I just wanted to appreciate you for a moment, thank you for being an example of how one can be both critical, reasonable, and nuanced at the same time. The fediverse needs more of this. Glib hot takes miss the point when the conflict is as old and complicated as this one and I can tell you’ve thought about this from multiple perspectives.
The Israeli government could have vowed to end Hamas without a land war in Gaza
I’m not sure how they could have reasonably done that. Political pressures and many versions of incentives, including the blockade, have not historically worked. Hamas is popular, moreso after Oct 7, (74% approval among Palestinians.) Even if Hamas the organization went away, the public’s desire for intifada has not. It rebrands itself as different organizations and its members join those. Another terrorist government like Islamic Jihad with the same people in charge wouldn’t be much different. They needed to respond to violence with violence for their own safety and take out those responsible.
anyone with half a brain should realize would inevitably lead to massive civilian casualties due to the population density of Gaza and how Hamas operate by martyring their own people in the name of Jihad - as it indeed has.
Yes, and what Israel considers acceptable collateral damage seems to have changed, probably because of the consideration their own civilians were shown, and because they didn’t want to make human shield tactics effective. Rockets fired from a hospital are just as deadly as those fired from military bases. Israel built an AI to select targets en masse and it appears they will attack many structures if it has a connection to Hamas and they can legally justify it.
It’s worth noting that conflicts in densely populated areas with explosives typically have a much higher civilian body count (90%) than Israel’s (61%,) so they are still being more selective with targets than the average in this type of war, although I suspect that is of little comfort to Gazans.
Conflict continued to cause widespread civilian death last year, notably in densely populated areas, where civilians accounted for 90 per cent of the casualties when explosive weapons were used
civilians make up 61% of Gaza deaths from airstrikes
Properly evacuate everyone who wishes to leave and encourage Egypt to do their part to take in refugees, and any other Arab states. Create a safe, well defended evacuation route for refugees to flee, and keep it open, while you tightly secure the blockade around Gaza, and block/flood/raid the tunnels.
These are all good ideas, unfortunately while they are happy to complain about Palestine being an, “open air prison,” and condemn Israel at the UN, none of their neighbors are willing to take them in. Probably in part because Palestinian refugees destabilized many of the countries they historically have a presence in, and in part because it makes Israel look bad and keeps international pressure on them.
most importantly, for all Palestinian refugees, promise a “right of return” back to Gaza/West-Bank, or Israel proper to be a citizen of “Israeli-Palestine” which covers the whole area, after the war.
I suspect the former is totally viable with a meaningful peace, the latter probably not, as it would mean Israeli leaders would be elected by their historical enemy whose majority wants a one state solution where Jews are denied equal rights, according to polling. There are many Arabic/Muslim majority countries in the region but only one Jewish one in the world.
Two states working together to help each other. Over time, work hard to find or build homes for refugees and all displaced Palestinian diaspora as close to where they came from as possible.
This might be possible when the generational hatred and willingness for violence subsides. I like the idea, anyway.
there are plenty of good reasons to despise Netanyahu and his government.
Yes, indeed! In fact he propped up Hamas in a bid to weaken the PA.
Awesome push back, many thanks. The pragmatic side of things is almost always more complicated than the theory. Happy some of my ideas were week received. That tells me I’ll not be the only one thinking of them!
Edit: My post was removed by automod. Rule 1. No idea why. Silly algorithm.
Removed by mod
I just wanted to appreciate you for a moment, thank you for being an example of how one can be both critical, reasonable, and nuanced at the same time. The fediverse needs more of this. Glib hot takes miss the point when the conflict is as old and complicated as this one and I can tell you’ve thought about this from multiple perspectives.
I’m not sure how they could have reasonably done that. Political pressures and many versions of incentives, including the blockade, have not historically worked. Hamas is popular, moreso after Oct 7, (74% approval among Palestinians.) Even if Hamas the organization went away, the public’s desire for intifada has not. It rebrands itself as different organizations and its members join those. Another terrorist government like Islamic Jihad with the same people in charge wouldn’t be much different. They needed to respond to violence with violence for their own safety and take out those responsible.
Yes, and what Israel considers acceptable collateral damage seems to have changed, probably because of the consideration their own civilians were shown, and because they didn’t want to make human shield tactics effective. Rockets fired from a hospital are just as deadly as those fired from military bases. Israel built an AI to select targets en masse and it appears they will attack many structures if it has a connection to Hamas and they can legally justify it.
It’s worth noting that conflicts in densely populated areas with explosives typically have a much higher civilian body count (90%) than Israel’s (61%,) so they are still being more selective with targets than the average in this type of war, although I suspect that is of little comfort to Gazans.
These are all good ideas, unfortunately while they are happy to complain about Palestine being an, “open air prison,” and condemn Israel at the UN, none of their neighbors are willing to take them in. Probably in part because Palestinian refugees destabilized many of the countries they historically have a presence in, and in part because it makes Israel look bad and keeps international pressure on them.
I suspect the former is totally viable with a meaningful peace, the latter probably not, as it would mean Israeli leaders would be elected by their historical enemy whose majority wants a one state solution where Jews are denied equal rights, according to polling. There are many Arabic/Muslim majority countries in the region but only one Jewish one in the world.
This might be possible when the generational hatred and willingness for violence subsides. I like the idea, anyway.
Yes, indeed! In fact he propped up Hamas in a bid to weaken the PA.
Awesome push back, many thanks. The pragmatic side of things is almost always more complicated than the theory. Happy some of my ideas were week received. That tells me I’ll not be the only one thinking of them!
Edit: My post was removed by automod. Rule 1. No idea why. Silly algorithm.