have been killed, a stupid and impossible to justify political position? And it looks even.worse when assessed from the humanitarian perspective.
Why did Starmer pick this as a hill to die on so to speak? It doesn’t make him look strong, just weak and afraid. To give Israel diplomatic cover? But that’s even stupider when his party isn’t in power.
Sometimes as a non-Westerner observing the politics of the Western democracies, specifically debates and divisions over foreign policy over Israel, one can’t help but think that the blind and unconditional support of Israel, isn’t only strategically short sighted (geopolitics at the global level) but sometimes even more illogical when it comes to domestic politics.
Can someone explain the difference between a ‘humanitarian pause’ and a ‘ceasefire’ please?
I guess that puts to bed the argument that Labour are refusing to back the SNP motion on account of the fact that it’s political games on an issue we have no influence over.
9 comments
Kier still doing his damnedest to give Israel diplomatic cover to continue the slaughter in Gaza. All in the face of calls from the UN and humanitarian aid agencies for a ceasefire.
Yes labour, you are the baddies.
Awkward timing. Hamas’s infrastructure underneath the Al-Shifa hospital has been exposed overnight, patients are being evacuated to Egypt and the idea that Israel might give up and go home *today*, of all days, is ludicrous.
Hamas have been clear that they will never abide by a ceasefire, either. Have any of these players heard of Starmer, an opposition leader 3.5 thousand miles away, let alone heard of Stephen Flynn? It’s pointless.
>The party plans to table a Commons motion reflecting concerns over the civilian death toll, and urging longer pauses in the fighting to deliver aid.
>But it will echo the Labour leader’s position, and stop short of urging an immediate ceasefire in the conflict.
Concerns? Slow down there Sir Starmer. You ought to be careful using such strong language.
But apparently not concerned enough to think the killing should stop. What a guy.
Give the civvies some tucker, get some new doctors and journalists in, and get bombing again.
Usual Tory shit we’ve come to expect from this particular Tory.
Isn’t opposition to a ceasefire in a conflict where more than 10,000 Palestinian women and children have been killed, a stupid and impossible to justify political position? And it looks even.worse when assessed from the humanitarian perspective.
Why did Starmer pick this as a hill to die on so to speak? It doesn’t make him look strong, just weak and afraid. To give Israel diplomatic cover? But that’s even stupider when his party isn’t in power.
Sometimes as a non-Westerner observing the politics of the Western democracies, specifically debates and divisions over foreign policy over Israel, one can’t help but think that the blind and unconditional support of Israel, isn’t only strategically short sighted (geopolitics at the global level) but sometimes even more illogical when it comes to domestic politics.
Can someone explain the difference between a ‘humanitarian pause’ and a ‘ceasefire’ please?
I guess that puts to bed the argument that Labour are refusing to back the SNP motion on account of the fact that it’s political games on an issue we have no influence over.
Behind the curve again labour.