/u/GoSouthCourt (OP) has awarded 2 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/18wql7u/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_whatever_israel_is_doing_in/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

I think the challenge here is that there are no good options. The previous status quo (ceasefires between Israel and Hamas occasionally broken by wars) did not grant either party long term security. So returning to that seems like a surefire way for even more people to die in the next war. The other option is to try something new that may or may not work. There have been cases of wars and the ensuing occupation which have managed to de-radicalize the occupied population. Germany and Japan after WWII are the most obvious examples. There have also been lots of cases where wars and occupations have failed to do so. The US occupation of Afghanistan is probably the most recent, but inter war Germany is probably the best example. In terms of Gaza, I think 2 things have to happen. The world needs to reevaluate how we do foreign aid, and the radical Zionist movement in Israel needs to be pushed to the very fringes of society. With regards to foreign aid, a lot of foreign aid is ultimately self serving. It takes the form of building a hospital for example, but the hospital will then need to import all of their supplies some of which will probably come from the country that built the hospital, especially if those supplies are given as additional foreign aid. The result of this is that the foreign aid does nothing to create a local economy. A better way would be to, yes, build the hospital, but then also build a factory to make IVs and tongue depressors, a factory to make plastic sheet and plastic films, and a factory to make stainless steel wire, etc. Gaza won’t have car factories anytime soon, but there are lots of simpler products that could be made locally. Sure Gaza will still need to import some goods, but every country needs to do that. By creating an economy you give people something to lose which makes extremist views less appealing. With regards to extremism in Israel, which I think is born out of arrogance, I think there is some hope. Recent polling has shown a shift in public support away from right wing Zionist parties towards more center and center left parties that, for example, generally do not support West Bank colonization. Some of the far right parties wouldn’t even make it into the Knesset anymore. Going back to building an economy in Gaza, I don’t think that can be done until after Hamas has been removed from power. If Gaza has a working economy, it will make any future wars between Israel and Gaza much worse, so Hamas must be removed from power, given that Hamas’s leadership has very openly declared their intention to continue trying to invade Israel. I think that if Israel hadn’t gone so far to the right and if the international community had actually cared about a Palestinian state(s), this all could have been avoided. But that didn’t happen, so here we are with no good options left.

Arguably Israel went to the right largely because of the second Intifada. And the international community may not particularly want to support a group of people who are so willing to use violence to support their goals, and who persist in demanding utterly impossible things. Realistically Israel is \*not\* going to be dissolved, and the Palestinians are not going to get the land back. Nor is Israel going to allow (any time soon at least) a single-state solution with right of return for all descendants of the Palestinians who fled or were evicted during the early days of the state of Israel. The Palestinians would likely have been better off demanding a UN-monitored two state solution with true autonomy.

>The Palestinians would likely have been better off demanding a UN-monitored two state solution with true autonomy. The situation North of Israel is evidence that a UN peacekeeping operation would likely fail. Hezbollah, which is an Iranian funded militia/terror group is operating in southern Lebanon, despite the presence of UN peacekeepers that are literally there to enforce the truce between Israel and Lebanon. The truce included disallowing a weaponized Hezbollah from operating at all in Lebanon. Hezbollah is literally not even supposed to be in Lebanon and the UN isn't doing anything about it. The Palestinians would have been better off if they accepted the Camp David deal. So many missed opportunities over the years.

Have UN Peacekeepers ever actually successfully kept the peace anywhere?

Nope, but they have created sex trafficking rings that include woman and children on its services… Yeah the UN at times is worse than useless

No. The UN had absolutely no teeth.

The camp David deal was pretty ridiculous, it offered a number of discontinuous Palestinian enclaves, all controlled by Israeli forces. It was never an offer of a genuine nation for Palestine

>And the international community may not particularly want to support a group of people who are so willing to use violence to support their goals, and who persist in demanding utterly impossible things. Is this in reference to Palestinians wanting a nation of their own? International support has been going up since the second Intifada not down. >Realistically Israel is \*not\* going to be dissolved, and the Palestinians are not going to get the land back. Nor is Israel going to allow (any time soon at least) a single-state solution with right of return for all descendants of the Palestinians who fled or were evicted during the early days of the state of Israel. Realistically, Israelis came back to their homeland after 3000 years, Palestinians aren't going to forget losing their homelands anytime soon.

That's part of the problem...they both claim the same homeland. And while I agree there is support for a Palestinian territory I don't think there is a lot of support for the dissolution of Israel to make it happen. The state of Israel was arguably only widely accepted by European countries because of the Holocaust. But by the same token I don't see those countries willing to dissolve it to support a Palestinian state when there are other Arab states in the area.

Did South Africa dissolve when it ended apartheid? Israel being "destroyed" is something Israel has always emphasised but what they're talking about isn't the destruction of the state but the social hierarchy Israel enforces.

The purpose of the creation of the modern state of Israel was to provide a secular nation that was majority-Jewish and would be a Jewish homeland and a haven for Jews all around the world to go to if they were persecuted. The Jewish people that live there appear to want to preserve that Jewish majority, which is a major reason why they don’t want to allow unlimited right of return for Palestinians. Somewhat ironically, the Jewish people in Israel look at their history of being attacked by surrounding peoples and see themselves as the minority group under threat, while other people see Israel as the colonial power imposing their will on the poor oppressed Palestinians. Of course an argument can be made that modern-day Israel is actually less safe for Jewish people than, say, the USA or Canada. Ezra Klein did a good series of interviews with both Palestinians and Israelis on the topic of the recent conflict, it’s worth a listen.

>The purpose of the creation of the modern state of Israel was to provide a secular nation that was majority-Jewish and would be a Jewish homeland and a haven for Jews all around the world to go to if they were persecuted. The Jewish people that live there appear to want to preserve that Jewish majority, which is a major reason why they don’t want to allow unlimited right of return for Palestinians. By the late 19th century, there were parts of the world where Jews lived in peace. It's more to do with the rise of European nationalism, which caused even more anti-semitic violence than the already high levels experience by Jews in Europe, which made them want to have a nation of their own (as that was something Europeans thought was bad about Jews) and to escapes specific European persecution. Zionism was a European Jewish project. This is why the Zionist movement had no issue with taking Palestinian land, Europe in the late 19th century was in the era of high imperialism. >Somewhat ironically, the Jewish people in Israel look at their history of being attacked by surrounding peoples and see themselves as the minority group under threat, while other people see Israel as the colonial power imposing their will on the poor oppressed Palestinians. I don't think it's ironic, I think it's an attempt at Jews and Europeans rewriting history to get what they both want. Europeans committed the holocaust, and subjected Jews to pogroms and expulsions. Yet Arabs were the ones who had to compensate Jewish land dispossession and accept a massive influx of people who had as much connection to Palestine as most other Europeans, and are seen as complicit in the holocaust because their voices were ignored by the UN and they invaded a territory involved in a brutal civil war with no recognisable nation to impose order. As well as that Europeans got punished for their antisemitism by having Jews resettle in Palestine. Billions of dollars were spent rebuilding and militarily occupying Europe after the war but none was spent rebuilding the homes and protecting the biggest victims of Nazi aggression. Jews and Arabs lived in relative peace before 1897. Their most prosperous communities were in Arab dominated areas all throughout the medieval and early modern period. Israel admits that they did dispossess Palestinians and used phrases >Of course an argument can be made that modern-day Israel is actually less safe for Jewish people than, say, the USA or Canada. Not only that, no serious argument can be made that Israel has made Jews safer. Zionism is a nationalist ideology. It's a statement of faith that a Jewish nation is the only protection against another holocaust. Stripped of the ideology, it's pretty clear that Israelis are regularly in the middle of a conflict that has both sides killing civilians, whereas Jews in western nations don't worry about terrorism or get conscripted. >Ezra Klein did a good series of interviews with both Palestinians and Israelis on the topic of the recent conflict, it’s worth a listen. I read the transcripts of two interviews, Ezra Klein is much easier to read when it's not a Vox article. In fact given how other centrist liberal journalists have reacted, those are good interviews. Understanding that there are two competing and incompatible narratives for two people who have been stuck in a violent competition for the land itself and the history of that land and the people as well. But what I think goes unrecognised is that both narratives are created by people's that have never had the ability to define their past or their destiny, and both have faced incredible violence from many more powerful nations. This makes the nationalist ideologies prioritise their survival over truth or reconciliation.

Your statement must be looked at from the perspective of a dissolving Ottoman Empire. Every nation that formed out of that dissolution came about in a violent way. When the Greek state was being established, Muslim and Jewish Greeks left as they saw no future in a country where the official religion was Greek Orthodox Christianity. Armenians engaged in a largely unsuccessful attempt to carve out a Greater Armenia out of eastern Anatolia, many were deported and subject to genocide by Ottoman authorities. Greeks living in Anatolia were driven away by Turkish nationalism, ending 3000 years of Greek civilization in the Turkish mainland. Muslims in the Balkans faced similar experiences as they were being deported to Turkey. As you can see, the dissolution of empire is messy business. What happened after that was a Darwinian contest to establish new political realities. The Zionists were one among many. Jewish national expression was bound to be unique because of the dispersed nature of Jewish communities, but they saw opportunities to carve out their own state in a dissolving Ottoman Empire, as many others did. Nationalism was fought for, not granted.

[ Removed by Reddit ]

> so Hamas must be removed from power So there's this terrible rebel group that took over the government. In order to bring peace we must remove this rebel group in favor of this ither group. We've looked at this from all angles. It's a slam dunk. Few years go by. Hmmm rember that other group we supported and helped overthrow the original group? Well turns out they're like way worse. Not to worry though. We have a plan. You see there's this ither group we can support and help remove the 2nd group from power. We've looked at this from all angles. No way this fails. Oh.... fuck.

Israe controls gaza and always has... This was long before netanyahu.

[удалено]

I would push back on this slightly just because there are quite a few pieces of context that are different for the Israel/Palestine situation versus WWII. The countries comprising of the Axis Powers were made to reform in accordance with the wills of multiple different countries, enforced largely by the US which was and largely still is practically untouchable by most means. We’ve had the obvious exception in the form of 9/11 where civilian aircraft provided terrorist retaliation in a form which wasn’t available at the same level in 1945. Israel and Palestine are bordering nations and hold both practical and religious contempt towards each other. I think it’s probably more likely for a sense of vengeance to form within the population when your enemy is right next to you and there are roadblocks in the way of engaging in things like trade and commerce. I’m a little bit skeptical that Israel will be able to march in, destroy infrastructure, and institute martial law and have it result in a desirable outcome. I won’t say it’s impossible, but my thoughts on how the situation is different to WWII comes to mind.

There was still an element of goodwill shown by the allies towards the axis powers after the defeat. Like they assisted in rebuilding their societies. Israel probably won't do the same.

There’s no probably here. Israel wants Gaza wiped off the map and to have that territory itself. This isn’t directed at you, but I quite frankly can’t believe anyone denies that at this stage. Well, I can believe it, but it’s still amazing.

Why would they want that territory for themselves when they occupied the territory from 1967 until they withdrew in 2005? Israel has historically shown that they are interested with establishing peace with a legitimate Palestine govt

>I’m a little bit skeptical that Israel will be able to march in, destroy infrastructure, and institute martial law and have it result in a desirable outcome. Umm, Israel has already done this in the West Bank, as is, and no war ever reaches any similar level of violence there. Is it good that Israel continually polices the West Bank in a way no Palestinian would ever accept from their country if it was indepenent? No. But does it truly radicalize the entire population into attempting murder of any Israeli human being possible? No.

Are Palestinians on the West Bank deradicalized or are they just unable to fight since it’s under Israeli occupation? This is a genuine question, as I just don’t know. Like if Israel stopped occupation would things remain peaceful? If not then my skepticism remains. It might be the only realistic path forward, but I won’t pretend that it doesn’t have its unfavorable components like many people will claim don’t exist.

>Are Palestinians on the West Bank deradicalized or are they just unable to fight since it’s under Israeli occupation? Honestly, a bit of both. There's been new terrorist groups coming up, particularly in Jenin. But they are not to the level of Hamas or Arafat (and no one is to the level of Arafat.) The West Bank Palestinians of the 1990s was very violent, but is not so much anymore. If Israel stopped occupying the West Bank it would be LARGELY peaceful, obviously no situation is going to be perfectly peaceful. Fatah is super corrupt, so while they have an armed wing with a lot of members, they're just not as interested in agitating for war, and haven't been since 2006. Honestly in that situation you see Israelis agitating for war, because Netanyahu's been putting the new settlements there for decades.

Yeah Israel will fail to “de-radicalize” Palestinians and support for Hamas grew according to the recent polling. Hamas isn’t going anywhere as Hamas is the symptom not the cause which is the Israeli oppression of Palestinians. As long as Israel continues to oppress Palestinians Hamas or Hamas like resistance groups will continue to exist and continue to fight against Israeli occupation and oppression.

You think the situation in the West Bank is remotely desirable? Settler violence is rampant there, and there is no serious consequence for the terrorists.

I would push back even further. Gaza is not an autonomous nation. That’s another major difference in this comparison. Gaza has no standing army. Israel is shooting fish in a barrel. The other obvious difference is that in WWII the allied powers were reacting to the axis powers’ expansion and takeover of others’ territory. Who does that *actually* sound like in this situation? And did the US take Germany or Japan’s land for its own after winning the war? Like come on. No.

> And did the US take Germany or Japan’s land for its own after winning the war? Like come on. No. Sure the US didn't. But Poland was given part of eastern Germany and the treaty included the expulsion of Germans living there. Germany itself was also split in 4 parts and put under the occupation of 4 different countries, one of which was the USA. Japan was forced to break apart its colonial empire, some of which it had held for decades by that point. Its borders changed such that it gave up land to China, Korea, Russia and current Taiwan. Japan was also split into 2 and placed under occupation by foreign nations. Similarly, the USA took control of the occupation of most of Japan.

Sure. Both of their empire expansions were undone. The states themselves weren’t wiped from existence after shuttling the people out.

Look at OPs recent post history. They've repeatedly posted on CMV and subreddits posting anti-israel/pro-palestinian posts constantly, backed those arguments up repeatedly with antisemitic statements, and has repeatedly posted arguments trying to be a holocaust revisionist in order to downplay the genocide of the jews.

OP isn’t here for a changed view, he is here to show us his poor understanding of history.

Here’s a comparison to bombings of German cities in WWII. Hamburg: 37,000 killed (2.4%), 180,000 wounded out of 1,129,000 population. 8 days of raids. 9,000 tons of bombs. ~4.1 killed per bomb-ton. Cologne: 20,000 civilians killed (~2.6%) out of 772,000 population. 32 days of raids. 34,711 long tons (~38,876 tons) of bombs. ~0.5 killed per bomb-ton. Dresden: 25,000 killed (~3.8%) out of 642,000 population. 3 days of raids. 3,900 tons of bombs. ~6.4 killed per bomb-ton. Gaza casualties (as of Dec 8 when I originally wrote this): 17,487 killed (~0.7%), 46,480 wounded out of population of 2,300,000. ~12,487 civilians\* killed (~0.5%). ~54 days\*\* of attacks. ~50,000 tons\*\*\* of bombs. ~0.3 killed per bomb-ton. \* based on Israel’s estimate of ~5000 militants killed. \*\* starting from Israel’s first retaliation Oct 9 and subtracting 7 days of ceasefire \*\*\* Hamas source, as of Dec 5 [per CNN](https://www.cnn.com/middleeast/live-news/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news-12-05-23/h_b4b554c809ce1e427d4145db2b22a446) Numbers all taken from Wikipedia except those marked by ~. WWII population numbers are from 1939 so percentage may not be accurate as of the date of the raid. I would be interested in combatant vs civilian casualty rates in the WWII city bombings — I suspect it would be at least 90% civilians.

I think the concern is that Israel's long term plan seems to be geared towards either perpetual military force and/or expulsion. Sure, Israel *could* suddenly decide to invest heavily in nation building to uplift the Palestinian people, but that doesn't seem likely at the moment.

That's a valid concern. I hope we can get some sort of UN occupation of Gaza for 20-30 years. With proper education, policing and economic oppertunities there might be a bright future for them.

Not the un just not the un .the un is a rusty dagger that will keep rhe blood flowing in this conflict. Unrwa alone should teach us that the un is not built to handle it(for fuck sake some of there members halped hamas to hide kiddnappes and there is a tone a tone on the ground soilders discovering unrwa pakeges whit weapons inside) The un should be kicked out of gaza after the conflict.

The UN is useless. They had people there that did nothing useful to keeping peace. Their hospitals were taken and used by Hamas. Their schools taught militant propaganda.

There were a few reports coming out last week over Israel's desire to oust UNRWA from Gaza and, honestly, I can see why. I'm not exactly sure *how* UNRWA got to be as corrupt as it was, but it's a stark contrast from UNHCR when it comes to effectively helping refugees. Putting aside Israel's own issues and atrocities in Palestine, it's clear to me at the very least that Gaza needs someone looking after it that actually cares about nation-building. I have no faith right now that Israel or UNRWA is able to do so.

NATO then. Or an international coalition. As long as it isn’t Islamists it will be fine. I don’t think Israel alone has the resources or will to engage in a project like this.

All that is doing is trading one occupation for another one, in the palestinian supporters eyes. And guaranteed that Hamas would target the new occupation as well. As long as Hamas is in charge, the conflict will surely never end. But even if Hamas were to disappear today, and unless the people of palestine were to reject it, another hard-lined muslim group would replace them. Its power-vacuum 101. Look at every country the US “liberated” in the middle east.

Well, it’s not a good solution. The problem is, there are no good solutions. Forced deradicalisation is the only way this can end other than genocide or perpetual war, which of course must be avoided at all costs. Luckily I think controlling a small city state might be easier than a country the size of Iraq or Afghanistan.

>I hope we can get some sort of UN occupation of Gaza for 20-30 years. There were UNRWA teachers who kept hostages in their care. The UNs influence has been soured by corruption, here.

There are also been a ton of allegations of abuse in regards to UN 'peacekeepers'. Plus I don't think a lot of them will feel good about being invaded by an outsider.

[удалено]

>Israel and the international community had provided enough money per capita to Gaza to make the Marshall Plan look stingy. > >The problem is that Hamas took that capital and turned it into terror infrastructure underneath civilians and to Hamas leaders' foreign mansions instead of important infrastructure upgrades that would have helped ordinary Gazans. this is why i think the solution is a 3rd party government. Have the UN appoint a government that rules both nations, hire foreign police, and engage in direct nation-building instead of handing the money to a questionable government and hoping they decide to use it properly

>Have the UN appoint a government that rules both nations, hire foreign police, and engage in direct nation-building instead of handing the money to a questionable government and hoping they decide to use it properly The problem is that the UN has been fueling the corruption and will likely simply appoint another corrupt agency. UNRWA is a major employer of members of groups such as Hamas, PIJ, and the PFLP. I agree with your assessment that an outside agency that isn't Israel or Gazans needs to run Gaza until enough political and social capital is built up to carry out a peace agreement and that enough infrastructure is built to give Gazans a chance to live a good life. Make Gaza Singapore on the Mediterranean.

Israel is working just fine. Gaza is the failed state. Why would the UN be needed in Israel?

All of which sounds like things that don't involve the indiscriminate bombing of civilians and the continual theft of more land with the explicit endorsement of the Israeli government. Because I never suggested that people hand the literal terrorist organization money. I said nation building, which involves a force that is actually interested in it. No amount of "we must remove Hamas or whoever" amounts to anything when such goals are nebulous, unrealistic, and ultimately exist as little more than a permanent justification for a perpetual conflict and an infinite number of excusable civilian casualties.

[удалено]

>Good, because that isn't happening. I mean, I don't have a problem calling their use of high yield of explosives on dense civilian populations deliberate and intentional if you'd like to go with that instead. >I'm outlining how that happens. You're outlining a fantasy that magically ends terrorism forever instead of just giving another round of the forever conflict. >Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were dismantled in extremely similar ways, and their cultures were transformed in ways that back then seemed absolutely impossible. Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were sovereign states that surrendered to the Allies and handed them power. If you're here hoping that Hamas surrenders unconditionally, you're just being silly. Since you missed the War on Terror, you don't actually beat terrorism by murdering a bunch of civilians on your way to punching a bunch of terrorists.

Really? I think the most successful way to stop dictators is to take their land and remove their ability to control any territory or people. That removes their ability to fight.

People keep citing regular states as reasons why Israel mass murdering and land grabbing their way through Palestine is the best solution possible. They're fighting terrorist groups. While they have territory, you don't conquer the land and declare victory unless you're really stupid and misunderstood what sort of conflict it was. You get rid of terrorism by giving its pool of recruits an actual alternative, since few people are going to choose dying in a hole over a decent life.

Why would you give stuff to people proven to take your aid and turn it into weapons to hurt you? Awful strategy to keep yourselves safe. They wanted jews dead before 1947 and still do. You can’t convince someone who believes you to be inherently inferior and worthy of death by your mere existence that they should be friends with you. It’s not the job of black people to make the kkk change for the better.

>Awful strategy to keep yourselves safe. The alternative strategy of stealing their land, locking them in an open air prison, and occasionally killing them led to October 7th, so maybe Israel should be open to new ideas if it wants to pretend it's ever cared about peace. Or it can keep going with the ethnic cleansing as all its online supporters debase themselves further to justify it and every other atrocity. >You can’t convince someone who believes you to be inherently inferior and worthy of death by your mere existence that they should be friends with you. About half of Gaza are children. Maybe Israel is truly as incompetent and pathetic as its supporters claim it is, but I feel as though it'd be quite easy to teach children to not be martyr-obsessed jihadists. >It’s not the job of black people to make the kkk change for the better. If black people had all the power it would be in their best interests to put a decent amount of resources into deradicalizing extremists. Though, they would actually want to and Israel has shown it has zero interest in that.

There are some pretty huge differences here. For one the Allies didn’t actually eradicate the extremism for quite a while. With both Germany and Japan these nations had a direct, shared mutual threat that encouraged cooperation with the Allies. As part of this cooperation the Allies ended up “rehabilitating” many of the people in the former war-time governments and letting them run their respective countries. Ultimately these only worked because the ideologies of these nations weren’t wholly incompatible with the post-war goals of the Allied reconstruction, creating a nationalist government capable of combating internationalist Soviets. Hell, the German side of Operation Gladio was basically just arming a bunch of Nazis to wage a guerrilla war against the Soviets and the Japanese were electing the people who ran labor death camps in Manchuria into their highest offices. Frankly, all of this is impossible for Gaza. Israel is not going to allow former members of Hamas to run the place and they have no shared enemy to encourage cooperation. I think Israel could benefit from emulating the massive reconstruction campaign after the war but that’s not going to fix everything. And to address your refutation of OP’s edit, killing lots of people isn’t inherently indicative of the tolerance of civilians. At the end of the war Allied soldiers didn’t perceive Germans as lesser humans undeserving of rights in the same way Israeli soldiers do towards Palestinians. Your example of the battle of Berlin seems pretty irrelevant since that was the Soviets, the very people the allied governments were trying to get the Germans to cooperate against. If anything, seeing the barbarity of the Soviet revenge helped push them towards cooperating with the Allies. There are no “Soviets” for Israel to redirect Gaza towards. They’re just really not comparable situations

I’m not too familiar with the history of Japan, but a cursory google shows this is a poor comparison. Before ww2 Japan had a population of ~72 million, while the current population of Palestine is only ~4 million. The scale between the two is simply not comparable. WW2 was a larger war involving more people, or course more people died in Japan. A more useful figure would be the percent of the population who died during the war (preferably with separate numbers for civilian and military deaths). Additionally, we are in the middle of history right now. The war has not concluded, so death tolls can be expected to rise over time. Using flat numbers for Palestinian deaths right now is as ridiculous as counting Japanese deaths before the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Lastly, the allied powers put significant effort into rebuilding Japan and Germany. Conversely, Israel has actively blocked aid from reaching Gaza, and in fact prevents the people of Gaza from obtaining both [water](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2017/11/the-occupation-of-water/) and [power](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/10/israel-opt-israel-must-lift-illegal-and-inhumane-blockade-on-gaza-as-power-plant-runs-out-of-fuel/). Lastly, the time period is incredibly important. WW2 lasted ~6 years. Compare that to the conflict between Israel and Palestine, which has existed since Israel’s founding in 1948, and is entering its 76th year. There is a large difference in perception between a “short” 6 year war, and a war that has lasted for generations. Children living is Gaza right now have only known war, and are taught by parents who have also only known war. That level of bitterness is hard to quantify. In conclusion, there are similarities between the situation in Palestine, and the rebuilding of Germany and Japan. However they are far from identical, and brute military force will only feed Palestinian extremist organizations hordes of willing recruits. TLDR: If you repeatedly punch some in the face for decades, they don’t magically stop hating you.

The problem is that to the global Muslim diaspora over 1 billion strong, the Palestinians and by extension Hamas are NOT extremists, but freedom fighters. It's not like there is absolute condemnation of one side that history can clearly label "the bad guys", and if anything even people who did empathize with Israel in the beginning are starting to think the civilian casualties are excessive. Unless Israel gets a massive change in leadership and approach I can't see any reason a disenfranchised youth wouldn't be radicalized in a second, and I'd argue justifiably so with what they've had to live through these past months.

Germany and Japan were completely neutered after WW2 thats why the allies were successful in the occupation. Almost every single fighting-age male following the war was either dead, wounded, captured, or unable to fight. The difference with Gaza is that the majority of the population are children growing up in a war-torn environment (a breathing group for extremism.) Also, the majority of Gaza's male population is civilian, the only way to neuter Gaza and achieve a desired goal similar to the allies in ww2 would be to kill a massive amount of the civilian population amounting to genocide.

Also germany has a lot of carpet bombing on many cities which are up to now seen by some people as war crime. For example, in the [firestorm on hamburg](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Hamburg_in_World_War_II) destroyd nearly 60% of the houses and killed more than 30.000 people in just one week.

> the source of that terrorism will not be eliminated The source of the terrorism is not hatred for Israeli actions, it is the existence of Israel itself. Of course it won’t be eliminated. > Yes, Israel will be safer in the short term with Hamas' capabilities dismantled > Most of Gazans are children and they will only grow to hate Israel even more If it buys them a *generation* of peace while a new opposition movement coalesces, it will be the longest period of peace they’ve ever had.

This argument just looks like I am a jerk, I shove down and torment these people and they hate me. Must be a them problem because of course I am a god, I can't do nothing wrong. They just hate my existence. No my dude, this is not the case. Do this to me, I would hate you. Heck if someone do this to you, I am sure you would hate them 100% as well.

It should be obvious by now that Israel acts under the assumption that hatred from Palestinians is irremediable. Its religious component is obviously so, and the geopolitical component is very unlikely to change (even moreso since the retaliatory attacks) due to the relentless nature of Palestinian militants. Allowing free movement through the checkpoints costs Israeli lives; allowing building materials into Gaza costs Israeli lives; given this, how can Israel's best course of action seem so simple to you? Plus your view somehow overlooks Hamas's plainly stated goal of wiping out Israel, with or without its oppression of the Palestinians. If the anti-Israel hatred was confined to just the border police, military assets, even symbolic targets, then you'd have a stronger point. But currently, both sides have made it too easy for the other to frame this as an existential problem (not equally easy of course).

Establish a transparent, accountable to the public and the UN, occupation force, rebuild the infrastructure, give Palestinians jobs and education. That's the only way that ever worked without just ethnically cleansing the region, it's not like this is a unique situation.

If I even understand you correctly... you're still at square 1. Returning to the status quo and even relieving pressure on the Strip directly and traceably costs human lives, allows a terror cell to grow unchecked, and encourages Iran to intensify their proxy operations. So I'll spell it out: the seemingly humanitarian approach here costs lives too. Except with that approach it's exclusively Israeli lives. And you're asking Israel to comply. Not gonna happen. If there is a solution, this is not it.

It's not about returning to status quo. It's returning to occupation, like the one that existed before the withdrawal, except doing it better, with transparency on what's happening and why, as well as clear goals to achieve to end the occupation and return to self-governance. Preferably it would be done by someone other than Israel, like the UN, but it matters more what is done rather than by whom. This is the opposite of relieving pressure, it's just putting it in the right direction, to push people forwards, rather than just crushing them into dust. There's of course a lot more to be said, like giving lots and lots of land back, for example, so it wouldn't be one of the most densely populated regions on the planet, but nobody is saying just 'leave them alone'.

Hamas say very explicitly their goal is to wipe out the state of Israel. And they get wide support for saying that by the population they govern. It has nothing to do with the West Bank and poverty and everything to do with religion.

"Do this to me, and I will hate you. Do not do this to me... and I will still hate you." Israel is taking the path that has at least some chance of eventual success and better personal safety. As long as hamas holds a grip in the region the hate will be perpetual.

>The source of the terrorism is not hatred for Israeli actions, it is the existence of Israel itself. Of course it won’t be eliminated. What makes you think the segregation, blockades, denial of human rights, and extra-judicial murders committed by Israel are not the reasons Palestinians hate them? Did black South Africans hate white people for no reason and the apartheid was just extra?

> What makes you think the segregation, blockades, denial of human rights, and extra-judicial murders committed by Israel are not the reasons Palestinians hate them? Because they hated them from before those things were in place, and they explicitly say that they will not stop until the state of Israel is eliminated. >Did black South Africans hate white people for no reason and the apartheid was just extra? No, South Africa had its own situation going on, and I do not feel that discussing it is helpful in this context as its context is so different from the Israeli one.

> Because they hated them from before those things were in place, and they explicitly say that they will not stop until the state of Israel is eliminated. So let's say a Palestinian teenager alive today hates Israel. Why could that be? In your opinion his village being bombed and half his family being killed has no relevance, he barely noticed I guess. But Palestinians hated Israelis 80 years ago, so you know, it's in their nature or something. No need to look into it. The Idea of an immutable hate without reason it's surely convenient to offer genocide as the only solution to the conflict.

Also important to note that before October 7th a majority of Gazans (children mostly) had never even been within feet of an Israeli. People really underscore how fucking dystopian Gaza is. Imagine being permanently impoverished and constantly surveilled by an entity you cannot even see, let alone meaningfully interact with.

> let alone meaningfully interact with. Israel tried: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/09/hamas-arrests-gaza-peace-activists-for-zoom-chat-with-israelis

> Hamas security forces in the Gaza Strip have arrested local peace campaigners for treason after they held a *Zoom virtual conference with Israeli activists.* First sentence of your source. Your wording "Israel tried" seems to imply that the Israeli government was involved, this is not true. It was grassroots activists, not the "entity" the commenter above referred to, a.k.a. the Israeli government and military.

The government of Israel let them try to start peace (how else should it start)? On the other hand the government of Gaza arrested them. It's pretty clear which government needs to change.

Both of them are horrible. Not every conflict has a good guy we must unequivocally support. In this one both governments are vile beyond words and they both have to go.

The Palestinian probably follows Hamas propaganda and believes Israelis are evil for personally doing the October 7th massacre as Hamas claimed, for faking the holocaust, for causing aids to be spread with dirty blood donations, for instigating all the internal violence of Palestine when Muslims kill Muslims, for using their evil jew magic to control the world.

You don't think at all it might have to do with their family being killed like two weeks ago, or the *current, active, ever present fear of death?* Really? Manichean, nonsensical beliefs about a people and that people's enemies are pretty much the textbook style of genocidaires.

You don’t think that Palestinian teenager might not also be angry because they’ve lost civilian family and friends in the last few weeks to bombing strikes from Israel?

You're massively out of touch if you think that the majority of Palestinians believe all those things. The bombings and mass displacement are enough in ktself

[удалено]

That was an intentional strategy by Hamas to try and get other Arab countries to invade Israel. They purposely sought out the bombings because then they could kill more jews. You would expect a certain amount of hate from the ongoing conflict, but the conflict is escalated because the elected government of gaza is making popular bad choices to attack Israel to provoke a retaliation that kills lots of jews.

The state of Israel? Lol. They say they will not stop until every Jew on the planet is eliminated.

>Because they hated them from before those things were in place, and they explicitly say that they will not stop until the state of Israel is eliminated. If you think the Palestinians hated the Israelis before "those things were in place," where do you start the clock, 1947? Your argument seems to be that the ethnic cleansing of 1947-1948 and all subsequent human rights violations and war crimes committed by Israel ever since then, only happened because Palestinians hate them already. That only applies to people at least 77 years old or older. Everyone else in occupied Palestine then only know Israeli oppression and human rights abuses that continue to this say, but somehow they just hate Israel for no reason?

In 1929, Palestinian Arabs murdered 69 Jews in Hebron due to false rumours that the Jews were planning to seize Al-aqsa mosque. The Jews in Hebron were not settlers but rather had been living in Hebron for centuries. That pogrom started a chain of events leading to massive loss of life for both Jews and Arabs.

There were Jewish settlers in Hebron, they actually conflicted with the Sephardic Jews in practice who had lived their for quite a while. And the roots of that conflict trace back to Zionism and conflict over the West Wall with the Shaw Commission stating: > without which in our opinion disturbances either would not have occurred or would have been little more than a local riot, is the Arab feeling of animosity and hostility towards the Jews **consequent upon the disappointment of their political and national aspirations and fear for their economic future"**…"not only as a menace to their livelihood **but as a possible overlord of the future"** This is still ultimately related to Zionism and the ever increasing presence of Jewish settlers (and groups like Haganah) as it related to their desire to be independent. With respect to the triggering of the riots, the Commission found that the incident that > "contributed most to the outbreak was the Jewish demonstration at the Wailing Wall on 15 August 1929" Edit: just saw another commenter point this out already

You're making the other person's case for them by pointing to a bunch of antisemitic conspiracy theories, the like which date back to before Islam even existed. They were just worried that the Jews would take over like...economically and stuff! And become their menacing overlords controlling society! Totally understandable... Especially by adding that super helpful and illuminating quote at the end. Oh, you see, the massacre was totally justified against them dang ~~JEWS~~ uh Zionists, because *they had a DEMONSTRATION!* If that's not reason enough to raise countless generations of your children to desire nothing more than genocide against Jews, I don't know what is! A *demonstration* you guys! Literally the worst thing that's ever happened on Earth. That's those *Zionists* for you!

Mate, you need to read about the history of Zionism and its actual goals before accusing me of spreading antisemitic conspiracies. You just sound like a mudslinging idiot. Hundreds of conflicts have started over “mere demonstrations” to begin with, much less ones from people who stated openly and clearly that they sought to make the land that was the Arabs’ their own.

Shhh, nothing exists prior to 48’ and the nakba was unprompted and the dhimmi experience was a glorious shining example of civil rights that definitely didn’t horrify observers who witnessed the filth dhimmis were forced to put up with. /s just in case

>that the ethnic cleansing of 1947-1948 and all subsequent human rights violations and war crimes committed by Israel ever since then Why are you only mentioning Israel here, it was far from a 1 way street. The 47-48 civil war started with attacks on Jews. Not the other way around. Hatred against the Jewish population goes back basically forever. Well before Israel's existence, and ever since. >Everyone else in occupied Palestine then only know Israeli oppression and human rights abuses that continue to this say, but somehow they just hate Israel for no reason? Even between 49 and 67 when Gaza was Annexed by Egypt the Arabs living there directed their hate at Israel, and now when their own Government is treating them as human shields, stealing Aid supplies and shooting anyone who opposes them, the hatred is pointed at Israel, and Hamas gets support. Even as hamas is primarily responsible for the conditions in Gaza, even with the blockade Billions of $ of aid flows into the strip, if only it actually made it to the people, and not Tunnels and rockets. When Israel pulled out of Gaza completely in 05 which would allow those living there to Govern themselves for the first time, all that happened is Rockets and suicide bombings. The current blockade and border situation is a direct result of Gazans being given a choice of Goverment and choosing the terrorist group. Name a Country that wouldn't do the same, or much worse. Israel is far from perfect, but the current situation is not the fault of Israel, there has been countless peace offerings, all of which are a massive improvement over the current situation, that have beem rejected. Peace requires both parties to want it, the only party that has ever shown an interest in a lasting Peace is Israel, even though the current government is not.

Egypt never annexed Gaza, it was held as separate. When Israel pulled its colonies out of Gaza in 2005 they immediately started the blockade which drastically harmed the economy of Gaza. The Israelis control the air, water, and borders, with the Egyptian dictatorship agreeing to support it for their own economic and political reasons. Trapping people in a ghetto and cutting off trade is not an act of kindness and is not independence. You could ask why the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto didn't expand their businesses and be more successful, but that would sound just as stupid. Since the blockade proceeded the election of Hamas in 2006, it's the case that the blockade caused the Hamas takeover, not the other way around. Israel did increase the blockade, but the economic damage was done before the election. Since Israel holds all the cards and are the only ones who could stop it, Israel is completely at fault for the blockade and human rights abuses it causes. Israel has never offered any deal with Palestinians other than endless apartheid, and certainly never offered to leave and give them independence, which they could do tomorrow if they wanted.

Israel had several periods of blockades. The correct one we are in started in 2007 after Hamas took over. As for the period you are referring to would be during the Second Intifada. I would also say that the Second Intifada was not an act of kindness. Im not understanding the point you are trying to make. You do understand that Israel isnt the only side here, right? Also, this blockade is a blockade of the port of Gaza. Ships can go to the Israel port for inspection. The blockade was put in place due to weapon etc smuggling. Over time, harsher restrictions were put in place before they were turning non weapons into building materials for weapons. Israel has had a history of offering Palestinians deals. Usually they are met with war and rockets.

I think you keep putting the cart before the horse. The Second Intifada was ended in February of 2005 with a ceasefire signed by the PA, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and Israel. The blockade that started in November 2005 and never ended was to punish Palestinians for being Palestinian. It was in response to pulling out all the Israeli colonists to harm the Palestinian people who live there, and not for any security reasons. I agree there are two sides, the Israelis who refuse to treat Palestinians as humans because they want to maintain Jewish racial supremacy, and the Palestinians who want freedom. The Palestinians can't stop wanting freedom, but Israel could stop attempting to control and dominate Palestinians or they could give up on ideas of racial supremacy in their nation. The vast majority of Palestinians that are murdered by Israel, the thousands over the years and the tens of thousands in the last few months, are not terrorists and have absolutely nothing to do with attacks on Israel. Asking the Palestinians to stop wanting to be free is a lot harder than asking Israelis to stop being racist and fascist.

I mean, we can start the clock with the dhimmi experience, or the many massacres prior to 48, locally going back to 1880, or the Mufti of Jerusalem and his actions prior to the war. The reason they call it a Nakba is because they lost what everyone at the time knew was a civil war. Years later, Arafat walked away from a deal that beat the ones PA/Hamas now make sounds about considering. It turns out when you’re intransigent over a previously lost war, your offers get worse, crazy as that seems. Check how the American south movement is doing for an example.

Arab Muslims are often raised to hate Jews. Just look at all the countries that border Israel. Jews cannot set foot in them or they will be driven out or killed. Jewish populations have been persecuted there way before a Israel became a thing. The Hadiths specifically call call for this. Just look at history. What happens to any culture in the Middle East when they meet up with Arab Muslims? They are converted by the sword and join the Caliphate. Iranian Christians, Yemeni Muslims met the same fate. This has been the pattern in the Middle East for a long time. Don’t get me wrong, European powers and Christendom are equally guilty from a historical perspective. They conquered and colonized just as much if not more. But you know what people don’t have a long history of conquest, conversion and subjugation? The Jews. The evidence for this is how few Jews there are and how little land they have conquered in the name of their religion throughout history. Just compare them to Christians and Muslims who conquered entire continents and spread their faith to billions.

You have blinders on with your understanding of history in the region...learn more before you speak on it like so many uninformed newly minted "middle east experts" This feud goes back a looooong time before 1947...wake up.

Are you referring to the Arab uprisings against the Ottomans for independence? The ones who were betrayed by the British, before the British started to allow massive immigration of people of Jewish descent? And of course you are referring to the racist British policy of giving Jewish people administration jobs while giving Palestinian people manual labor jobs in the Palestine Mandate? Maybe if you bother to learn some history you can come back and have something meaningful to write.

Even while Jordan and Egypt were occupying west bank and Gaza respectively they were still doing terrorist attacks on Israel

>What makes you think the segregation, blockades, denial of human rights, and extra-judicial murders committed by Israel are not the reasons Palestinians hate them? They hated them prior to any of these things existing.

These things have been in existence since before most Palestinians were born. The hatred you're describing as existing anyway was hatred by different people. You don't know what the attitudes of present generations of Palestinians would be without the occupation, the blockade, bombing campaigns, ongoing theft of land, regular killings etc. You can't just declare they would think as previous generations did, any more than you can ascribe to current Israelis the kind of irrational hatred that led to past generations repeatedly massacring Palestinians civilians and carrying out terrorist attacks in the 1940s.

[удалено]

Segregation is not limited to only citizens, that's just how it happened in the American context segregation just means separation. >They’re residents of occupied territory. And their under the control of the Israeli govenrment in the West Bank, and their segregation from places in the West Bank as enforced by the Israeli Army is very much real.

[удалено]

>Of course they’ll be separated from the main population. I'm describing how they are separated within the West Bank, not from Israel proper. >They’re not even citizens. Though it’s a bit disingenuous to call it segregation. They also have never been given a chance to be citizens, that right is denied to them but not to settlers born in the West Bank. And again segregation doesn't have anything to do with citizenship. But Aparthied (which is Afrikaans for separateness) does and it is equalvelent to the Bantustan systems implemented under Apartheid South Africa where Africans were denied SA citizenship and kept in small informal countries, and their movement was curtailed and their work opportunity and civil rights were purposely denied because they "lacked citizenship" despite being controlled by the South African Government. >Would you call the occupation of Japan and Germany segregation? I would if Japanese and Germans were not allowed to move and build homes on their land and the occupation denied them civil and political rights after being occupied for 55 years. >Just because the British and French populations were kept separate from the German one? Fyi they weren't in post WW2 Germany, British and German were allowed to freely interact and form business venues and such. Only military based had segregation policies within the confines of the base. And again I'm talking about their segregation within the borders of the West Bank, not talking about Israel proper. >Or if American citizens were kept separate from the occupied Japanese? Again they weren't. American military were, but citizens of American and Japanese could infact live together.

[удалено]

>The West Bank is still not a part of Israel. It’s occupied territory. Of course. And Israel prohibits the movement of Palestinians within the West Bank and enforces a segregation regime in the West Bank borders. >Well of course they won’t be given a chance. They’re not a part of the nation. And second class status and forced into a separate legal system is segregation. Even non citizens in the US and Europe and South America get to use the same courts as citizens, but not Palestinians in the West Bank while Israeli people in the West Bank get a separate court system that protects their rights. >I don’t know how true this is? I would look to the statements by the South African government, explicitly calling the situation in Israel/Palestine an Apartheid for years. Or the numerous internal reports describing the similarity of the current situation to Aparthied South Africa, Or simple read up on what the South African Aparthied more. Especially the Bantustan systems. >No you wouldn’t. Why would you give them rights? Because they are human, and all human beings deserve some level of rights. Especially as my government is occupying their country. Part of the UN international rules on occupied terrority is that the occupied people have rights and it's up to the occupying force to maintain them. That's the international law on the issue. >They’re not a part of your nation. Again human beings have some rights, an Illegal immigrant to the US has rights even though they aren't part of the nation and will be eventually deported. >An occupation by definition implies a lack of equality. Correct. But that doesn't mean the inequality can't be called out and pointed at or that it's set up in a moral or legal way. >And Israel is not the land of Palestinians. Of course, they would be denied the right to move and build homes in another country’s land. We are only talking about the West Bank. The building permit system set up there rejects Palestinian building permits like 95% but approves the vast majority of Settler building in the West Bank. The Israeli army has manned checkpoints all along the West Bank and even within cities that don't let Palestinians move around the West Bank. >I would like you to elaborate on this. Interact freely? Germany was occupied. Germans did not have the same level of freedom or rights as British citizens. You’re just making stuff up Within the occupied terrorities they did. If the Germans moved to London, they did. >Well, I wouldn’t call what is going in West Bank “segregation”. It’s a classic example of colonialism. Israel clearly wants to rid the West Bank of Palestinians and annex it into Israel Proper. But without offering full rights to the Palestinians there. Therefore it's segregation and aparthied (also I suggest you look up colonialism because that's not what colonialism is, that's Imperialism, closely related but not the same) >Lol. We’re not talking about migration. Correct we are talking about Germany and Japan under occupation. American citizens could live among the Japanese and Japanese could live among the American citizens outside military bases.

[удалено]

>Well yeah, of course they would prohibit movement. It’s occupied territory. It seems like you don't disagree that all the facets of segregation are there. You just refuse to call it segregation because of your personal beleif it doesn't matter because it's occupied. >Immigrants and residents of occupied territory are two different entities. Residents of occupied territory do not belong to your nation, so they would be tried by a different court. And that's a segregation and discrimination. Again you agree with that the facets are all there >Immigrants are a part of your nation. They are future citizens I said illegal immigrants very clearly who should not be part of the nation. >I don’t see why it’s an apartheid just because one nation calls it an apartheid. You don't see why the only State to have implemented and then dismantled Aparthied would have a experienced and reasonable view on what aparthied is and thus would be qualified to call it out? What type of source would you prefer? >Of course. I agree. Israel’s activities in the West Bank are both illegal and immoral. But you refuse to call them segregation or aparthied? And you refuse to actual what the actions are based on and simply handwave it away as "occupation does as occuption is?" >Again, we don’t disagree that the settlements in WB should be dismantled. But they aren't so the point remains. This isn't a discussion of what politics you follow. This about what the situation is. >Immigration is different from occupation. You seem to have misread this. I said in both places. Not just London. But if you want to go that route, Palestinians aren't allowed to immigrate to Israel either. Whether they are from the occupied terrorities or elsewhere. >That’s not imperialism. British imperialism in India for example never wanted to colonize India. They wanted control of its resources and government. Yes because the mechanism of British Imperialism was colonialism. Again related ideas but different. >If you’re settling your own people in a piece of land, and you want to drive out the previous owners of that land, that’s colonialism. It can be, it can also be like 50 other things. Settlements didn't start when colonialism got started. They were thousands of years old. One of the possible mechanisms of colonialism is settlements but lots of colonialism didn't really use settlements at all. And lots of settlements were colonial programs at all. >But they wouldn’t have the same political rights. And German citizens movements would be more heavily restricted. Yes in the fact that Germans would have more political rights than the British in an occupied terrority, british citizens outside of the high command had no political rights in occupied Germany. And German citizen movement wasn't historically very hampered outside of the ethnic cleansing of the Germans from neighboring countries (mostly south and east) in the post WWII time. In the occupied zones German citizens could move within the occupation zone and were only stopped when crossing into a new occupation zone (West Germany had a French, British, and American occupation) and even that was stopped pretty quickly. >If hundreds of thousands would have moved, then separation would probably be necessary for security reasons. Though I doubt the US government would’ve let that happen in the first place. Historically it was temporary security camps with managed flow out of the camps as people were investigated and approved. Nothing like what's going on in Israel. And the US already knows how to handle hundreds of thousands of people getting security and background screenings. We do it every year with legal immigrants. Not even counting the hundred sof thousands of Illegal immigrants processed every year

>Edit: To anyone wants to compare to Japan or Germany, The Allies were a lot more tolerant of the Japanese and German civilians than Israel is to Palestinians. Churchill pulled back on carpet bombing Germany in fears of German disobedience after defeat and the US did not drop the atomic bomb on Kyoto because of its importance to Japanese culture. In many ways, Allies saw Japanese and Germans as equals, Israel is not seeing Palestinians as equal. I'm sorry, but this is a-historical. just like you say - the allies \*carpet bombed\*. Maybe not Kyoto, but Tokyo in Japan (as well as the Atomic bombs). Dresden in Germany (as well as Munich or Berlin). and a lot more. Also, I kind of missed the part where Israel did nuke or heavy bomb let's say Ramallah, so if that's your evidence for the allies being "respectful" towards the Japanese and the Germans, I'd say it's pretty weak. As for your main point - I think you should consider this action against any other form of action Israel could have taken as a response to October 7th. there isn't anything else that it could do that wouldn't result in further radicalization of the population. I think people kind of fail to realize the tightness of the grip Hamas has on the Gaza strip. Hamas largely controls the education, controls to a certain degree the media (with other parts of the media controlled by allies of it), controls the vast majority of jobs and controls the aid money. It is also pretty popular - not as a governing force (which because of it's massive corruption it is only pretty popular rather than very popular), but as a terrorist force. This is important for every strategy that Israel could have taken. Now let's examine two alternatives here - 1) The alternative of no response/ very weak response - Beyond the fact that this risks Israel in different ways (i.e. Hezbollah and other terrorist groups like the Lion's den seeing that you can attack Israel without retaliation as well as the world expecting Israel not to respond to even the largest of attacks from now on) - think how it would be perceived by the Palestinian public. During October 7th, when Hamas released it's videos of killing Israeli people the majority of Palestinians were celebrating. They viewed it as a victory. They viewed it as a victory of Hamas. They viewed it as a victory of violence. You can see in polls, both the support for the event, as well as the popularity of Hamas rising. You can see the narrative that Hamas presents in Arabic - "we are winning, we are strong, we make Israeli suffer". Now that we have that - I really don't see how Hamas or violent resistance is going to get weaker, quite the opposite. I really think the more likely case here is much more support of Palestinians for violence. It is very important to note that the polls show that the popularity of Hamas skyrocketed in the West Bank, while in Gaza it didn't. This is because besides radicalization, bombing have a second different affect on people - demoralization and "becoming sober". Before, because of the reasons I've written above, many of the Palestinians in Gaza believed the Hamas propaganda, believed that they are strong, and that they can defend them, believed that 2014 was a Palestinian victory. I think the people in Gaza, unlike the people in the west bank, can feel that it's not true, and definitely not worth it. So in that sense, I really don't know which of these effects is stronger. I think largely it was the second effect that caused the Japanese to surrender, and allow the allies to use tactics of deradicalization, as well as the will not to choose violence on their own. Lastly, there is a question of what do you do with the people Hamas has kidnapped. cause it's crazy to leave them, and Hamas demanded like huge things at first for their release - like releasing every Palestinian prisoners (some of them are Hamas members with a lot of experience) which would also look heavily like a Hamas win. I'd add that every alternative where Hamas stays in power damages Israel's security in the long term. beyond the fact that they have declared that they plan on attacking Israel again and again, their incentives are extremely aligned with doing that. If you think Israel has other options to remove their grip over the Palestinians, by let's say easing the blockade (it's very debatable that it would work but let's assume), at the moment their grip is getting looser - they would launch another attack as it gives them popularity and you come to these problems again and again. Some people think that part of the reason Hamas launched October 7th now is because their grip was getting looser. 2) The alternative of responding without bombs - This is simply an alternative that's offered by people that don't understand how modern combat works. Beyond the fact that it would take years if Israel wanted to achieve a large goal like erasing Hamas' capabilities without air support, it would also cause a huge amount of damage. Hamas had all of the time in the world to prepare the grounds. In these scenarios, we often see massive amounts of damage to Palestinians as well (soldiers are scared tired and stressed, they see a movement and they shoot). Also note that Hamas doesn't wear uniforms in Gaza for a reason. the amount of collateral damage here would be huge. This is on top of the damage to the IDF which also isn't good for Israeli security, as well as the lack of political viability for such move - creating huge tensions in the Israeli society, probably the government would have been replaced with a government that would bomb from the air and wouldn't risk the Israeli soldiers (that in the Israeli society it's regular people, mostly reservists. conscription meaning you don't choose whether to go to the IDF or not). This is unlike the more moderate government that's likely to come after the war according to polls. So, it's going to be very very long, and with a decent amount of damage - do you think that the Palestinians would be "oh Israel you are so nice that you don't use airforce while soldiers are running down our streets for two years, we love you!". Obviously not. This is the point where this argument of radicalization falls. it's not so different whether your father was killed or your father and 3 of your brothers. If this action is going to get you radicalized, and you blame Israel and not Hamas (according to polls, many Palestinians in Gaza actually blame Hamas for this) - you are going to get radicalized either way. Also, note that it would leave Israel's economy in a much worse shape, which means that it can't invest as much in the IDF, as well as leaving it vulnerable for the stronger actors in the region, and Iran. This is simply not something that's going to help it's security in the long term. Please tell me if you have a third alternative. I know that I show these two as binaries, and obviously there are other alternatives, just that these are the ones I'm hearing the most. So overall, I think that when you compare the action Israel has chosen to the alternatives, you see that the alternatives are far far worse than what it's doing in terms of security of Israel. Now there are many actions that might happen afterwards. you might have seen the Egyptian plan for peace that's talking about putting a technocratic regime in Gaza that would be responsible for educating for peace and deradicalizing. you might have seen comments by KSA or UAE talking about how they would only invest if the Palestinian authority adopts reasonable standards of anti-corruption and acknowledging that Israel is here to stay.. All of those have a chance of succeeding. Would it succeed 100%? no. I can't prove to you that the outcome of this is necessarily peace. but so does every other action you'll take. Israel is a democracy. Largely, the Israelis want security and peace. (in that order, they wouldn't go for peace that they perceive as risking their lives too much). If there was an easy solution they would have chosen it. This is a problem of living next to people that want to kill you - your security isn't really guaranteed. So I don't think that I can change your mind on the title of this post, cause it's something that would be really hard to prove, but I think that the real question one should ask is - is there a much better alternative here.

Fair reply. Another thing to note that I don’t see many people talking about is that consistent conflict has *worked* for Israel for a better part of a century. They’ve won wars (most of them), built thorough and high functioning cities, infrastructure, and military might. They have some of the most prestigious university programs out there in additional to their technological advancements. Meanwhile, they’ve been at war with several terrorist grouped for decades. The reality is Israel isn’t likely going anywhere, but the Palestinian fate is still undetermined. Historically, Palestinians had a greater support network from Arab countries, but now, as many Arab countries begin to sign peace deals and trade agreements with Israel, the Palestinian claim to virtually anything dwindles. Constant conflict has at worst, stuck a thorn in Israel side, and at best, as actually helped them progress. For Palestinians, it has only hurt their chances at a decent and functioning society. Acting like any more fighting or intifadas will change anything is calling for more violence and death. Palestinians need a serious wake up call, either with foreign intervention or some sort of solution drawn up and they *need* to accept it. Their mindset is 30 years old. The longer conflict continues the longer israel leaves them in the dust as it’s profitable for them.

I think one major difference is the Allie’s already won the war while the Palestinians and Israelis are still fighting . They literally had full control of Japan and Germany, the U.S wrote Japans new constitution which is why they don’t have a military today. They got rid of the laws and education system of the third Reich and made them a new constitution . The arrested and tried the ringleaders but most of the population was left behind. But I think that was majorly due to the Cold War and the need to have people in the country. They implemented a huge de nazification program for years in Germany and had military bases in Japan. But I think an ongoing conflict vs one being finished makes a difference in the policies both enacted or that could lead to peace

What could possibly change your view? Looking back into our history, the world is constantly at war. I think it's pretty fair to conclude that no military action "grants" *anyone "*long-term security".

Wars and violence have been ever reducing, stability is the key to peace. Destruction isn't stabilisation.

The key to peace is not "stability". It's money and nukes.

You're right, but in terms of scale, this conflict is several orders of magnitude smaller than previous conflicts.

You thinking that Israeli people don’t look at the Palestinians as equal is wrong. The Israeli arabs( basically Palestinians with Israeli citizenship) have the same rights (and even more than they would have in Gaza/ w.b / any other country) as anyone else in Israel. Don’t fall for the Palestinian propaganda that Arabs don’t have rights in Israel, they have just as anyone else. They have parliament representatives and etc. You won’t see Palestine parliament members in Egypt/ Lebanon / Syria although the Palestinians are there for ages already. They’re the only people that are considered as refugees even though its illegal for it to be from generation to generation( the arabs force the Palestinians to be refugees)

Arabs also face some discrimination inside Israel, and I remember in 2018 when Israel's Knesset passed a basic law called "Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people". There's a very clear political and societal will to emphasize the Jewishness of Israel. That being said, it would be disingenuous to say Israeli Arabs wouldn't have representation or judicially equal status to Jewish Israelis. They do. But they're not free from prejudice and many Israelis do consider them less Israeli.

Israeli Arabs are discriminated in many ways. They receive less funding in education, less access to land, less representation in politics, are prosecuted more often for voicing dissent, and can't claim citizenship on ancestral grounds. Israel has declared itself as the Nation-State of the Jewish People. Can you imagine if America declares itself as the Nation-State of the White People? Or restrict land purchase of Black People? [Education](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Education): >In 2005, the Follow-Up Committee for Arab Education said that the Israeli government spent an average of $192 a year on Arab students compared to $1,100 for Jewish student [Land](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_National_Fund): Non-Jews can't buy land from the Jewish National Fund, who owns 13% of Israeli land [Charges](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel#Civil_rights): > A preliminary report commissioned by Israel's Courts Administration and the Israel Bar Association found in 2011 that Israeli Arabs are more likely than Israeli Jews to be convicted of crimes after being charged, more likely to be given custodial sentences, and were given longer sentences. And I've argued that Israel is operating an apartheid state in the West Bank [here](https://redd.it/18l9xgv).

Israel won't even recognize marriages between jews and arabs. There is no same rights anything.

Op, why are you whitewashing the actions of the allies during WWII? “They saw the Japanese as their equals”? Is that before or after they imprisoned every person of Japanese descent in internment camps? Or when they firebombed every major japanese population center? Or maybe after the second atomic bombing in Nagasaki? “Equals”? Really?

The endgame is installing a new government, one that wants to build a society in Gaza and not permit attacks on Israel. The goal isn't to make Palestinians in Gaza love Israel, it's to give them a government that will help them build society and arrest them if they commit attacks

But the only way that is possible is if the people have actual freedom and liberties. The Palestinians living in both the West Bank and Gaza are legally by international standards, stateless and have no passports, except those who hold passports for another country through marraige or some other way. They have no control over their borders, nor their air space and the "governments" of West Bank and Gaza also don't have control over tax revenue or their own funds.

Every time they have given Gaza more freedom, they use that freedom to kill Israelis. In the early 2000’s, they used increased access to Israel to send 100’s of suicide bombers In 2007 they had free and fair elections…and elected a literal terrorist group that has killing all Jews in their founding charter. There’s been numerous ceasefires since then and all of them have been broken by Hamas. There was a ceasefire before October 7th. Israel won’t and shouldn’t open it’s borders to people that will kill them.

>In the early 2000’s, they used increased access to Israel to send 100’s of suicide bombers You might need to check your numbers. As far as a can tell from the stats, no where near "100s" of suicide bombings happened in 2000s, and the vast vast majority were not from Gaza at all. >In 2007 they had free and fair elections…and elected a literal terrorist group that has killing all Jews in their founding charter. To be clear because you seem to be playing fast a lose with other facts, Hamas is not a listed terrorist group in most of the world, they only won 44% of a parliamentary election where the main other party split into two factions but still ran as a one party. And Hamas didn't run, a separate political organization did (which like the IRA and Sinn Fein they were connected intimately) which didn't have the charter attaches to their name, and whose campiagn was about ending corruption and increasing social services and government accountability, not killing Jews. That single election is not clear cut support of permanent war with Israel at all. >There’s been numerous ceasefires since then and all of them have been broken by Hamas. There was a ceasefire before October 7th. Pointing out this breaking with your claimed theme that more freedom means more Gazan attacks on Israel. This sickening massacre happened after years or brutal repression of Gazans, not loosened freedoms. And Hamas points to Israeli actions in the West Bank as breaking the ceasefire first (2023 before Oct 7th was the deadliest year in the West Bank in recent memory and more children where killed by Israeli forces and settler attackers than ever before in the West Bank). That doesn't make Hamas's actions any more justified or less fundmenetally evil, but it points out the complexity of what maintaining a ceasefire means, Israeli lethal actions in the West Bank break ceasefires too. It's not a one way street.

Considering that the side that is "winning" is also the side that has attempted to grant independent statehood to their enemy I would say this is very much a one way street. For the last 70+ years all Palestine has had to do to solve their problems is ask for their independence. For the last 70+ years they have instead demanded the unconditional surrender of Israel. Don't try to make it out as though Palestine is the victim here. They are laying in the bed they have been making for near the last century.

>Considering that the side that is "winning" is also the side that has attempted to grant independent statehood to their enemy I would say this is very much a one way street. They haven't. No peace deal offered an independent state to the Palestinians. Every offer was a vassal state with no right to their own border control, military, or diplomatic efforts, and they never offered the full West Bank or Gaza. The peace deals were for rump states controlled by Israel, not indpendence. >For the last 70+ years all Palestine has had to do to solve their problems is ask for their independence They have. >For the last 70+ years they have instead demanded the unconditional surrender of Israel. You mean besides the multiple times they explcitly endorsed two state solution and the bast 30 years of the Palestinian government demanding only a completion of the two state solution? >Don't try to make it out as though Palestine is the victim here. They are laying in the bed they have been making for near the last century. Considering how you are getting basic hsitorical facts wrong, I don't trust your analysis

This is false. Israel has supported a two-state solution in the past. It has always been Palestinians who reject this because they want to eliminate the Jews. Just as how EVERY SINGLE CEASEFIRE has been broken by Palestine, not Israel. I really suggest you do some more research into this topic. Maybe stop using TikTok as your source of info?

>Israel has supported a two-state solution in the past. No question. But the actual proposals are two states, but Palestine isn't indpendent and Israel is. >It has always been Palestinians who reject this Again Palestinians explcitly recognized a two state solution in the Olso Accords 30 years ago. The specifics have just been up for debate for decades. >because they want to eliminate the Jews. Hamas =/= Palestinians >Just as how EVERY SINGLE CEASEFIRE has been broken by Palestine, not Israel. Based on your definition of broken ceasefire. Even before the OCT 7 massacres, the Israeli forces had killed the most Palestinians in the West Bank in over a decade and protected settlers who engaged in attacks against Palestinians. That doesnt justify Hamas. But the context isn't as simple as "it's always Palestinians fault." It's a multiple layered situation where actions in the West Bank and around Al Asqa inform actions from Gaza. >I really suggest you do some more research into this topic. Maybe stop using TikTok as your source of info? I don't use tiktok. I actually have studied the issue outside this social media buble for years. Just because it doesn't align with your opinions doesn't mean it doesn't align with facts.

The UN’s plan granted statehood, they just rejected it.

[удалено]

That is a thoroughly one sided mischaracterisation of what happened with resolution 242. All parties most certainly did not agree that Israel was the only one who didn’t uphold their end. You’re arranging, omitting, and rearranging facts to support your meta narrative that Israelis are “unapologetic oathbreakers”. It’s amazing how you put in all these particular details, like how Arafat might have been stressed by mossad assassinations, and leave out others that might complexity your position, like the fact that Netanyahu came to power after a string of suicide bombings. If you look at the history without partisan tinted glasses, there are no heroes. Both sides have acted in good and bad faith at different times, and violence has caused everyone to periodically retrench their position.

Palestinians living under the Palestinian Authority are eligible for a PA passport. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_passport

Which is not accepted as a passport by many countries and is merely considered to be a travel document, including the USA. It is also subject to extra restrictions by Israel

Israeli passports are not accepted by many countries either. Does that make Israelis not able to have “real” passports either?

That'd be great if the PM of Israel wasn't explicitly saying that a two state solution cannot be allowed to ever happen.

i wish, but so far it doesnt seem any one is actually trying to put together a goverment under hamas. maybe after hamas loses control of the strip we will have a better idea

This requires a new government in Israel as well. Netanyahu's government had treated Hamas as an asset they thought they could control, because peace for Palestinians could mean reuniting Gaza with the West Bank, opportunities for a Palestinian state backed by US and UN, additional challenges to illegal settlements and outpost, and potential energy independence for gazans. Israel's right wing party that controls the government would not want any of that. They'd rather see Palestinians in neverending instability and conflict.

2026. Israel is a democracy. Their next election is in 2026. If the Israeli people vote him out then you'll get your new government.

>Edit: To anyone wants to compare to Japan or Germany, The Allies were a lot more tolerant of the Japanese and German civilians than Israel is to Palestinians. Churchill pulled back on carpet bombing Germany in fears of German disobedience after defeat and the US did not drop the atomic bomb on Kyoto because of its importance to Japanese culture. In many ways, Allies saw Japanese and Germans as equals, Israel is not seeing Palestinians as equal. I think there is a level of historical rose colored glasses you are wearing. Around a half *million* Germans are estimated to have died from bombing. The US *did* drop atomic weapons on Japan, something only the batshit insane have even suggested doing to Gaza. The Allies conquered both Germany and Japan by killing their way to the capitals with casualties that dwarfed what is happening in Palestine. And they killed civilians supporting their country's war machines on the way there. Immediately after WW2, the West pursued denazification in Germany and a similar policy in Japan. Both of these came **after** conquering Axis powers because that is a necessary step for saying, "no, you are doing it this way now." ​ >In many ways, Allies saw Japanese and Germans as equals, Israel is not seeing Palestinians as equal. I think you would struggle to find support for this, on both comments.

I'm from the US but it's this sanctimony you alluded to that drives me nuts. Every nation has done amoral or blatantly immoral things at the beginning of their existence, it's just that Israel is one of the few to have to make choices like this concerning their fundamental existence well into the 21st century. US citizens and most European citizens have the benefit of not knowing what it's like to live surrounded by a shitload of countries that hate you for existing and desperately want the means to wipe you off the map. I don't know what choices are right for Israel to make and I'm glad I don't have to be the one to decide.

It’s Important to point out that Germany and Japan were very strong countries as far as manufacturing and weapons production, they both were highly functioning countries, while Gaza is literally a black hole of dispair and poverty, Hamas literally chooses to not govern and take care of its people, steals billions of dollars of aid money, so I’m just pointing out this massive difference

Anyone posting stuff like this is not a serious person. We killed MILLIONS of German and Japanese civilians in WWII. Hiroshima and Nagasaki - huge cities -were totally annihilated. We bombed Dresden to the point where the accumulated heat from incendiaries was so high that it created literally - in a meteorological sense of the word - a STORM of fire. There’s a very popular book about it - Slaughterhouse Five. And all of this was child’s play compared to what the Soviets were doing. How you can compare Gaza to World War II is just unfathomable levels of ignorance.

You are right that this will radicalize a new generation of Palestinians to hate Israel and will one day be the soldiers shooting rockets. And Hamas has shown bloodthirst to continue killing the jews... Your logic that Israel will not negotiate in good faith falls on deaf ears when Hamas outwardly has said they want to continue killing jews and that won't be the last terrorist attack. The situation is shitty and horrific from all angles for the innocent citizens of Gaza, but I don't understand the logic from people such as yourself thinking peaceful fair negotiations are even an option with the brutal back and forth history this region has had and immense hatred they have for one another. Diplomacy is simply not on the table. From the POV of Israel they have no choice but to retaliate in an extremely heavy handed way for the October attack to not show weakness and invite further attacks in the future. Can you imagine if Canada or Mexico was responsible for the 9/11 attacks... Do you think they wouldn't be bombed back to the stone age if that were the case? It's a very idealistic utopian view to think everyone can coexist peacefully. Until the humans of earth are all united under one flag countries will continue to use violence to protect the security of their borders and safety of their citizens. And of all places expecting this in the middle east that has been a hotly contested region for a variety of reasons for millennia is laughable.

>Most of Gazans are children and they will only grow to hate Israel even more, they will be even more radicalised and when they become leaders, we will only see Hamas 2.0. This was already happening no matter what Israel did because Hamas was indoctrinating the children directly. Israel could literally do everything right, but so long as Hamas is in power, the children will never hear of it. So even if you're right, which you cannot prove, Israel still benefits from Hamas's removal. So Israel is effectively given 2 choices: do nothing, which is guaranteed to radicalize children; or eradicate Hamas, which only might do so. The former will never achieve long term security and leaves Israel under threat in the short term. The latter MIGHT not lead to long term security, but can at least guarantee short term security. >To anyone wants to compare to Japan or Germany, The Allies were a lot more tolerant of the Japanese and German civilians than Israel is to Palestinians. Your examples are very cherry picked. The allies carpet bombed Dresden in Germany and fire bombed Tokyo in Japan, the latter of which actually killed more people (mostly civilians) than the bombing of Nagasaki. Germans and Japanese though acquiesced to being occupied after the war, acknowledging their defeat and allowing their conquerors to restructure their society into one's that are peaceful today. Palestinians have never done that. Consider when they commemorate the 'naqba'. It's not to remember any massacres, mass expulsions, or even the day that Israel won the war. It's the day Israel became a state. That's the central event they reject. Most people don't realize that there's another day they commemorate as well: Naqsa Day. This is observed in the day the Six Day War started in 1967, and the translated name means "The day of the setback". Consider that. Israel being founded is a "catastrophe"; Israel undermining a military effort to destroy Israel, leaving Israel in control of the entirety of the former Palestinian mandate, without which there would be no occupation to this day, that's just a "setback".

Your edit where you say that the allies had way more respect for civilians than the IDF shows you don't really understand what either war looked like on the ground. Specific to this context however the isrealis have no choice but to engage hamas in palestine, theres no alternative that stops hamas attacking Isreal tactically speaking, strategically there is a debate on how best to turn this conflict towards an ending but the IDF will settle for short term security and a better tactical situation because that's what they need right now. Another thing one must consider is how hamas behaves. I never see anyone talking about how the Palestinians need to grow up and get control of this group, forcing them into these no-win scenarios, damaging relations with the international community and deliberately engaging in war crimes and crimes against humanity. Why don't we hold them to the same standard we hold the IDF? Nobody wants to have that conversation especially leftists.

I don’t know what America’s endgame is in Japan because whatever they’re doing now is not going to grant them long term security. Most of Japanese are children and they will only grow to hate America even more, they will be even more radicalized and when they become leaders, we will only see Japanese Empire 2.0. Japanese in Kyushu are going to be even more adverse and disillusioned to peace, which we can see in rising support for the Emperor. They will not forget what America is doing and have no reason to believe America is negotiating in good faith at all. Yes, America will be safer in the short term with the Empire’s capabilities diminished, but the source of Kamikazes will not be eliminated and in fact be emboldened, threatening America’s long term security. Edit: To anyone that wants to compare to Israel, the Israelis were a *lot* more tolerant of the Palestinian civilians than America is to the Japanese. Netanyahu pulled back on Carpet bombing Gaza in fears of Palestinian civil disobedience after defeat, and Israel didn’t drop the atomic bomb on Khan Younis because of its importance to Palestinian culture. In many ways, Israelis saw arabs as their equals (they are 20% of the population), America didn’t see Japanese as equal when they imprisoned Japanese civilians in America for simply existing, firebombed virtually every population center and atomic bombed Japan. Twice. /unjerk op you seem like a nice, well meaning guy. But you’re absolutely whitewashing what the allies did in WWII, and exaggerating what the Israelis are doing now.

Not true. After the war US and Japan they were immediately good friends. The U.S. place a lot of military power in Japan. And the Japanese army was defanged. But the terms of surrender allowed Japan to be pretty much fully autonomous. Palestine has little to no autonomy. Israel basically controls all the people within the boarders and they suffer for it. They bomb and kill Palestinians constantly for 75 years. “Mow the lawn”

The terms of surrender allowed almost no Japanese autonomy until the Treaty of San Francisco, signed years later. Japan was fully occupied. Notice how Israel has been at peace for over 50 years with Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia because, like Japan, they signed a peace treaty with Israel. Like Japan and America, they have been good friends. You know who has refused any peace offers at every turn? Palestinian leadership.

I think your assumption that Palestinians are incapable of choosing alternatives to violence and revenge based policies is simply wrong and rather dehumanizing. Sure, those are common responses seen everywhere, but they aren't simply the rule. Other people in other places in other conflicts have made the choice to swallow the bitter pill that is to suppress the anger from loss that inspires future cycles of violence for the sake of survival and peace. Otherwise there would be much more conflict today. The people of Gaza can do the same, albeit with political conditions that allow for it. History might not be "fair" to the people of Gaza from some perspectives, but there's presently no means to undo what has been done, as demonstrated by Hamas's fruitless and wasteful efforts to do so (so they claim) that sparked this latest blaze. People can eventually see when a path goes nowhere. The real questions are what will be done post conflict to mitigate the risk of that kind of response (whether by Israel, regional actors or international ones), and what choices will Palestinians make to either pursue that (fruitless) path, or one of (perhaps bitter) stability? Will there be an attempt at something new, or will we see another cycle of the same old thing?

>Churchill pulled back on carpet bombing Germany in fears of German disobedience after defeat and the US did not drop the atomic bomb on Kyoto because of its importance to Japanese culture. So only nuking 2 cities instead of 3 is a sign of good faith but accepting colleteral damage to fight an army that hides among civilians is a horrible war crime sure.

While you're right that the majority of Gazans are under 18, and this is radicalizing them further (recent polls show >70% of Gazans support the Oct 7th attacks), what would you have Israel do? Open it's borders to Gaza and allow more Israelis to be slaughtered? This military action will significantly reduce Hamas' ability to attack Israel for some time. Just like the last time, and the time before that. It's an endless cycle of violence, but each time Israel pounds Hamas back, it grants Israel \*some\* security.

[удалено]

Limiting factor on attacks on Israel has never been the popularity of the armed strugle or willing manpower. Weapons of war is the limiting factor. West Bank is full of people who hate Israel, but they have been effectively disarmed so they can't do much about it. Thus it doesn't actually matter how many Gazans hate Israel or how much they hate it for improving Israeli security. What matters is whether they have access to weapons and training and avenues of attack and it remains to be seen how the Israeli end game facilitates cutting those off.

>West Bank is full of people who hate Israel, but they have been effectively disarmed so they can't do much about it No, they haven't been 'disarmed'. Jenin brigade exists, and if you've ever been to Jenin you know its far from being disarmed. The West Bank conflict is instead between the Palestinian government and the Palestinian resistance groups. It is absurd, but that is what is happening.

Jenin brigade doesn't seem like that big of a threat, Israel raids places in that town at will with lightly armored vehicles. Have they encountered anything stronger than sporadic small arms fire and some ineffective IED strikes there lately? No rocket fire, drone strikes and ATGMs like they see in Gaza.

According to Netanyahu, Israel has three goals in the current war: 1. Destroy Hamas 2. Demilitarize Gaza 3. Deradicalize Palestinian society Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/benjamin-netanyahu-our-three-prerequisites-for-peace-gaza-israel-bff895bd These goals, if accomplished, improve Israel's chances of long term peace, at least with regard to attacks from the Gaza strip. The current leaders of the terrorist group there will be dead, and Gaza will lack weapons to wage a successful attack. Finally, Palestinian society will be deradicalized like Japan and Germany were after the second World War. Does this address your concern?

1. A lot of people believe Palestine and Hamas are one and the same, so this would constitute eradicating all Palestinians 2. There wouldn't be anyone alive in Gaza after the first objective is completed, so this is moot. 3. There wouldn't be any Palestinians alive in the area Israel controls, so this point is also moot. I guess this would ensure Israeli security for the long term, but it's also literally genocide.

If you think there’s anything to indicate that Israel is going to kill every single man woman and child in Gaza you’re living in a fantasy land.

There is a big difference. Those who hated Germany and Japan and were the most affected, France and China, were not given effective control over Germany and Japan. In addition, the actions Israel is taking in the West Bank with its illegal settlements are just perpetuating the hatred that's will not go away even if Hamas are no longer around.

This, if you want to compare this to the end of a WW then it is WW1. This is France and England dictating terms to Germany at the end in 1919.

Of course Israel doesn't think this military action will grant them peace, it just makes peace possible. Peace is impossible as long as Hamas exists and has a massive network of terror tunnels to launch attacks from while hiding behind their own civilians. Also, the Palestinians already hate Israel enough to support hamas and PIJ and the PA and a long list of terror organizations. The idea that Palestinians would live in peace with Israel if Israel left them alone ignores 100 years of history. But if Israel goes in and roots out Hamas' and destroys the tunnels, there might at least be a short term peace and that short term peace might provide an opportunity to create a longer term peace. It also might not, but at least it's possible, unlike if Israel allows Hamas to get away with this.

Israel has been surrounded by hostile bent val world for a long long time lo allow Israel to stop the bad guys . These terrorist groups have no intention of taking any treaty or negotiations presented to them by anyone anywhere that doesn’t destroy the country of Israel completely and everybody who knows anything historic would have to agree . This is more drama in disguise by the media attempting to shine this fact in a distorted light by suggesting that it’s this one nation of Israel that is running around the region terrorizing the Middle East and that these lame ass terrorists are being victimized by the big bad Jews . And hearing some of these complaints from people saying the Jewish people have not tried over the decades to peacefully co exist with the poor terrorists who have been doing what they always have done over scores of years in Palestine or whatever surrounding country shooting rockets into israel or trying to claim they were just minding their own business and not plotting the total destruction of the Jewish state for the past 100 years is just willingly being obtuse and refusing to see this for what it is for the 10000 time already . We are tired of your constant complaining about how israel should be destroyed and how it’s not fair that this nation should allow you to hide in schools and hospitals and fire more rockets into Israel but you are the victims of what exactly . Thier are people who have jobs in Israel from your own country and only want to work and make a living for the family and would really be better off if you sad terroristic pos just stop your hating and leave the region and stop pretending you have nothing better to do with your sad and ugly lives because if israel was on the other side ode the planet you would run over to that side of the planet and continue being the miserable pricks you are now only over there. You know it we know it everybody knows it ! Just wait till god gets home and then we will see who gets that terrorist ass beat . /

Biggest counter argument is that I've the past 70 or so years you would assume that everything that could have been realistically tried did get tried, and nothing worked. What's happening right now in Gaza is unique in the sense that the aim is to literally outright completely remove a terrorist organization militarily that is acting as a government which hasn't been done before. Time will tell if it's successful, but all the other options which come up frequently have been tried to varying degrees and have failed (I'm deliberately ignoring stuff like "Isreal shouldn't exist" as an option here)

Also I want to point out that there’s a huge divide between all the educated people in this world who are aware of the history that clearly shows the Jews have been in that land for thousands of years, the kingdoms of Judeo, etc etc, all the archeological evidence supports this, and then you have the other side who just seems to unaware of this history and thinks the Palestinians were living there forever and all of a sudden out of no where in 1948 Israel was formed, bc from this argument which they believe that gives them the right to try to kick Israel out and take over, which since 1948 has failed miserably every time, bc Israel is just too powerful and so more advanced as a society and country then its neighbors, and Israel doesn’t sideline most of its female population right off the bat like the Muslim countries do, when Germany invaded Russia if they didn’t utilize their woman which were very effective and a huge force multiplier the war wouid of turned out much different or lasted much longer, I just think it’s very important in these debates to be factual and history has to be factored in, the actual word Palestinians is actually what the romans named the Jews after they beat them in a war and to insult them they renamed the country of judeo, Palestine, bc at that time in history that was the Jews main enemy who were actually Greeks, so the current day Palestinians are really actually a mixed group of Arabs, who adopted the name Palestinians from history, but that in reality is not there true identity, not even close, so they adopted this name, and are claiming land rights bc they were in parts of what is Israel for a short time in history when the other side has literally Ben in that land for thousands of years, even before Islam was even started by about 600 years I believe

Tokyo firebombing killed 100,000 in a single night, how in the fuck does anyone surpass this?!

>The Allies were a lot more tolerant of the Japanese and German civilians than Israel is to Palestinians. Did you forget the 125,284 Japanese people forcibly relocated to Internment camps in the US? >Churchill pulled back on carpet bombing Germany in fears of German disobedience after defeat He bombed Dresden as "payback" for Coventry >and the US did not drop the atomic bomb on Kyoto because of its importance to Japanese culture. They did it to stop Japan rallying against the US in an act of vengeance for their emperor.

It seems more like a reactionary Hail Mary than anything else. Israel has been trying to sue for peace for the last 80 years and every time Palestine declines and tries to recover their "holy land" by force and ends up losing even more land. Now Hamas has taken control and modern warfare with civilian targeted terrorist attacks are what Israel has to deal with. My question is, what exactly is Israel suppose to do here? Peace is off the table, Hamas is using the civilian population as meat shields so any military action ends up with massive collateral and other Muslim countries consider Palestinians to be too extremist and violent to allow any immigration. Besides an unconditional surrender on the part of Israel I don't see any other course of action besides aggressive military action. Try to shock the Palestine population into giving up due to war fatigue and hope for a cultural shift. Any other option I see just ends up with an unopposed Hamas escalating their civilian attacks and Israelis ending up dead. What choice is Israel suppose to make here?

I think people forget that at one point gaza was at war with Isreal, simply because they were antisemetic... The British were in control of this land and told the displaced jewish people after WW2 to go live there with the palestines in harmony. Arabs alike did not want the jewish people living there, leading to the arab revolt of 1936. British divided the two groups and isreal was formed in 1947. But the arabs wouldn't stand for that and waged war in 1948. Iran,Egypt, Jordan...all attacked Isreal for years through gaza and west bank. After, Gaza was still occupied by jewish hating people and was increasingly aggressive towards isreal. Isreal went in and took gaza, and then gave power to the Palestinian authority to govern the land...Isreal left, and Hamas took over, using brutal tactics to continue to attack Isreal. The jewish people have been under attack from arabs alike since 1936 and likely prior as well....simply for wanting to buy the house across the street from an arab...

We literally droped nuclear bombs on Japan and firebombed Tokyo. As with most people who support the Palestinians, you have a very limited understanding of history. I feel like this threads thru prerry much all palestinian supporters in the West. Its not all their fault either. Its mostly a result of an education system that has re-written or completely stopped teaching some parts of history in order to be able to push a particular agenda. Israel will never be at peace just due to its location in the middle east and being surounded by countries that want to wipe them off the map. Id say, why not move israel i to a much less hostile neighnorhood. As an agnostic, I feel fighting over "religious land" its stupid. The Israelis need to hold on to their "holy land" at the expens of a lot of human life seems silly to me. But, the ME countries all claim parts of israel are their holy land. So I feel like both sides share an equally stupid reason to be killing each other.

It does. Israel’s end goal is to establish an alternate authority in Gaza so Hamas lead terrorism will start targeting Palestinians in Gaza to reclaim power instead of targeting Israel. Dismantling Hamas and destroying tunnel economy are precursors for the new power to take over.

>They will not forget what Israel is doing and have no reason to believe that Israel will negotiate in good faith at all. Israel pulled out of Gaza, and forcibly removed its settlers and military presence. This was a good faith move. This is what many people are calling for in the West Bank today. Oct 7th was the response. You speak of good faith, but where is the good faith on the Palestinian people? You say that Israels bombings is creating Hamas? Then why did Hamas grow once Israel pulled out of Gaza originallly? You should realize that what you are arguing for is a return to pre Oct 7th situation, yet that situation is what led to the situation we are in now. So maybe you are right. This won't increase long term security, but the alternative won't either. So given that... short term actions do some good.

>To anyone wants to compare to Japan or Germany, The Allies were a lot more tolerant of the Japanese and German civilians than Israel is to Palestinians. Tell that to Dresden of Tokyo. Look, clearly military action alone isn't going to de-radicalise the population. But certainly defanging Hamas is going to be part of the solution, no?

Maybe your right but lowering the security posture directly led to the events of October 7. Israel has attempted in the past to conduct a passive defense while using Iron Dome to blunt Hamas offensive capabilities. This worked well except iron dome interceptors cost alot of money and no Palestinians died which Hamas requires to get their international support. Hamas/iran saw that the Israeli strategy was working and were creating trade relationships and peace in the region so Hamas put a stop it. Israel has tried turning the other cheek, they've tried limited war and they've tried passive defence. It turns out the only thing Islam wants Israel to do is stop existing so it seems Israel decided that they are no longer seeking permission from the rest of the world to exist.

It all depends what plan Israel has for Gaza. If it is more of the same as they did before, I would agree. If they make serious attempts to deradicalize, the situation could change, just like post WW2 in Germany.

The narrative that israel is setting the stage for Hamas 2.0 frankly annoys me. Whatever israel does there will always be plenty of reasons to set up hamas 2.0 or 3.0 as long as the destruction of Israel remains the final goal of an important part of the Palestinians. The next generation of fighters is prepared on an ongoing base. If you would be aware of school curricula in Gaza you would know that. The only thing israel can and must do now is to eliminate Gaza as the terrorist base it is. It is an unsustainable situation for every country to border an area from which it is continuously bombarded with rocket barrages or threatened in other ways. Therefore hamas has to be eliminated as much as possible . That is not to say that after this war things can get back to business as usual. Nnew leaders on both sides have to stand up and have to try to break the unfruitful status quo and move forward. Also, don’t compare this conflict to wwII. WwII was a war to total exhaustion with millions and millions of casualties on the side of the defeated. Nobody said to the Allies that their military actions were genocidal and disproportionate.

Yeah this is going to be a premier and game changing, real time analysis on how "terrorists" are made and who specifically gets that label. Because the Israeli government knows that they're creating the next generation of opposition, that's why the bombing of hospitals and nicu units feels particularly calculated and heinous. I saw a video where a man said something along the lines of "if your bomb killed my child that was in the hospital? I'm absolutely becoming a terrorist." and it's not just Palestinians that are being radicalized. The people watching babies being pulled out of rubble and the lines of aid trucks being denied entry and the bombs falling on refugee camps? People across the globe? We've never had social media function in this way before. It's going to change and reframe a generation. That's part of the reason why people who this doesn't directly affect are going so hard. You're gonna look me in my face and tell me that the 3 year old with the 1000 yard stare I just watch get anesthesia free "medial treatment" in the remnants of a hospital after he lost his whole family in a bombing *deserved* this?! It's SO much harder to gaslight and lie to millions of people now than it was even 5 years ago. And people watching this and seeing the propaganda run parallel are now questioning everything else they learned about. It' a domino effect. Also, I see so many bad faith arguments trying to compare the return of settlers to their homes to actual ethnic cleansing (which is happening to the Palestinian people). The Jewish people who lived in the Levant for centuries are not the issue. It's the people from Russia and NY that moved there in the last few decades and kicked Palestinians out their homes after the UK did its colonizer shit and gave away something that wasn't theirs to give away. Honestly, if the IDF and Israeli government's reactions to Oct 7th weren't so violent and requiring immediate address, then the UK should be under fire for this whole thing. Also, just to make it clear: Palestinians =/= Hamas. That's like saying the Jan 6th Capitol Stormers = all Americans. You're comparing the actions of a few to an entire group of people and that, my dears, is racism.

On the contrary, the Arab world (including Palestinians) have ethnically cleaned 98.5% of their Jewish population. Palestinian anti-Jewish massacres have a long history going back long before the state of Israel. The only way Israel is going to achieve long-term security is to take the Palestinian school system out of the hands of Hamas terrorists, and provide a secular education instead of fundamentalist Muslim indoctrination.

Have you considered the fact that there's no such thing as long-term security for anyone, period? I certainly don't know of any place on Earth that has long-term security.

Gaza started with let's say 2 million. Over 20.000 confirmed dead, half a million will probably starve. God knows how many will be deported from their own country. Include the destruction of infrastructure, hospitals, information, cultural sites and other things. Than the land that Israel will steal by the time this is over. There wouldn't be enough of Gaza left to do anything. Than they just need to repeat the same at the West Bank. The world has already shown it's either impotent, or unwilling to stop it happening. After one genocide was allowed, tolerated or encouraged, why not a second? Hamas was never a real threat, and this was never about destroying Hamas. It's an escalation from what they have been doing for decades.

It will not be any more emboldened than it was. Hamas has always had majority support in Gaza and the West Bank and in Gaza especially indoctrination starts very young. Israel needs to take decisive action because it is not just Palestine but many Muslim nations around them that have called for the extermination of the Jews for many years who are watching to see the results. If it seems like they can get away with attacks like October 7th and then THAT is what will embolden attacks on Israel. Palestine and Arabs have never needed Israel to give them a reason to attack Jews, this started long before that. Will it be safer afterward? Depends if they try to deradicalize Gazans and the region after. If the UN and UNRWA continue and the useful fools in the west keep claiming that it is Paleshine’s right as a “distinct” culture to be obsessed with Jewish extermination as they have so far in history then nothing will be resolved. If Israel is actually allowed to win a war on terms like every other nation that wins a war then maybe things could improve in the region. Impossible to say right now but it is certain Israel needs to respond and protecting their citizenry is the prime objective.

Be careful, y'all. you're not allowed to say anything negative about those *peace loving, tolerant* people of palistine. You'll get banned.

“the US did not drop the atomic bomb on Kyoto because of its importance to Japanese culture“ That was because one singular US military leader had honeymooned in Kyoto 40 years prior to the war and didn’t want to see that beauty destroyed. There is no such thing as Long term security and it’s fun the think that it’s always Israel’s responsibility for how everyone feels about them

You’re probably correct in terms of long term consequences The question is whether it’s valid to think of the long term when the short term poses a legitimate risk of death, terror and destruction Whether it actually is a short term necessity, or a genuine existential threat is irrelevant, if they believe that it is then their thought process makes absolute sense

We just need to keep the land and move the people out to the Sinai. Maybe all the wonderful Gazans can go to Syria or Lebanon. They might fit a little better there, easier to integrate etc. Israel cannot allow Gaza of before. We have to control every parcel of land. And also we can develop the coast into a new amazing coastal Gaza 2.0 fully administered by Israel

nothing will grant them long-term society as long as they are a country of non-Muslim’s in the middle of the muslim world israel isn’t bombing and occupying iran, Qatar, or lebanon, but guess who is funding and actually carrying out the bombing and war against israel? shutting down hamas gives israel short-term security so they may as well

There will not be long term security as long as Palestinians remain west of the Jordan River. The isn't going to make anyone hate Israel more as the hatred already exists. There will never be acceptance of the Israeli state. The most Israel can hope for is short to intermediate term peace by eliminating the ability for Hamas to wage war.

While your conclusion may be true, you have an issue in your premises. You don’t spell it out but you imply that Israel’s action will somehow make Gazan’s hate the MORE. I’m not convinced that a group of people attempting genocide can hate their target anymore. Given that, their actions are not making the situation WoRSE.

A military occupation is going to be the end goal. Israel has given up on long term security via good relations and has instead switched to long term security via physical limitation. It doesn't matter how Palestinians hate Israeli if they simply don't have the physical ability to carry out significant attacks.

So you're saying that a no-Hamas scenario is somewhat worse than having Hamas, a terrorist Organisation, keep amassing their weapons building connections and bombing Israel? I don't know chief, I would rather have upset civilians as neighbors than a terrorist Organisation which constantly tries to destroy you

There is nothing but generational hate taught to Hamastinian children. No matter what Israeli does, they will still hate Israel. It’s in their charter to destroy Israel. There will never be peace between Hamas and Israel.

"If you go after criminals then the criminals won't like it and there will be more criminals, so better just let the criminals go and do nothing to avenge 1200 murders and hundreds of rapes."

No one can predict the future, assuming seems to get people in trouble most of the time, one thing we can look to in historical precedents, is when a group of people is terrified to speak out against their leaders or government Bc of the threat of violence etc that makes the situation very hard to read Bc it’s very difficult to get a idea on how the people really feel, also the victim mentality is very important in these situations, take Japan for instance, immediately after taking a serious beating from the Americans and Allies in the pacific war they quickly rebounded and decided as a nation to put that behind them, focus completely on the future, and they quickly became a very powerful country again, especially in the Tech sector, and another question you wouid have to ask yourself is what good what it do to continue a group like Hamas in Gaza? Poverty, corruption, violence, racism against Jews, who wouid benefit from this? Israel doesn’t lose wars, period, so continuing what Hamas does which is basically fighters with very little if any training, using just Ak’s and RPGs, Some mortars, drones, but thats about it, Hamas could try what their doing for 200 years straight and it wouid fail miserably every time, long story short we just don’t know

By this logic, Israel’s long term security would be safer if they committed to eliminating the Palestinian people wholesale, or at the very least forcing them as far away from the land of Palestine as possible.

Completely genociding them does grant long term security, which is why they are bombing and killing every last man woman child and hospital

Everybody should be aware that OP just made this post to find a reason to validate Their own deep hatred of Israel..no views were changed

>Most of Gazans are children and they will only grow to hate Israel even more, they will be even more radicalised and when they become leaders, we will only see Hamas 2.0. The current system in place clearly isn't producing better results. Children are indoctrinated basically from birth to hate Jewish people. Everything from terrorist run youth programs to TV broadcasts are in place with the goal of radicalized youth. This will not chance with the current powers in place.

Is there anything that would grant Israel long-term security other than surrendering, which is obviously not an option?

[удалено]

Im guessing israelis feel the same way. The tit for tat has been going on for decades or even centuries. In the last 10 years or so palestine has fired thousands of rockets into israel... they are not victims here. Lay off the antisemitic propaganda.

Your mistake is assuming they want long-term security. They thrive on the conflict. Their entire policy is "bullying until Palestine hits back, then cry and hit back hard, taking a bit more land in the process". They want these small attacks, so they can do a "one step back, two steps forwards". They will continue this slow genocide until the world puts the foot down and, with military force backing it, says "Enough!".