Obviously there are significant differences between the circumstances; whether there are leaders and partners on the ground we can work with, whether there is a nuclear power involved, being the significant differences that stand out to me.
I think the transfer of power looks like this: members and accomplices of Hamas are killed as enemy combatants and terrorists, infrastructure is repaired, goods and supplies flow, and and everyone is pretty glad to be rid of them and people who just want to live their lives go and do so, I hope as or at least with a path to full Israeli citizenship and democratic representation. Bibi and his loyalists are also going to need to be voted out by the Israeli people, part of that existential prerogative. Maybe pockets of residence will persist underground. They will be got though.
I think the transfer of power looks like this: members and accomplices of Hamas are killed as enemy combatants and terrorists, infrastructure is repaired, goods and supplies flow, and and everyone is pretty glad to be rid of them and people who just want to live their lives go and do so, I hope as or at least with a path to full Israeli citizenship and democratic representation.
If Israel was willing to do that Hamas wouldn’t exist.
I disagree. The ideological opposition to a Jewish state is as old as Zionism itself and the violent opposition is as old as the state. In fact I think I recall some diplomat or another who was an early advocate for a Jewish state being assassinated for it. There was always a group of extreme, Islamic religious fundamentalists who violently opposed a Jewish state. At any rate, time is linear and we are here now.
And luckily for everyone, Israel is a democracy and therefore represents hope for change and a more just future.
The ideological opposition to a Jewish state is as old as Zionism itself and the violent opposition is as old as the state.
I mean yes. Why wouldn’t they oppose a Jewish state? “Hey we’ll steal your land and build an Apartheid state on it” did you want them to agree to that?
Obviously there are significant differences between the circumstances; whether there are leaders and partners on the ground we can work with, whether there is a nuclear power involved, being the significant differences that stand out to me.
I think the transfer of power looks like this: members and accomplices of Hamas are killed as enemy combatants and terrorists, infrastructure is repaired, goods and supplies flow, and and everyone is pretty glad to be rid of them and people who just want to live their lives go and do so, I hope as or at least with a path to full Israeli citizenship and democratic representation. Bibi and his loyalists are also going to need to be voted out by the Israeli people, part of that existential prerogative. Maybe pockets of residence will persist underground. They will be got though.
If Israel was willing to do that Hamas wouldn’t exist.
I disagree. The ideological opposition to a Jewish state is as old as Zionism itself and the violent opposition is as old as the state. In fact I think I recall some diplomat or another who was an early advocate for a Jewish state being assassinated for it. There was always a group of extreme, Islamic religious fundamentalists who violently opposed a Jewish state. At any rate, time is linear and we are here now.
And luckily for everyone, Israel is a democracy and therefore represents hope for change and a more just future.
I mean yes. Why wouldn’t they oppose a Jewish state? “Hey we’ll steal your land and build an Apartheid state on it” did you want them to agree to that?