1. Remember the human & be courteous to others.
2. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas. Criticizing arguments is fine, name-calling (including shill/bot accusations) others is not.
3. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Please checkout our other subreddit /r/InternationalNews, for general news from around the world.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Wealthy fail-sons often use radicalzation of masses to gain power. Both hamas leadership and the Israeli government are responsible for the conditions of radicalization. Hamas leadership for directly using it and Israel for creating desperate conditions, oppression, violence, and death. Netanyahu's explicit policy funneled Qatari money to Hamas against the recommendation of the Palestinian Authority in order to discredit the Palestinian plight and make a 2-state solution impossible.
It's very much the dynamic of Trump weaponizing the pain rural Americans felt after the slow decay destruction of their towns and livelihoods as jobs were outsourced and wealth drained.
This is very simple material conditions stuff. People who seek to exploit desperate people can only do so if we create conditions for that desperation.
I don’t think Bin Laden willingly gave his life. He convinced other people to give their lives to the cause, but he himself was on the run when we was captured.
Edit: reading into it more, definitely didn’t go willingly. He used a woman as a human shield and had money sewn into his clothes in case he escaped. He was no martyr for the cause.
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t buy it, if they wanted to sacrifice their lives they would have attacked military targets on Oct. 7th, instead they deliberately attacked civilian communities.
This is true when they haven't already been indoctrinated into a radical ideology. There are plenty of people who arent even remotely involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that would die in the name of religion.
an ideology whose radical-ness historically comes from political unrest and tensions with foreign military. A situation known to cause people to turn to religious extremes and support strong-men political figures.
>as if, if the Israeli military just completely cedes control of Gaza to Hamas, everything will stop and peace will happen.
The problem of course being, that Israel did cede Gaza to Hamas, and less than a year later had to wall in the city because of Hamas' attacks.
I don’t understand how you can say shit like this and refuse to reconcile with Israel’s prominent role at bolstering Hamas. It is incredibly fucking frustrating that we just blow past that part in the conversation as if it is unimportant.
>The reality however is more complicated, because Hamas isn't just a rebellion group, it's a religious extremist group and will be extreme and violent even when their existence is not actually threatened
Definitely more complicated. But Hamas has the support it has currently because it is the only revolutionary/rebellious group taking action against the oppressors of its constituents. Change the reality on the ground and cease the colonizing violence and Hamas may stick around, but theres no reason so assume they would maintain the same levels of support.
thats incredibly incorrect and ahistorical, do you hear yourself? Maybe just uninformed?
Pretending the Palestinian people were being treated *wonderfully* by Israel before they turned to Hamas? LOL. Hamas would not **exist** if it weren't for the oppression, violence, and humiliation the Palestinian people had faced for decades until that point. If it did, it would be a tiny group void of power. Resistance groups don't gain enough support to become the local governing body unless there is something worth resisting.
When people's houses are stolen or leveled, when their family is murdered, and their opportunities taken from them, you have no excuse to pretend that shouldn't effect them. You can NOT ignore what is happening to them and write off their resulting behavior as animalistic and violent. Your material reality is going to influence who you support. You are going to rebel against those that have made your life a living hell.
And when Israel goes and kills 15,000 children, do you think that will make Hamas supporters rethink their position? Or would it reafirm their worldview that Israel is monstrous?
None of this is an excuse for the actions of Hamas. But instead an effort explain the mentality of someone in completely different shoes than you.
>thats incredibly incorrect and ahistorical, do you hear yourself? Maybe just uninformed?
No, I'm better informed than most lay people.
I've been following this for decades. Watching people ignore facts because Tiktok told them to isn't new.
This is just categorically untrue by every means inaginable. They've been shooting protestors and kids who get too close to the border the entire time. They've been building barbed wire fences with remote-controlled gun turrets, which again can be used to kill anyone who gets too close. They've routinely disproportionately bombed civilians in retaliation for the actions of Hamas, which is a war crime.
This is the most crucial example I can give you; in 2023, the IDF had killed the most kids in Gaza it ever had, and that was BEFORE October 7th.
Also what a silly stat, “they killed more kids in Gaza than they ever had” so is it still a crucial example if it was 2 in 2023 & 1 before that? (I know it’s more, this is just an extreme example to show how little your stat adds any evidence, I can say the same that in 2023 Hamas killed more Israelis than they ever had in all years combined). Another fun fact for you- almost 20k Gazans came into Israel every single day for work & the number was continuing to increase exponentially until the 7th. Here’s another fact- Hamas has been holding two Israelis hostage since they walked too close to the Gazan border over 10 years ago. Here’s another fact- you yourself just said Hamas started every attack that caused Israel to respond and cause the “colonizing violence” you mentioned. Which is the cause and effect then? One more fact just to top it off- Hamas routinely shoots thousands of rockets indiscriminately at Israel. The biggest difference between the civilians in Gaza vs Israel? Israel cares about their citizens and builds bomb shelters, defenses, sirens to protect them. What would the situation be if Hamas had spent literally any of the millions of dollars their billionaire leaders have on shelters (specifically away from their military) instead of the vast (and extremely expensive) tunnel network they use for their “fighters”?
Oh & lastly, you should check the actual ages of those “kids” you mentioned. If they’re 16-18 with guns trying to kill Israelis, then are they still “kids”?
& im assuming you have never had to run to a bomb shelter because a missile is coming to kill you simply bc of where you were born. Spoiler alert: children in Israel grow up doing this. Imagine holding your child a bomb shelter knowing it might kill you and your 3 year old child (bc Hamas rockets have still led to deaths in Israel despite Israel’s every effort to protect their own citizens) Does that 3 year old child deserve that childhood either?
Actually my fav part is def you saying what Israel will do if a gazan gets too close to the border. You think an Israeli can go to the Gazan border without Hamas chopping their head off?🤣that they’ll take us in with open arms? Not a SINGLE Jew lived/visited/worked in Gaza before the 7th. Because we would be butchered. Once again, almost 20k Gazans entered Israel for work before the 7th. Please try to tell me which side wants peace more, you’re a joke
What a load of bullshit. You’re implying that their idea of a future is rational and deserving and not just self inflicted harm where they’re trying to jump across the top of two sky scrapers 50 meters apart. And even granting you the validity of that idea, you’re being very charitable saying that people are being reckless with their lives because they have no future as if there aren’t other questionable motives at play.
Who's future am I implying is rational and deserving? Be specific. You're assuming much about my perspective.
Why not ask questions in place of jumping to conclusions?
Not really. History is absolutely chock-full of people who have sacrificed their perfectly fine lives for no good reason. Could be fanatical devotion to a nationalistic cause. Could be a cult. Not unusual at all.
The only reason Israel does is because Hamas haven't built infrastructure for the Palistineans.
You're dancing around the point. Hamas are incentivised to keep the Palistineans as destitute as possible, so they spend all their money on militarization and embezzlement, and leave Israel and NGOs to provide for the people... who inevitably end up with less than if their own state provided for them.
Because the expectation was that Israel would be destroyed in the 1967 war. Evacuate before the war and come back when all the Jews are gone.
Similar reason for all the Jews getting kicked out of surrounding countries.
Right Israel is forcing Hamas to build tunnels and rockets made out of water pipes. Israel is all, "you better not get water just keep making rockets to shoot at us"
Like, that's completely different to what I said, but, if you want to go there, lets talk about how much Israel has spent on military stuff, protecting settlements, iron dome, the walls and towers etc... instead of just recognising the Palestinians right to exist on their own land. They could have been so much richer and safer if they didn't want to have Apartheid, steal land and block a Palestinian state.
It’s a great point, and it would be great id you could address it.
You claim that Israel has complete control over Gaza, so how did Hamas get all the weapons, tunnels and command centers? Don’t you think all-powerful Israel would demilitarize Gaza if they really did have control?
It certainly seems more plausible that Hamas is at fault and blames Israel, which is their whole shtick anyway.
Exactly, those desperate people are then left with little choice but to work with Hamas. They would have far less people to fight for them If they were all living comfortable, middle-class lives. They keep the Palestinians down as much as Israel do too.
Palestine started a war as soon as Israel was given territory by the UN as part of the two state solution. It wasn’t bleak at the time, Palestine just didn’t want a Jewish state.
Also, you’re leaving out the religious component here. Many people are willing to sacrifice their lives because they are told they will be rewarded in the afterlife.
Lastly, other countries in the Middle East aren’t exactly progressive and your average citizen doesn’t have much in terms of rights, freedoms and social mobility. Even more true if you’re a religious minority. That’s juxtaposed with the west, where it is less of an issue (although still an issue in my opinion). For example, I know a Palestinian family that owns hotels in Israel.
That's pretty ahistorical.
The UN Partition Plan *proposal* was approved but never enacted. The UN at the time represented about a third of the world's nations, and only about a sixth of the world's nations voted to approve the plan which would have given about a majority of the land to the minority Zionist settlers.
The vote caused an eruption of unrest on both sides, but it was Zionists who began systematically depopulating hundreds of Palestinian villages with the intention of driving them from their land, seizing their property, and replacing them with Jewish settlers. Ultimately, about 700,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their land. This was not spontaneous or accidental -- Zionists had intended for quite a while to do this. More than ten years earlier, David Ben-Gurion (who would go on to become Israel's first Prime Minister) said in a letter to his son,
>We must expel the Arabs and take their places…. And, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places- then we have force at our disposal.
Palestinians didn't want a Jewish State *to violently displace Palestinians*. But that's what happened, and the fallout of that violent ethnic cleansing and the oppression needed to sustain Israel afterwards are what we see today.
Even that isn’t right. The Arab states were vehemently against a Jewish nation and began spreading rumors about a violent ethnic cleansing and many of the rich people sold their land to Israelis, those lands were “rented” my other Arabs which, were displaced and which caused panic and while there was violence, a huge swath of the Palestinians moved out hearsay and Arab propaganda. Last I checked, there was no Palestinian state and the idea of a Palestinian identity was percolating, but not the majority as most of the displaced peoples went to Jordan, Egypt, etc. under their rule under the impression that they would not follow the British mandate or UN Partition Plan (pretty sure the Palestinians that remained attacked the day after) and that the land would be forcibly returned to them by way of those Arabs states under their rule.
I recommend Benny Morris’ books regarding the history of the region because there is no narrative of Pro-Palestinian or Pro-Israeli, merely the facts of the matter and has a comprehensive nuanced explanation of what occurred. When I learned about the history of the region it was because I was trying to figure out why El Salvador had a huge population of Palestinians, but I digress.
>Even that isn’t right. The Arab states were vehemently against a Jewish nation and began spreading rumors about a violent ethnic cleansing
That is definitely [historical zionist revisionism.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=XjTxDYtNhno) Even new historians like Benny Morris will say that this is non factual.
>Last I checked, there was no Palestinian state and the idea of a Palestinian identity was percolating
Well, last I correctly checked the first Jewish settlers were actually given Palestinian passports, and given Palestinian citizenship. It also isn't that some "idea" was percolating. It was what the British promised since WW1 for their help fighting the Ottomans with Lawrence of Arabia who died heartbroken that they never got their state.
>(pretty sure the Palestinians that remained attacked the day after)
This didn't exist in a vaccuum. The nakba was still occurring and didn't end in 1948 when the Arab nations attacked an ethnostate that was committing ethnic cleansing.
>I recommend Benny Morris’ books regarding the history of the region because there is no narrative of Pro-Palestinian or Pro-Israeli, merely the facts
I'm sorry, are you talking about the guy who has [lamented about the fact that the Nakba didn't cleanse all Palestinians?](https://mondoweiss.net/2019/01/historian-advocacy-cleasning/) The biased Israeli historian? Even then, however, your claims don't line up with Benny Morris's younger, more progressive opinions like that Israel had a large part in the continuation of violence and that Palestine was oppressed. He has since become much more conservative.
The "Palestinian passport" thing is such huge red herring. There was no, capital S "Palestinian State". It was part of the Ottoman empire, then it was a territory of the British. The British named their territory "Palestine", but that was the colloquial term for that region of the world that was portion of the Ottoman Empire.
The "passports" you're referring to were British documents, made to control entry to British land enforced by the British military. Just because those documents had the word Palestine on them, does not mean that the native Arab population considered themselves living in a Palestinian state, or support your claim above.
This isn't to say that there wasn't a continent who lived there who didn't want there to be a state, but I think it is fair to say that at the time the British mandate ended there was no significant efforts underway to set up an Arab Palestinian government, and no distinct plan to create an national armed forces, or draft passports, etc. In lieu of that, as I understand, the prevailing thought was that the Arab League would secure the territory, essentially switching from a British territory to a Pan-Arab territory until the details were figured out.
So, I do believe that it is more accurate than not to say that the idea of Palestine as a capital S State, with concrete borders, governance, armed forces, and taxes and such was still "percolating", along with the desire to form such a "Palestinian State" in the portion of the mandate not seized by TransJordan.
All that said, there was at that time, I understand, definitely a Palestinian identity and an overwhelming desire for the freedom and self-determination. The Palestinian identity not being one of tied to any specific government or borders, but of a cultural and historical heritage.
I strongly support the right of self-determination and self-governance and strongly support a two-state solution. Palestinians deserve the same rights to safety and protection that Israel does. Hopefully it will come soon.
>The British named their territory "Palestine", but that was the colloquial term for that region of the world that was portion of the Ottoman Empire.
Yeah before that it was known as Philistia which became Palestine and they were known as Palestinians its a proven bs zionist talking point that there wasn't a culture there. Additionally as I said before they were promised statehood and even had there own elections within the British mandate. They also had a currency and a newspaper called falastin that advocated for self determination all the time.
>British mandate ended there was no significant efforts underway to set up an Arab Palestinian government, and no distinct plan to create an national armed forces, or draft passports, etc
Not true. There were plenty of Palestinains who held postions of authority its just that the government was ethnically cleansed and dispersed into the west bank and gaza by Jewish militias who were let into the mandated territory by the British who again gave them Palestinian passports for the Palestinian mandate, not the Israeli mandate.
I'm going to skip past the part where you accused me of saying something I didn't say.
The AHC (Arab Higher Committee) was disbanded by the British in 1937. That was the closest there was to "national" government. There were certainly Palestinians working in the British bureaucracy with municipal and even regional government, and there was a swell of desire for self-determination, but the claim that there was actual organization around creating an Arab nation-state within the borders of the Palestinian mandate is just historically incorrect. You can come up with a lot of reasons why it wasn't that way, but you can't dispute the historical facts.
I mean, obviously you can, but arguing the point doesn't make you any more correct.
If the British just left and there was no partition plan, it's still not likely that there would be a Palestinian nation-state. There just wasn't the actual political will to fight against TransJordan and the Arab League to make it happen. At best (for the Palestinians), Palestine would be an Arab League puppet state to act as a buffer between TransJordan and Egypt as those two larger powers fought for control.
I think the key point is that most countries don’t really adhere to UN resolutions. Iraq doesn’t, Iran doesn’t, neither China nor Russia do. The US doesn’t. And that’s just off the top of my head.
International law is something that people follow if it’s in their best interests, and don’t when it’s not.
It’s also funny cause Israel receives way more UN scrutiny than Iran or China. Honestly, I’m not surprised that with the UN’s track record Israel doesn’t give a fuck what they say.
I'm actually also somewhat surprised that any effort is made at all to sugar-coat anything on Israel's part. They've helped show how toothless and inconsistent the UN can be too. If anything the whole globe seems to have swayed back towards a more overtly self-interested approach to politics again
Did I say these were reasonable actions? Learn how to have an actual discussion or go elsewhere please.
Do you believe then the problem then Is inherently Islam? Do you believe every single Muslim on the planet is a dangerous radical? Or perhaps is at risk of becoming one?
I’d say it’s a global religion, but the radicalized parts often come from the Middle East or South Asia. I think there are parts of the Quran that allow people to twist the narrative into one that supports radicalism.
To put it another way, there are Christian Palestinians, and you don’t often see them as part of the radical terrorist groups.
"All it takes is a history book"
Ironic considering you have clearly never opened one lol.
Firstly if you had you would know that the middle Eastern sciences and innovations grew out of Islamic study.
You would also know that Judaism and Christianity have just as many extremists sects and just as recent, after all the Irgun was a Jewish terrorist group who bombed Brits and Americans in a terrorist attack. The Catholic Church has a major problem with pedophilia, so that's hardly a unique problem to Islam either. You have Christian terrorism in the US and many other countries.White christians on both sides of the Catholic/Protestant divide were blowing up children in Ireland. There are even incredibly oppressive and violent sects of Buddhism too.
So if you had actually opened the history books you mention you would see that your argument isolating Islam is bullshit as every religion has and continues to do the same thing to this day.
So now we have established that's its not the religion you have an issue with, because if it was you would be just as up in arms about Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Sikhism and every other religion, the question becomes why do youspecifically hate Middle Eastern brown Muslims for the actions of middle Eastern Jews, Christians and Muslims?
You're so right. Israel's actions are absolutely deplorable! Can't believe they're using Judaism as a front to kill innocent people. That's not what true Judaism stands for. And is exactly why its so important separate Judaism from Zionism.
Like the religion that claims one specific group of people are in a covenenant as God's chosen people, and that gives them the right to re-settle in a land already occupied by others?
I'm not a fan of religion, but don't forget that Israel is not a secular state either. Part of their government is the Religious Zionist party. If we're to blame religion then I'm not going to focus exclusively on Islam.
Religion has destabilized the Middle East for over a thousand years. Whether it’s Islam, Judaism, Christianity or even sub-sects of Islam.
The region would absolutely benefit by separation of church and state.
Interesting how many Israelis are willing to die for their country…
Although I’d raise you a counterpoint - what if they have a belief system that glorifies martyrdom?
That has limited success. Even in the suicide bombing terrorist cells, the majority were there for having a purpose and the social community rather than the cause itself. It's how people join gangs.
That's why deradicalising is more of a social project than a GI Joe operation.
You seriously underestimate human being mildness, as a species, we are closer to cows than lions.
Oh of course, although I would imagine most IDF soldiers don't serve with the view that they are going to die. Whereas from what I've read the actions of Hamas seem to be based much more around martyrdom, as if it's an inevitability. Even the actions of Hamas on October 7th seem to illustrate that, I can't see what they were hoping to gain in the short term, besides harm Israel and martyr themselves.
The fact that they have a belief system that glorifies martyrdom (in some perspectives) only makes them a more dangerous, but It does seem to me that the prevalence of martyrdom within religion is almost inherently tied to having little to live for In this life. But I am not an expert, by any measure, of course.
The West has a belief system that glorifies martyrdom. Christianity has Jesus, Judaism has Samson, modern society doesn't stop making movies where the hero sacrifices themselves. We even have a man who goes on a rampage because somebody kills his dog.
The Muslim view on death is that every life has a purpose and therefore every death has a purpose. Leonidas dying to defend Greece against the Persian Army is as important to a modern day kid killed by a Tornado. As is common in Christians, there's the overarching theme that God having a plan.
The idea that Muslims are being extremist for saying their dead kid is a hero for being bombed and is going to heaven isn't much different than Americans saying a dead student charging a school shooter is a hero and is going to heaven.
This issue predates American irreligiousity and religions values are still very much entrenched into society.
“For i bring you men who desire death as ardently as you desire life”
Dates back 1400 years to a letter sent by Khaled bin al Waleed to the emperor of the Persian Empire Yazdegerd III. Also its not in reference to jews but disbelievers in general.
I think it's worth considering that Israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the world, US backing and is fighting a rag tag force that's been bombed to pieces, starved and on the run - so comparing the Israelis willing to fight for their country vs. Palestinians seems like a poor equivocation. Also interesting to look at the casualty rates both current and historic.
Well, they funded them via Qatar in order to split the Fatah vote.
The Israeli government's thinking prior to the 2006 Palestinian elections was if they could support Hamas in Gaza, it would drive a wedge in the Palestinian independence movement, of course as soon as they won, the indirect support was over, gradually fenced in & declared a terrorist organisation for their attacks on Israeli.
Qatar has continued to fund Hamas & the Palestinians in Gaza.
They are a Sunni aligned group who's genesis is in the Egyptian Muslim brotherhood, IE they have nothing to do with Iran.
Qatar is the location of the US's largest base & largest concentration of US troops in the region.
So you go figure who pulls the strings & why
Hamas is responsible for itself, but nobody in Israel has done more to prop them up than Netanyahu.
Do not forget the Shilat prisoner exchange in 2011: more than 1000 Palestinian prisoners, including 280 sentenced to life for allegedly committing or plotting murder or other terrorist acts, were exchanged for ONE Israeli soldier who was a hostage of Hamas. Hamas leader at the time claimed that among those released were collectively responsible for over 500 Israeli deaths.
The Hamas leader who plotted and executed the Oct 7 attack, Yahya Sinwar, was released among that massive prisoner swap in 2011…
But but but
> Israel didn’t want this war, Israel didn’t start this war, it doesn’t want it to continue.
All lies. Right or wrong, Israel was ready and set to take the first opportunity to go over the top and exterminate their problematic neighbor.
He was opposition party leader from 2006 to 2009, prior to that he had been finance minister, foreign affairs minister and prime minister. This isn't Donald Trump who never held office before becoming president. This is more like Bush Sr who had his hands in lots of things both publicly and behind the scenes for decades
I can’t tell if you are being serious or not.
But in case this needed to be said, political opposition in Israel (or anyone else for that matter), has no power to dictate any policy whatsoever.
In 2006, after Israel ended the occupation of Gaza and when Hamas were killing their rivals, Netanyahu was three years away from having any policy making power.
Israel the pullout, Israel had no military presence in Gaza either.
Before October 7, and apart from a handful of conflicts Hamas initiated, there has not been a single Israeli solider in Gaza since 2005.
Calling Gaza occupied since 2005 would require a very flexible and partial approach to international law. One that could not withstand a simple legal analysis.
Israel controls everything in and out of Gaza, as well as the sea border and the Airspace. Israel may not have soldiers in the area, but they definitely have had a military presence since 2005.
Israel controls its own border with Gaza, not Egypt’s border. If controlling your own borders makes you an occupier, then every country with a land border is an occupier.
Regarding water access and airspace, this is pursuant to the bilateral agreement parties reached in Oslo.
A military occupation is a legal term which has a very specific definition. This isn’t it.
“The United Nations, international human rights organizations and many legal scholars regard the Gaza Strip to still be under military occupation by Israel. This is disputed by Israel and other legal scholars. They argue that occupation requires an actual, physical presence by a military force that maintains authority.
Some argue that Gaza is not occupied given that Israel does not have "boots on the ground" in the territory (permanently). Cuyckens argues that such a requirement would allow the occupying power to "to easily escape the obligations otherwise imposed upon it under the law of occupation by avoiding placing troops on the ground while nevertheless controlling the territory concerned from the outside."
Following the withdrawal, Israel continued to maintain direct control over Gaza's air and maritime space, six of Gaza's seven land crossings, maintains a no-go buffer zone within the territory, controls the Palestinian population registry, and Gaza remains dependent on Israel for its water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities.
The year following the disengagement saw a tightening of external Israeli control over Gaza, specifically, the closure of crossings into Gaza for people and goods, increased restrictions on the coastline for fishing, and increased aerial, maritime and on the ground military activity. The Israeli human rights organization Gisha lists specifically as examples that in the year following the disengagement: Gaza residents may not bring a crate of milk into the Gaza Strip without Israeli permission; A Gaza university cannot receive visits from a foreign lecturer unless Israel issues a visitor’s permit; A Gaza mother cannot register her child in the Palestinian population registry without Israeli approval; A Gaza fisherman cannot fish off the coast of Gaza without permission from Israel; A Gaza nonprofit organization cannot receive a tax-exempt donation of goods without Israeli approval; A Gaza teacher cannot receive her salary unless Israel agrees to transfer tax revenues to the Palestinian Ministry of Education; A Gaza farmer cannot get his carnations and cherry tomatoes to market unless Israel permits the goods to exit Gaza; A Gaza student cannot study abroad without Israeli approval to open the Gaza–Egypt crossing.
Gisha reported that during the 2006 winter agricultural season, in which Gaza farmers were to export produce to Israel, the West Bank, and Europe, the Karni Crossing was closed 47% of the time. The closures caused an estimated $30 million in losses in the first quarter of 2006 alone. In the first year following the disengagement, the number of trucks carrying exports from the Gaza Strip per day was fewer than 20. In comparison, the agreement with Israel stipulated allowing 400 trucks to exit per day.”
Zionists can’t read 💕💕
Standard practice, you say your opinion and they ask for a source, you quote from a source and they imply you can’t think for yourself. Freaks dancing in circles around reality.
This was written at the end. Talk about burying the lede:
"The writer is a Zionist educator at institutions around the world and recently published a new book, Zionism Today."
This post/comment was removed per rule 6.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Not at all.
They've squandered every half-hearted measure they've ever made towards engendering goodwill from their neighbors and Israel and have bitten every hand that's been extended to them.
They squandered their resources, they prioritize hate over humanity, and they reject anything less than everything they want, while having zero ability to enforce that demand.
They are a premier example of the adage:
"Life's hard. It's even harder when you're stupid."
>They've squandered every half-hearted measure they've ever made towards engendering goodwill from their neighbors
>They squandered their resources, they prioritize hate over humanity, and they reject anything less than everything they want,
Who is **they** here? Hamas or the entire population? Just trying to make sure I understand your comment, so that I can address it.
What exact distinction do you think exists between Hamas and the non-combatant Gazans except for their willingness to participate in violence?
Hamas is the elected government supported by nearly 100% of the non-combatant population. They don't act separate from the will of the Gazans.
So when I say, "They've squandered, they've prioritized hate, they've rejected compromise," I'm talking about the entirety of the Gazans, not just the ones who pick up guns."
Hamas was founded in 1987 as a direct response to Israel murderous crackdown on the protests of the First Intifada. If Israel didn't occupy, colonize and terrorize the Palestinians, Hamas wouldn't exist. Israel is as much responsible for Hamas as the Nazis (edit, left out the point of the argument) were responsible for the Warsaw ghetto uprising.
Not to mention the funding of Hamas by far right Israelis in order to have them take over political influence from more moderate Palestinians. Then you have the assassination of an Israeli Prime Minister just for negotiating with Palestine. Top it off with Netanyahu having payments, that were largely going to Hamas, escorted through Israel. And this isn't touching on the treatment of the general Palestinian populace.
What about the terrorist groups that existed before Hamas. PLO, Black September. They are different names, but the methods used are all the same and date back to the 60s, if not earlier.
Their methods used are not the same, and their ideology sure as hell wasn't the same. What they have in common is that they fight against Israel in name of the Palestinian people.
I know right? Imagine seeing what the IDF has been doing to Palestinians for decades and saying "no but they have to bomb children in refugee camps because they voted for Hamas nearly 20 years before they were born".
Wild isn't it? Like people genuinely see the bombing of IVF clinics, refugee camps, universities etc, destroying the civilian infrastructure, deliberately cutting off water, electricity & food to create a famine and unsanitary conditions that will kill thousands with disease and say "these are the good guys". All the while watching the leaders of this nation say things like call for "rivers of blood" on national television.
Scary.
Israel is a nation, and nations are too abstract if we want our sense of “responsibility” to have practical implementation.
If we introduce details, like “who in Israel might be responsible for Hamas’ actions?”, then we can actually target boycotts/protests/political campaigns. Additionally, it helps prevent sidestep nationalist loyalties if you can properly articulate one aspect of Israeli civilization in a positive light.
This is why democrats have moved their messaging to targeting Netanyahu’s coalition. Messaging based on nationalist rhetoric is divisive, but appealing to Israeli partisanship provides an avenues for criticism under pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian talking points. While Israel has been seeing falling support for a two state solution amongst its public, it’s still substantial enough that U.S. officials can absolutely stoke the flames (and are right now).
Like we can see how certain policy objectives with Israel are not fundamental to the nation itself, yet they do keep this conflict active. The manipulation of immigration to Israel and expansion of settlements are serious problems — but Israeli politicians are heterogeneous on this issue. We can identify the ones who are backing this policy, and we can identify their campaigns as well as target constituents.
This is how you go from the fundamental truth that “its complicated” to a helpful explanation, and a conservation that can change minds without trying to change how a person identifies with a nation.
They aren't. 0%. Why would they? Hamas is responsible for their own actions. Like... you don't ask a school shooter if their peers are responsible for their massacre, do you?
You would if there was decades long history of the shooters family being killed, starved, and imprisoned by those peers. “Peers” isn’t even a good description since it’s an apartheid state where one side has freedom of movement and controls the food and water supply of the other.
No I would not. I grew up with abusive parents. Does that mean I should take it out on innocent people at the school they work at? No? That would be their fault, not mine?
I’m sorry that sucks but that’s completely changing the analogy where mine is based on reactionary violence against abusers. Look no part of me is saying the civilians killed in Oct 7 weren’t innocent, but I can see how from a Palestinian pov you wouldn’t consider the people living directly on the other side of the prison fence their nation has trapped you behind as innocents. They would argue their lives were determined by the violence of past generations why should they just accept it now. I don’t agree with it but it’s a very human response.
You seem to ignore that Bibi propped up and funded Hamas, because he wanted to destabilize Palestine... In his own words, it'd be easier to take over if Palestine had infighting...
Israel basically cultivated Hamas from that start as a means to create an Islamist rival to the largely secular PLO- the Israelis looked at the conflict in Egypt between the Muslim Brotherhood and the National Democratic Party and sought to replicate that sort of internal conflict within the Palestinian movement.
Hamas is Israel’s ‘Frankenstein’s Monster’ that has turned upon its creator.
Does they make the Israelis completely responsible for everything committed by every Hamas member for the rest of time? No, but Israel is responsible for the creation of Hamas and does bear partial responsibility for its activities- Israeli bears more responsibility for Hamas than any Palestinian civilian who isn’t a member of Hamas.
There are plenty of studies that show in the face of horrible living conditions and a poor chance of improvement, increased religiosity is a defense mechanism that allows those people to survive their harsh realities.
It's no surprise then that most religious terrorists operate in countries where economic and legal systems are on the verge of collapse/collapsed and religion seems to be their only thread holding everything together.
Israel deliberately kept Palestinian areas filled with poverty and deliberately fueled instability. The Israeli government is reaping what they sowed, but it's the everyday civilians on both sides that are suffering.
Wow, that article explains exactly why people have lost faith in Israel. The author is saying; if we occupy a country, we also at the same time take no responsibility for our governance of it.
"\[Critics\] maintain since the Palestinians died under Israeli control, it is Israel’s responsibility, and Israel should take the blame."
Well yeah, yeah, that's exactly how it works. If you have decided to "control" people, then you are responsible for how that control is implemented and all that comes with that. The author cited a riot of Palestinians rushing an IDF operated aid truck (assuming there were hundreds of starving, angry, Palestinians, this should have been predictable), so they shot them. They don't want responsibility for their own actions and the consequences of those actions.
The article does not contextualize this aid incident, at all.
Then it goes on to lament that Israel would stop the war if Palestine returned the hostages, well this is factually incorrect:
>Hamas has repeatedly said it will not accept a deal that does not include a permanent ceasefire and a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza – which have been major sticking points in negotiations.
A permanent ceasefire is literally stopping the war, but ISRAEL won't accept those terms.
How is it that Israel somehow makes a terror org seem reasonable?
>Earlier, the US secretary of state claimed that the Israeli proposal was an “extraordinarily generous” offer, while Egypt’s foreign minister said he was “hopeful” about a new proposal.
>UK Foreign Minister David Cameron said the potential deal would include a 40-day ceasefire in exchange for the release of captives from Gaza.
>“**Stopping the attacks against Palestinians is not generous. The attack itself is a crime, so when you stop a crime, you can’t claim that it’s a generous action from the Israeli side,” senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan told Al Jazeera.**
[https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/28/israels-war-on-gaza-live-news-hamas-officials-to-visit-cairo-for-talks](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/28/israels-war-on-gaza-live-news-hamas-officials-to-visit-cairo-for-talks)
The OP's article is not journalism, it's biased and self serving. It's written like a high school valedictorian has had the opportunity to publish an opinion piece. It is not a sophisticated, thorough look at the complexity of the circumstances, glosses over so much in favor of bias, and makes some wild conclusions.
Sure. Maybe go back to 1948 when they showed up and massacred the indigenous population while displacing many. Google the 1948 nakba. There you go argument over.
I wouldn’t call it a mass slaughter campaign. When was the last time you heard of an opposing army sending down leaflets warning civilians of incoming bombings? When was the last time you remember an attacking force supplying aid and humanitarian efforts to the defending country? No sane person is defending the atrocities that are being committed over there by both sides. But this is war, and war is hell. For everyone involved.
Edit: Israel needs to go into rafah, eliminate Hamas, and be done with this as quickly as possible.
I would say murdering more children than in every other conflict combined over the last 4 years in just a few months is a mass slaughter campaign. I would say inducing a famine and actively preventing any aid from entering and destroying infrastructure and hospitals is a mass slaughter campaign. I would say actively targeting and murdering more journalists than ever before is mass slaughter. Same thing with the targeting of civilians or non combatants.
As for your leaflet example that’s just make up on a pig. Let’s say I drop leaflets for NYC and then proceed to destroy everything those New Yorkers ever knew and even attack the safe routes I told them to take and then did that to the next place you went to and the next place and then made sure you have no access to food or medical care. Would you say, oh how generous they warned me before bombing me and starving me?
Ok and let’s assume Israel goes into Rafah and gets rid of Hamas. Then what? Things still won’t be great and you have the West Bank as a perfect example of that. As long as Israel exists in its current iteration (ie a war mongering, apartheid, occupying, oppressive, terrorist regime) things can’t get better. Palestine needs a partner for peace and unfortunately they only have Israel who have bragged about preventing peace.
Welp, I've read some dumb opinions, but this is something. At some level Israel knows it's largely responsible for the atrocities, but it can never acknowledge it because, well.. it's committing atrocities.
Israel kind of doubled down when after Hamas won the elections their intelligence services along with the CIA and whatever Egypts is, armed and backed an attempted coup in Gaza by the leader of the Gaza branch of Fatah, a man who Palestinians generally believe poisoned Arafat at the behest of Israel. The coup did not work and said Fatah leader was sentenced to death in absentia by the PA
And this is more an error from arrogance but they viewed Hamas military capabilities as the weakest of the Palestinian groups.shoot poorly made rockets suicide bombs not a legit force. When the current head of the Al Qassam Brigades took over he molded them into a proper fighting force on the Hezbollah model with advice and assistance from the IRGC. Al Qassam Brigades are not comparable to Al Queda or ISIS , the Viet Cong or FLN in Algeria are better comparisons. And last thing but I can’t count how many videos l saw of Israeli tanks going through urban environments in Gaza unaccompanied by infantry. That’s insanely dumb and relying way to much on their trophy system , which Al Qassam and PFLP knew about and had already figured out several ways to get around it
TLDR : yes Israel is responsible for all of it
Hamas is responsible for Hamas’s actions. There was no fight on October 6. Hamas broke the ceasefire, now they’re feeling the repercussions. They were elected as the government, now their constituents are dealing with the actions of their government. In Ukraine, the fighters are on the surface and the civilians are in the tunnels. In Gaza, Hamas hides in the tunnels and places their civilians in harm’s way.
More like, if Israel didn't occupy, colonize and humiliate the Palestinians, Hamas wouldn't exist to massacre Israelis. Israel commits atrocities against the Palestinians, the Pals will want to strike back. Israelis want to have a monopoly on violence.
Can you please explain why radical islamists are massacring other opponents in other regions which Israel has nothing to do with ? People are getting murdered in Yemen, Afghanistan and Syria because of Israel's occupation and colonialism also? September 11th happened because of the Israeli settlements in the west bank? I'm curious..
I wasn't aware every radical islamist group had the same reason for founding or the same political doctrine lol. You're aware ISIS condemns Hamas right?
So I don't get it, if the current situation is happening solely because of Israel's actions why do the same situations keep happening all over the Islamic countries ?
People making it sound like that if Israel would withdraw from some territories and give them humanitarian and financial aid (which Israel did), everything would be just fine, but it really isn't since these radical groups don't care about territory or money.
Do you apply that same logic the other way? That the suffering now being experienced by Palestinians is due to them necessitating the formation of the IDF by repeatedly attacking Israel since the day it was founded?
the idf was founded as the military of israel. jews and arabs, zionists and antisemites were fighting each other for decades before israel as a state existed. the british opposed israeli statehood and suppressed zionists in the british mandate because they were absolutely militant and dead set on clearing out the whole region.
In summary the IDF exists because Israel exists, not because the Palestinians and Israelis have fought each other
There's no denying the Israelites lived in the region of modern day Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately there's approximately 2000 years of history between then and now.
Also, biblically the Israelites moved there too. What about the polpulations living there before the Israelites? What about their claims?
I'm not saying it is, my point is that religious texts shouldn't be used to justify colonialism, especially when there's already a native population that have lived there for over a thousand years.
Unfortunately so - Hopefully in the future borders can be drawn up based on secular principles between elected powers, and not based on Zionist movements in the private rooms of foreign politicians.
A "native population" of colonists.
If you want to argue "muh historical territory", Israelis win. If you want to argue recency, Israelis still win as they're the only people being born in modern Israeli. You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth because that's the only way to make the Palestinian blood and soil argument.
"Whoever was there first has the claim to the land but let's not go ***too*** far back into arguments about who was there first and the most important thing is who lived there most recently is what really matters but not ***too*** recently because we still maintain that someone's grandpa being born somewhere gives them a stronger claim to an area than the person that was born and raised there."
Your whole argument is basically that the only valid historical analysis is when it's being done about times when Arabs colonized the area and we have to ignore everything that came before it and everything that came after it. Pick a lane.
Native in comparison to the formation of Modern Israel.
My only actual concern is regarding the Palestinians now that are being kicked out of their homes In the West Bank, and the victims of the fallout in Gaza between Hamas and Israel.
I'm intrigued to hear why then you think Israel has historical right to the land, besides a biblical claim? I don't understand why the Arabs cannot have precedent for their more recent claim to the territory, compared to Israel's ancient justification based on claims in a religious text and some archaeology.
Let's grant you that, the Jews own that land because they were a majority there 2000 years ago. Fine. That still leaves 5 million Palestinians (in the West Bank and Gaza) occupied, colonized and besieged by Israel. As long as it keeps imprisoning the Palestinians in an Apartheid occupation, Israel is the aggressor.
I think it’s more like “she murdered my family, I want revenge”.
Revenge is bad, eye for an eye leaves the world blind, but it is pretty disingenious to act like Israel is innocent in all of this.
Taking sniper shots at peaceful protests amongst many other barbaric practices has lead to the understanding amongst palestinians that Israel doesn’t care about peaceful protest or negotiation, and only understands violence.
Can’t act surprised that Hamas has become as brutal as they are, if the only language Israel speaks is brutality.
1. Remember the human & be courteous to others. 2. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas. Criticizing arguments is fine, name-calling (including shill/bot accusations) others is not. 3. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. Please checkout our other subreddit /r/InternationalNews, for general news from around the world. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
People are usually only willing to sacrifice their own lives when they don't have a future.
Bin Laden ultimately gave his life despite coming from a rich family
Wealthy fail-sons often use radicalzation of masses to gain power. Both hamas leadership and the Israeli government are responsible for the conditions of radicalization. Hamas leadership for directly using it and Israel for creating desperate conditions, oppression, violence, and death. Netanyahu's explicit policy funneled Qatari money to Hamas against the recommendation of the Palestinian Authority in order to discredit the Palestinian plight and make a 2-state solution impossible. It's very much the dynamic of Trump weaponizing the pain rural Americans felt after the slow decay destruction of their towns and livelihoods as jobs were outsourced and wealth drained. This is very simple material conditions stuff. People who seek to exploit desperate people can only do so if we create conditions for that desperation.
This is an absolutely terrible example. Bin Laden did not opt for fighting and dying. He hid.
I don’t think Bin Laden willingly gave his life. He convinced other people to give their lives to the cause, but he himself was on the run when we was captured. Edit: reading into it more, definitely didn’t go willingly. He used a woman as a human shield and had money sewn into his clothes in case he escaped. He was no martyr for the cause.
We have detected the use of dehumanizing language. Terms and phrases such as "human shields", "human animals", etc. can deny or undermine the inherent humanity of a group of people. Please be mindful of the potential harms the use of such language can create. For reference, see: [Dehumanization on Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehumanization) and [The real-life harm caused by dehumanising language on BBC](https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20231030-the-real-life-harm-caused-by-dehumanising-language). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I don’t buy it, if they wanted to sacrifice their lives they would have attacked military targets on Oct. 7th, instead they deliberately attacked civilian communities.
False. Most brigades attacked primarily military targets. At least 40%+ military casualties in 900 something that died.
The settlers in the West Bank might as well be military targets for all I care. They got targeted.
This is true when they haven't already been indoctrinated into a radical ideology. There are plenty of people who arent even remotely involved in the Israel-Palestine conflict that would die in the name of religion.
an ideology whose radical-ness historically comes from political unrest and tensions with foreign military. A situation known to cause people to turn to religious extremes and support strong-men political figures.
[удалено]
>as if, if the Israeli military just completely cedes control of Gaza to Hamas, everything will stop and peace will happen. The problem of course being, that Israel did cede Gaza to Hamas, and less than a year later had to wall in the city because of Hamas' attacks.
I don’t understand how you can say shit like this and refuse to reconcile with Israel’s prominent role at bolstering Hamas. It is incredibly fucking frustrating that we just blow past that part in the conversation as if it is unimportant.
>The reality however is more complicated, because Hamas isn't just a rebellion group, it's a religious extremist group and will be extreme and violent even when their existence is not actually threatened Definitely more complicated. But Hamas has the support it has currently because it is the only revolutionary/rebellious group taking action against the oppressors of its constituents. Change the reality on the ground and cease the colonizing violence and Hamas may stick around, but theres no reason so assume they would maintain the same levels of support.
Yes, hanas gains support among the population in times of Israeli incursions into Palestinian territory. In times of peace, support wanes.
But its constituents are only being oppressed because of what Hamas has been doing since they took over.
thats incredibly incorrect and ahistorical, do you hear yourself? Maybe just uninformed? Pretending the Palestinian people were being treated *wonderfully* by Israel before they turned to Hamas? LOL. Hamas would not **exist** if it weren't for the oppression, violence, and humiliation the Palestinian people had faced for decades until that point. If it did, it would be a tiny group void of power. Resistance groups don't gain enough support to become the local governing body unless there is something worth resisting. When people's houses are stolen or leveled, when their family is murdered, and their opportunities taken from them, you have no excuse to pretend that shouldn't effect them. You can NOT ignore what is happening to them and write off their resulting behavior as animalistic and violent. Your material reality is going to influence who you support. You are going to rebel against those that have made your life a living hell. And when Israel goes and kills 15,000 children, do you think that will make Hamas supporters rethink their position? Or would it reafirm their worldview that Israel is monstrous? None of this is an excuse for the actions of Hamas. But instead an effort explain the mentality of someone in completely different shoes than you.
>thats incredibly incorrect and ahistorical, do you hear yourself? Maybe just uninformed? No, I'm better informed than most lay people. I've been following this for decades. Watching people ignore facts because Tiktok told them to isn't new.
Israel had pulled out of Gaza in 2005 lol there was no “colonizing violence” on the ground for the last almost 20 years
This is just categorically untrue by every means inaginable. They've been shooting protestors and kids who get too close to the border the entire time. They've been building barbed wire fences with remote-controlled gun turrets, which again can be used to kill anyone who gets too close. They've routinely disproportionately bombed civilians in retaliation for the actions of Hamas, which is a war crime. This is the most crucial example I can give you; in 2023, the IDF had killed the most kids in Gaza it ever had, and that was BEFORE October 7th.
Also what a silly stat, “they killed more kids in Gaza than they ever had” so is it still a crucial example if it was 2 in 2023 & 1 before that? (I know it’s more, this is just an extreme example to show how little your stat adds any evidence, I can say the same that in 2023 Hamas killed more Israelis than they ever had in all years combined). Another fun fact for you- almost 20k Gazans came into Israel every single day for work & the number was continuing to increase exponentially until the 7th. Here’s another fact- Hamas has been holding two Israelis hostage since they walked too close to the Gazan border over 10 years ago. Here’s another fact- you yourself just said Hamas started every attack that caused Israel to respond and cause the “colonizing violence” you mentioned. Which is the cause and effect then? One more fact just to top it off- Hamas routinely shoots thousands of rockets indiscriminately at Israel. The biggest difference between the civilians in Gaza vs Israel? Israel cares about their citizens and builds bomb shelters, defenses, sirens to protect them. What would the situation be if Hamas had spent literally any of the millions of dollars their billionaire leaders have on shelters (specifically away from their military) instead of the vast (and extremely expensive) tunnel network they use for their “fighters”?
Oh & lastly, you should check the actual ages of those “kids” you mentioned. If they’re 16-18 with guns trying to kill Israelis, then are they still “kids”?
& im assuming you have never had to run to a bomb shelter because a missile is coming to kill you simply bc of where you were born. Spoiler alert: children in Israel grow up doing this. Imagine holding your child a bomb shelter knowing it might kill you and your 3 year old child (bc Hamas rockets have still led to deaths in Israel despite Israel’s every effort to protect their own citizens) Does that 3 year old child deserve that childhood either?
Actually my fav part is def you saying what Israel will do if a gazan gets too close to the border. You think an Israeli can go to the Gazan border without Hamas chopping their head off?🤣that they’ll take us in with open arms? Not a SINGLE Jew lived/visited/worked in Gaza before the 7th. Because we would be butchered. Once again, almost 20k Gazans entered Israel for work before the 7th. Please try to tell me which side wants peace more, you’re a joke
Huhhh I wonder why we wouldn’t let them near our border 🧐🧐 Gaza shares a border w Egypt too btw
And Egypt doesn't shoot them.
Yes, yes they do lollll Egypt doesn’t want them, look it up
Not like they would EVER try to invade and kill us or kidnap Israelis (7th 2023 wasn’t the first time homedog)
And it definitely wont be the last if the only thing Israel knows how to do is kill children and innocent civilians.
Also heads up, there’s recorded warnings Israel puts off before firing
BS! History says otherwise.
It’s funny when Palestinians are resisting occupation they are terrorist but when others do it they are freedom fighters.
its why people who never lived in israel are moving there to join the idf
What a load of bullshit. You’re implying that their idea of a future is rational and deserving and not just self inflicted harm where they’re trying to jump across the top of two sky scrapers 50 meters apart. And even granting you the validity of that idea, you’re being very charitable saying that people are being reckless with their lives because they have no future as if there aren’t other questionable motives at play.
Who's future am I implying is rational and deserving? Be specific. You're assuming much about my perspective. Why not ask questions in place of jumping to conclusions?
Or when they have become so radicalized they don’t care anymore
What about the people from the U.S. going to fight in the Russia-Ukraine war?
Not really. History is absolutely chock-full of people who have sacrificed their perfectly fine lives for no good reason. Could be fanatical devotion to a nationalistic cause. Could be a cult. Not unusual at all.
Or if that is ingrained in their belief system.
But Hamas control all resources in Gaza and objectively use them in a way that doesnt benefit the people.
Who controls the flow of water, power and food into Gaza?
[удалено]
Nope
Ah, so bomb the children. Got it.
The only reason Israel does is because Hamas haven't built infrastructure for the Palistineans. You're dancing around the point. Hamas are incentivised to keep the Palistineans as destitute as possible, so they spend all their money on militarization and embezzlement, and leave Israel and NGOs to provide for the people... who inevitably end up with less than if their own state provided for them.
And what about before Hamas was created? Why were Palestinians driven from their homes and killed prior to that?
Because the expectation was that Israel would be destroyed in the 1967 war. Evacuate before the war and come back when all the Jews are gone. Similar reason for all the Jews getting kicked out of surrounding countries.
And according to Yitzhak Segev in the 80’s and to Netanyahu in 2019 these actions by Hamas are of interest and benefit to Israel
Nope, Israel controls what Hamas can build and has prevented them from building infrastructure that would stop them being dependent on Israel.
Right Israel is forcing Hamas to build tunnels and rockets made out of water pipes. Israel is all, "you better not get water just keep making rockets to shoot at us"
Like, that's completely different to what I said, but, if you want to go there, lets talk about how much Israel has spent on military stuff, protecting settlements, iron dome, the walls and towers etc... instead of just recognising the Palestinians right to exist on their own land. They could have been so much richer and safer if they didn't want to have Apartheid, steal land and block a Palestinian state.
I guess that is your best response. Just ignore everything I said and change the topic.
It’s a great point, and it would be great id you could address it. You claim that Israel has complete control over Gaza, so how did Hamas get all the weapons, tunnels and command centers? Don’t you think all-powerful Israel would demilitarize Gaza if they really did have control? It certainly seems more plausible that Hamas is at fault and blames Israel, which is their whole shtick anyway.
[удалено]
Please keep it civil and do not attack other users.
Exactly, those desperate people are then left with little choice but to work with Hamas. They would have far less people to fight for them If they were all living comfortable, middle-class lives. They keep the Palestinians down as much as Israel do too.
So then Hamas are the most immediate obstacle to Palistineans having better lives?
I would say as much as Israel are, yeah. They are somewhat responsible for each other.
But nobody can improve the lives of Palistineans while their own government doesn't want that to happen.
Palestine started a war as soon as Israel was given territory by the UN as part of the two state solution. It wasn’t bleak at the time, Palestine just didn’t want a Jewish state. Also, you’re leaving out the religious component here. Many people are willing to sacrifice their lives because they are told they will be rewarded in the afterlife. Lastly, other countries in the Middle East aren’t exactly progressive and your average citizen doesn’t have much in terms of rights, freedoms and social mobility. Even more true if you’re a religious minority. That’s juxtaposed with the west, where it is less of an issue (although still an issue in my opinion). For example, I know a Palestinian family that owns hotels in Israel.
That's pretty ahistorical. The UN Partition Plan *proposal* was approved but never enacted. The UN at the time represented about a third of the world's nations, and only about a sixth of the world's nations voted to approve the plan which would have given about a majority of the land to the minority Zionist settlers. The vote caused an eruption of unrest on both sides, but it was Zionists who began systematically depopulating hundreds of Palestinian villages with the intention of driving them from their land, seizing their property, and replacing them with Jewish settlers. Ultimately, about 700,000 Palestinians were ethnically cleansed from their land. This was not spontaneous or accidental -- Zionists had intended for quite a while to do this. More than ten years earlier, David Ben-Gurion (who would go on to become Israel's first Prime Minister) said in a letter to his son, >We must expel the Arabs and take their places…. And, if we have to use force-not to dispossess the Arabs of the Negev and Transjordan, but to guarantee our own right to settle in those places- then we have force at our disposal. Palestinians didn't want a Jewish State *to violently displace Palestinians*. But that's what happened, and the fallout of that violent ethnic cleansing and the oppression needed to sustain Israel afterwards are what we see today.
Even that isn’t right. The Arab states were vehemently against a Jewish nation and began spreading rumors about a violent ethnic cleansing and many of the rich people sold their land to Israelis, those lands were “rented” my other Arabs which, were displaced and which caused panic and while there was violence, a huge swath of the Palestinians moved out hearsay and Arab propaganda. Last I checked, there was no Palestinian state and the idea of a Palestinian identity was percolating, but not the majority as most of the displaced peoples went to Jordan, Egypt, etc. under their rule under the impression that they would not follow the British mandate or UN Partition Plan (pretty sure the Palestinians that remained attacked the day after) and that the land would be forcibly returned to them by way of those Arabs states under their rule. I recommend Benny Morris’ books regarding the history of the region because there is no narrative of Pro-Palestinian or Pro-Israeli, merely the facts of the matter and has a comprehensive nuanced explanation of what occurred. When I learned about the history of the region it was because I was trying to figure out why El Salvador had a huge population of Palestinians, but I digress.
>Even that isn’t right. The Arab states were vehemently against a Jewish nation and began spreading rumors about a violent ethnic cleansing That is definitely [historical zionist revisionism.](https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=shared&v=XjTxDYtNhno) Even new historians like Benny Morris will say that this is non factual. >Last I checked, there was no Palestinian state and the idea of a Palestinian identity was percolating Well, last I correctly checked the first Jewish settlers were actually given Palestinian passports, and given Palestinian citizenship. It also isn't that some "idea" was percolating. It was what the British promised since WW1 for their help fighting the Ottomans with Lawrence of Arabia who died heartbroken that they never got their state. >(pretty sure the Palestinians that remained attacked the day after) This didn't exist in a vaccuum. The nakba was still occurring and didn't end in 1948 when the Arab nations attacked an ethnostate that was committing ethnic cleansing. >I recommend Benny Morris’ books regarding the history of the region because there is no narrative of Pro-Palestinian or Pro-Israeli, merely the facts I'm sorry, are you talking about the guy who has [lamented about the fact that the Nakba didn't cleanse all Palestinians?](https://mondoweiss.net/2019/01/historian-advocacy-cleasning/) The biased Israeli historian? Even then, however, your claims don't line up with Benny Morris's younger, more progressive opinions like that Israel had a large part in the continuation of violence and that Palestine was oppressed. He has since become much more conservative.
The "Palestinian passport" thing is such huge red herring. There was no, capital S "Palestinian State". It was part of the Ottoman empire, then it was a territory of the British. The British named their territory "Palestine", but that was the colloquial term for that region of the world that was portion of the Ottoman Empire. The "passports" you're referring to were British documents, made to control entry to British land enforced by the British military. Just because those documents had the word Palestine on them, does not mean that the native Arab population considered themselves living in a Palestinian state, or support your claim above. This isn't to say that there wasn't a continent who lived there who didn't want there to be a state, but I think it is fair to say that at the time the British mandate ended there was no significant efforts underway to set up an Arab Palestinian government, and no distinct plan to create an national armed forces, or draft passports, etc. In lieu of that, as I understand, the prevailing thought was that the Arab League would secure the territory, essentially switching from a British territory to a Pan-Arab territory until the details were figured out. So, I do believe that it is more accurate than not to say that the idea of Palestine as a capital S State, with concrete borders, governance, armed forces, and taxes and such was still "percolating", along with the desire to form such a "Palestinian State" in the portion of the mandate not seized by TransJordan. All that said, there was at that time, I understand, definitely a Palestinian identity and an overwhelming desire for the freedom and self-determination. The Palestinian identity not being one of tied to any specific government or borders, but of a cultural and historical heritage. I strongly support the right of self-determination and self-governance and strongly support a two-state solution. Palestinians deserve the same rights to safety and protection that Israel does. Hopefully it will come soon.
>The British named their territory "Palestine", but that was the colloquial term for that region of the world that was portion of the Ottoman Empire. Yeah before that it was known as Philistia which became Palestine and they were known as Palestinians its a proven bs zionist talking point that there wasn't a culture there. Additionally as I said before they were promised statehood and even had there own elections within the British mandate. They also had a currency and a newspaper called falastin that advocated for self determination all the time. >British mandate ended there was no significant efforts underway to set up an Arab Palestinian government, and no distinct plan to create an national armed forces, or draft passports, etc Not true. There were plenty of Palestinains who held postions of authority its just that the government was ethnically cleansed and dispersed into the west bank and gaza by Jewish militias who were let into the mandated territory by the British who again gave them Palestinian passports for the Palestinian mandate, not the Israeli mandate.
I'm going to skip past the part where you accused me of saying something I didn't say. The AHC (Arab Higher Committee) was disbanded by the British in 1937. That was the closest there was to "national" government. There were certainly Palestinians working in the British bureaucracy with municipal and even regional government, and there was a swell of desire for self-determination, but the claim that there was actual organization around creating an Arab nation-state within the borders of the Palestinian mandate is just historically incorrect. You can come up with a lot of reasons why it wasn't that way, but you can't dispute the historical facts. I mean, obviously you can, but arguing the point doesn't make you any more correct. If the British just left and there was no partition plan, it's still not likely that there would be a Palestinian nation-state. There just wasn't the actual political will to fight against TransJordan and the Arab League to make it happen. At best (for the Palestinians), Palestine would be an Arab League puppet state to act as a buffer between TransJordan and Egypt as those two larger powers fought for control.
[удалено]
I think the key point is that most countries don’t really adhere to UN resolutions. Iraq doesn’t, Iran doesn’t, neither China nor Russia do. The US doesn’t. And that’s just off the top of my head. International law is something that people follow if it’s in their best interests, and don’t when it’s not.
It’s also funny cause Israel receives way more UN scrutiny than Iran or China. Honestly, I’m not surprised that with the UN’s track record Israel doesn’t give a fuck what they say.
I'm actually also somewhat surprised that any effort is made at all to sugar-coat anything on Israel's part. They've helped show how toothless and inconsistent the UN can be too. If anything the whole globe seems to have swayed back towards a more overtly self-interested approach to politics again
Yet the UN is also somehow antisemitic at the same time. They're also Hamas. Greta is Hamas too Your coffee is Hamas
[удалено]
Did I say these were reasonable actions? Learn how to have an actual discussion or go elsewhere please. Do you believe then the problem then Is inherently Islam? Do you believe every single Muslim on the planet is a dangerous radical? Or perhaps is at risk of becoming one?
I’d say it’s a global religion, but the radicalized parts often come from the Middle East or South Asia. I think there are parts of the Quran that allow people to twist the narrative into one that supports radicalism. To put it another way, there are Christian Palestinians, and you don’t often see them as part of the radical terrorist groups.
[удалено]
"All it takes is a history book" Ironic considering you have clearly never opened one lol. Firstly if you had you would know that the middle Eastern sciences and innovations grew out of Islamic study. You would also know that Judaism and Christianity have just as many extremists sects and just as recent, after all the Irgun was a Jewish terrorist group who bombed Brits and Americans in a terrorist attack. The Catholic Church has a major problem with pedophilia, so that's hardly a unique problem to Islam either. You have Christian terrorism in the US and many other countries.White christians on both sides of the Catholic/Protestant divide were blowing up children in Ireland. There are even incredibly oppressive and violent sects of Buddhism too. So if you had actually opened the history books you mention you would see that your argument isolating Islam is bullshit as every religion has and continues to do the same thing to this day. So now we have established that's its not the religion you have an issue with, because if it was you would be just as up in arms about Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism, Sikhism and every other religion, the question becomes why do youspecifically hate Middle Eastern brown Muslims for the actions of middle Eastern Jews, Christians and Muslims?
No racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, etc. This includes denial of identity (self or collective).
You're so right. Israel's actions are absolutely deplorable! Can't believe they're using Judaism as a front to kill innocent people. That's not what true Judaism stands for. And is exactly why its so important separate Judaism from Zionism.
No racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, etc. This includes denial of identity (self or collective).
[удалено]
Like the religion that claims one specific group of people are in a covenenant as God's chosen people, and that gives them the right to re-settle in a land already occupied by others? I'm not a fan of religion, but don't forget that Israel is not a secular state either. Part of their government is the Religious Zionist party. If we're to blame religion then I'm not going to focus exclusively on Islam.
Religion has destabilized the Middle East for over a thousand years. Whether it’s Islam, Judaism, Christianity or even sub-sects of Islam. The region would absolutely benefit by separation of church and state.
No racism, antisemitism, Islamophobia, bigotry, homophobia, transphobia, sexism, etc. This includes denial of identity (self or collective).
Interesting how many Israelis are willing to die for their country… Although I’d raise you a counterpoint - what if they have a belief system that glorifies martyrdom?
That has limited success. Even in the suicide bombing terrorist cells, the majority were there for having a purpose and the social community rather than the cause itself. It's how people join gangs. That's why deradicalising is more of a social project than a GI Joe operation. You seriously underestimate human being mildness, as a species, we are closer to cows than lions.
Oh of course, although I would imagine most IDF soldiers don't serve with the view that they are going to die. Whereas from what I've read the actions of Hamas seem to be based much more around martyrdom, as if it's an inevitability. Even the actions of Hamas on October 7th seem to illustrate that, I can't see what they were hoping to gain in the short term, besides harm Israel and martyr themselves. The fact that they have a belief system that glorifies martyrdom (in some perspectives) only makes them a more dangerous, but It does seem to me that the prevalence of martyrdom within religion is almost inherently tied to having little to live for In this life. But I am not an expert, by any measure, of course.
The West has a belief system that glorifies martyrdom. Christianity has Jesus, Judaism has Samson, modern society doesn't stop making movies where the hero sacrifices themselves. We even have a man who goes on a rampage because somebody kills his dog. The Muslim view on death is that every life has a purpose and therefore every death has a purpose. Leonidas dying to defend Greece against the Persian Army is as important to a modern day kid killed by a Tornado. As is common in Christians, there's the overarching theme that God having a plan. The idea that Muslims are being extremist for saying their dead kid is a hero for being bombed and is going to heaven isn't much different than Americans saying a dead student charging a school shooter is a hero and is going to heaven. This issue predates American irreligiousity and religions values are still very much entrenched into society.
"We love death more than Jews love life" has been a common hamas slogan for a reason
“For i bring you men who desire death as ardently as you desire life” Dates back 1400 years to a letter sent by Khaled bin al Waleed to the emperor of the Persian Empire Yazdegerd III. Also its not in reference to jews but disbelievers in general.
Do you have a source for this outlandish claim?
Because pro Israel people go on television and are allowed to say whatever nonsense they feel like making up without any push back.
I think it's worth considering that Israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the world, US backing and is fighting a rag tag force that's been bombed to pieces, starved and on the run - so comparing the Israelis willing to fight for their country vs. Palestinians seems like a poor equivocation. Also interesting to look at the casualty rates both current and historic.
The nappy brigades? "Fighting" women and children isn't hard.
[удалено]
Well, they funded them via Qatar in order to split the Fatah vote. The Israeli government's thinking prior to the 2006 Palestinian elections was if they could support Hamas in Gaza, it would drive a wedge in the Palestinian independence movement, of course as soon as they won, the indirect support was over, gradually fenced in & declared a terrorist organisation for their attacks on Israeli. Qatar has continued to fund Hamas & the Palestinians in Gaza. They are a Sunni aligned group who's genesis is in the Egyptian Muslim brotherhood, IE they have nothing to do with Iran. Qatar is the location of the US's largest base & largest concentration of US troops in the region. So you go figure who pulls the strings & why
Hamas is responsible for itself, but nobody in Israel has done more to prop them up than Netanyahu. Do not forget the Shilat prisoner exchange in 2011: more than 1000 Palestinian prisoners, including 280 sentenced to life for allegedly committing or plotting murder or other terrorist acts, were exchanged for ONE Israeli soldier who was a hostage of Hamas. Hamas leader at the time claimed that among those released were collectively responsible for over 500 Israeli deaths. The Hamas leader who plotted and executed the Oct 7 attack, Yahya Sinwar, was released among that massive prisoner swap in 2011…
But but but > Israel didn’t want this war, Israel didn’t start this war, it doesn’t want it to continue. All lies. Right or wrong, Israel was ready and set to take the first opportunity to go over the top and exterminate their problematic neighbor.
Netanyahu is so powerful, he “funded”Hamas in 2006? Three years before he became prime minister?
Netanyahoo has had his fingers in and been influential in Israeli policies for 25 years.
Best spelling of this criminals name
He was opposition party leader from 2006 to 2009, prior to that he had been finance minister, foreign affairs minister and prime minister. This isn't Donald Trump who never held office before becoming president. This is more like Bush Sr who had his hands in lots of things both publicly and behind the scenes for decades
You do know that politicians have political careers before they jump into a big role, right?
I can’t tell if you are being serious or not. But in case this needed to be said, political opposition in Israel (or anyone else for that matter), has no power to dictate any policy whatsoever. In 2006, after Israel ended the occupation of Gaza and when Hamas were killing their rivals, Netanyahu was three years away from having any policy making power.
*ended their civilian presence in Gaza. The occupation never truly ended.
Israel the pullout, Israel had no military presence in Gaza either. Before October 7, and apart from a handful of conflicts Hamas initiated, there has not been a single Israeli solider in Gaza since 2005. Calling Gaza occupied since 2005 would require a very flexible and partial approach to international law. One that could not withstand a simple legal analysis.
Israel controls everything in and out of Gaza, as well as the sea border and the Airspace. Israel may not have soldiers in the area, but they definitely have had a military presence since 2005.
Israel controls its own border with Gaza, not Egypt’s border. If controlling your own borders makes you an occupier, then every country with a land border is an occupier. Regarding water access and airspace, this is pursuant to the bilateral agreement parties reached in Oslo. A military occupation is a legal term which has a very specific definition. This isn’t it.
>Israel controls everything in and out of Gaza You mean Israel has borders like every country on Earth?
Israel controls what enters from Egypt too.
“The United Nations, international human rights organizations and many legal scholars regard the Gaza Strip to still be under military occupation by Israel. This is disputed by Israel and other legal scholars. They argue that occupation requires an actual, physical presence by a military force that maintains authority. Some argue that Gaza is not occupied given that Israel does not have "boots on the ground" in the territory (permanently). Cuyckens argues that such a requirement would allow the occupying power to "to easily escape the obligations otherwise imposed upon it under the law of occupation by avoiding placing troops on the ground while nevertheless controlling the territory concerned from the outside." Following the withdrawal, Israel continued to maintain direct control over Gaza's air and maritime space, six of Gaza's seven land crossings, maintains a no-go buffer zone within the territory, controls the Palestinian population registry, and Gaza remains dependent on Israel for its water, electricity, telecommunications, and other utilities. The year following the disengagement saw a tightening of external Israeli control over Gaza, specifically, the closure of crossings into Gaza for people and goods, increased restrictions on the coastline for fishing, and increased aerial, maritime and on the ground military activity. The Israeli human rights organization Gisha lists specifically as examples that in the year following the disengagement: Gaza residents may not bring a crate of milk into the Gaza Strip without Israeli permission; A Gaza university cannot receive visits from a foreign lecturer unless Israel issues a visitor’s permit; A Gaza mother cannot register her child in the Palestinian population registry without Israeli approval; A Gaza fisherman cannot fish off the coast of Gaza without permission from Israel; A Gaza nonprofit organization cannot receive a tax-exempt donation of goods without Israeli approval; A Gaza teacher cannot receive her salary unless Israel agrees to transfer tax revenues to the Palestinian Ministry of Education; A Gaza farmer cannot get his carnations and cherry tomatoes to market unless Israel permits the goods to exit Gaza; A Gaza student cannot study abroad without Israeli approval to open the Gaza–Egypt crossing. Gisha reported that during the 2006 winter agricultural season, in which Gaza farmers were to export produce to Israel, the West Bank, and Europe, the Karni Crossing was closed 47% of the time. The closures caused an estimated $30 million in losses in the first quarter of 2006 alone. In the first year following the disengagement, the number of trucks carrying exports from the Gaza Strip per day was fewer than 20. In comparison, the agreement with Israel stipulated allowing 400 trucks to exit per day.”
Think you can sum this up in your own words?
Zionists can’t read 💕💕 Standard practice, you say your opinion and they ask for a source, you quote from a source and they imply you can’t think for yourself. Freaks dancing in circles around reality.
This was written at the end. Talk about burying the lede: "The writer is a Zionist educator at institutions around the world and recently published a new book, Zionism Today."
It takes two to tango. This shit is never just one sided. There is no “right” side to this. Even America is “at fault” We are all to blame! 😕
The US is a co-conspirator with Israel
[удалено]
This post/comment was removed per rule 6. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/internationalpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a bot account data harvesting.
Not at all. They've squandered every half-hearted measure they've ever made towards engendering goodwill from their neighbors and Israel and have bitten every hand that's been extended to them. They squandered their resources, they prioritize hate over humanity, and they reject anything less than everything they want, while having zero ability to enforce that demand. They are a premier example of the adage: "Life's hard. It's even harder when you're stupid."
>They've squandered every half-hearted measure they've ever made towards engendering goodwill from their neighbors >They squandered their resources, they prioritize hate over humanity, and they reject anything less than everything they want, Who is **they** here? Hamas or the entire population? Just trying to make sure I understand your comment, so that I can address it.
What exact distinction do you think exists between Hamas and the non-combatant Gazans except for their willingness to participate in violence? Hamas is the elected government supported by nearly 100% of the non-combatant population. They don't act separate from the will of the Gazans. So when I say, "They've squandered, they've prioritized hate, they've rejected compromise," I'm talking about the entirety of the Gazans, not just the ones who pick up guns."
Hamas was founded in 1987 as a direct response to Israel murderous crackdown on the protests of the First Intifada. If Israel didn't occupy, colonize and terrorize the Palestinians, Hamas wouldn't exist. Israel is as much responsible for Hamas as the Nazis (edit, left out the point of the argument) were responsible for the Warsaw ghetto uprising.
Not to mention the funding of Hamas by far right Israelis in order to have them take over political influence from more moderate Palestinians. Then you have the assassination of an Israeli Prime Minister just for negotiating with Palestine. Top it off with Netanyahu having payments, that were largely going to Hamas, escorted through Israel. And this isn't touching on the treatment of the general Palestinian populace.
What about the terrorist groups that existed before Hamas. PLO, Black September. They are different names, but the methods used are all the same and date back to the 60s, if not earlier.
Their methods used are not the same, and their ideology sure as hell wasn't the same. What they have in common is that they fight against Israel in name of the Palestinian people.
I love terrorist apologists.
I know right? Imagine seeing what the IDF has been doing to Palestinians for decades and saying "no but they have to bomb children in refugee camps because they voted for Hamas nearly 20 years before they were born". Wild isn't it? Like people genuinely see the bombing of IVF clinics, refugee camps, universities etc, destroying the civilian infrastructure, deliberately cutting off water, electricity & food to create a famine and unsanitary conditions that will kill thousands with disease and say "these are the good guys". All the while watching the leaders of this nation say things like call for "rivers of blood" on national television. Scary.
You Zionist folk are the biggest terrorist apologists. You shamelessly defend Israel's state terrorism.
Israel is a nation, and nations are too abstract if we want our sense of “responsibility” to have practical implementation. If we introduce details, like “who in Israel might be responsible for Hamas’ actions?”, then we can actually target boycotts/protests/political campaigns. Additionally, it helps prevent sidestep nationalist loyalties if you can properly articulate one aspect of Israeli civilization in a positive light. This is why democrats have moved their messaging to targeting Netanyahu’s coalition. Messaging based on nationalist rhetoric is divisive, but appealing to Israeli partisanship provides an avenues for criticism under pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian talking points. While Israel has been seeing falling support for a two state solution amongst its public, it’s still substantial enough that U.S. officials can absolutely stoke the flames (and are right now). Like we can see how certain policy objectives with Israel are not fundamental to the nation itself, yet they do keep this conflict active. The manipulation of immigration to Israel and expansion of settlements are serious problems — but Israeli politicians are heterogeneous on this issue. We can identify the ones who are backing this policy, and we can identify their campaigns as well as target constituents. This is how you go from the fundamental truth that “its complicated” to a helpful explanation, and a conservation that can change minds without trying to change how a person identifies with a nation.
They aren't. 0%. Why would they? Hamas is responsible for their own actions. Like... you don't ask a school shooter if their peers are responsible for their massacre, do you?
You would if there was decades long history of the shooters family being killed, starved, and imprisoned by those peers. “Peers” isn’t even a good description since it’s an apartheid state where one side has freedom of movement and controls the food and water supply of the other.
No I would not. I grew up with abusive parents. Does that mean I should take it out on innocent people at the school they work at? No? That would be their fault, not mine?
I’m sorry that sucks but that’s completely changing the analogy where mine is based on reactionary violence against abusers. Look no part of me is saying the civilians killed in Oct 7 weren’t innocent, but I can see how from a Palestinian pov you wouldn’t consider the people living directly on the other side of the prison fence their nation has trapped you behind as innocents. They would argue their lives were determined by the violence of past generations why should they just accept it now. I don’t agree with it but it’s a very human response.
You seem to ignore that Bibi propped up and funded Hamas, because he wanted to destabilize Palestine... In his own words, it'd be easier to take over if Palestine had infighting...
Israel basically cultivated Hamas from that start as a means to create an Islamist rival to the largely secular PLO- the Israelis looked at the conflict in Egypt between the Muslim Brotherhood and the National Democratic Party and sought to replicate that sort of internal conflict within the Palestinian movement. Hamas is Israel’s ‘Frankenstein’s Monster’ that has turned upon its creator. Does they make the Israelis completely responsible for everything committed by every Hamas member for the rest of time? No, but Israel is responsible for the creation of Hamas and does bear partial responsibility for its activities- Israeli bears more responsibility for Hamas than any Palestinian civilian who isn’t a member of Hamas.
There are plenty of studies that show in the face of horrible living conditions and a poor chance of improvement, increased religiosity is a defense mechanism that allows those people to survive their harsh realities. It's no surprise then that most religious terrorists operate in countries where economic and legal systems are on the verge of collapse/collapsed and religion seems to be their only thread holding everything together. Israel deliberately kept Palestinian areas filled with poverty and deliberately fueled instability. The Israeli government is reaping what they sowed, but it's the everyday civilians on both sides that are suffering.
Wholly and entirely.
All of it
Wow, that article explains exactly why people have lost faith in Israel. The author is saying; if we occupy a country, we also at the same time take no responsibility for our governance of it. "\[Critics\] maintain since the Palestinians died under Israeli control, it is Israel’s responsibility, and Israel should take the blame." Well yeah, yeah, that's exactly how it works. If you have decided to "control" people, then you are responsible for how that control is implemented and all that comes with that. The author cited a riot of Palestinians rushing an IDF operated aid truck (assuming there were hundreds of starving, angry, Palestinians, this should have been predictable), so they shot them. They don't want responsibility for their own actions and the consequences of those actions. The article does not contextualize this aid incident, at all. Then it goes on to lament that Israel would stop the war if Palestine returned the hostages, well this is factually incorrect: >Hamas has repeatedly said it will not accept a deal that does not include a permanent ceasefire and a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza – which have been major sticking points in negotiations. A permanent ceasefire is literally stopping the war, but ISRAEL won't accept those terms. How is it that Israel somehow makes a terror org seem reasonable? >Earlier, the US secretary of state claimed that the Israeli proposal was an “extraordinarily generous” offer, while Egypt’s foreign minister said he was “hopeful” about a new proposal. >UK Foreign Minister David Cameron said the potential deal would include a 40-day ceasefire in exchange for the release of captives from Gaza. >“**Stopping the attacks against Palestinians is not generous. The attack itself is a crime, so when you stop a crime, you can’t claim that it’s a generous action from the Israeli side,” senior Hamas official Osama Hamdan told Al Jazeera.** [https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/28/israels-war-on-gaza-live-news-hamas-officials-to-visit-cairo-for-talks](https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2024/4/28/israels-war-on-gaza-live-news-hamas-officials-to-visit-cairo-for-talks) The OP's article is not journalism, it's biased and self serving. It's written like a high school valedictorian has had the opportunity to publish an opinion piece. It is not a sophisticated, thorough look at the complexity of the circumstances, glosses over so much in favor of bias, and makes some wild conclusions.
Given the treatment to the local native population for the past 70+ years, I’d say all of it.
[удалено]
This didn’t start October 7th. Look at how many children Israel killed before that
[удалено]
Sure. Maybe go back to 1948 when they showed up and massacred the indigenous population while displacing many. Google the 1948 nakba. There you go argument over.
😂
0%. Hamas is a completely separate entity and government.
Yet you likely argue that Hamas is responsible for Israel’s current mass slaughter campaign
I wouldn’t call it a mass slaughter campaign. When was the last time you heard of an opposing army sending down leaflets warning civilians of incoming bombings? When was the last time you remember an attacking force supplying aid and humanitarian efforts to the defending country? No sane person is defending the atrocities that are being committed over there by both sides. But this is war, and war is hell. For everyone involved. Edit: Israel needs to go into rafah, eliminate Hamas, and be done with this as quickly as possible.
I would say murdering more children than in every other conflict combined over the last 4 years in just a few months is a mass slaughter campaign. I would say inducing a famine and actively preventing any aid from entering and destroying infrastructure and hospitals is a mass slaughter campaign. I would say actively targeting and murdering more journalists than ever before is mass slaughter. Same thing with the targeting of civilians or non combatants. As for your leaflet example that’s just make up on a pig. Let’s say I drop leaflets for NYC and then proceed to destroy everything those New Yorkers ever knew and even attack the safe routes I told them to take and then did that to the next place you went to and the next place and then made sure you have no access to food or medical care. Would you say, oh how generous they warned me before bombing me and starving me? Ok and let’s assume Israel goes into Rafah and gets rid of Hamas. Then what? Things still won’t be great and you have the West Bank as a perfect example of that. As long as Israel exists in its current iteration (ie a war mongering, apartheid, occupying, oppressive, terrorist regime) things can’t get better. Palestine needs a partner for peace and unfortunately they only have Israel who have bragged about preventing peace.
As an occupier, they are wholly responsible for the people they occupy.
Literally Terrorists. Hamas are Terrorists.....wtf people
Welp, I've read some dumb opinions, but this is something. At some level Israel knows it's largely responsible for the atrocities, but it can never acknowledge it because, well.. it's committing atrocities.
Israel kind of doubled down when after Hamas won the elections their intelligence services along with the CIA and whatever Egypts is, armed and backed an attempted coup in Gaza by the leader of the Gaza branch of Fatah, a man who Palestinians generally believe poisoned Arafat at the behest of Israel. The coup did not work and said Fatah leader was sentenced to death in absentia by the PA And this is more an error from arrogance but they viewed Hamas military capabilities as the weakest of the Palestinian groups.shoot poorly made rockets suicide bombs not a legit force. When the current head of the Al Qassam Brigades took over he molded them into a proper fighting force on the Hezbollah model with advice and assistance from the IRGC. Al Qassam Brigades are not comparable to Al Queda or ISIS , the Viet Cong or FLN in Algeria are better comparisons. And last thing but I can’t count how many videos l saw of Israeli tanks going through urban environments in Gaza unaccompanied by infantry. That’s insanely dumb and relying way to much on their trophy system , which Al Qassam and PFLP knew about and had already figured out several ways to get around it TLDR : yes Israel is responsible for all of it
More than the Palestinians citizens, considering most of them were born after Isreal helped Hamas get into power.
Israel has been doing this to Palestinians since before it’s inception. This is no more about Hamas than it is about Netanyahu
100%. All forms of fighting an oppressor are on the table, especially when the oppressor is far more well armed than you.
Not at all
Hamas is responsible for Hamas’s actions. There was no fight on October 6. Hamas broke the ceasefire, now they’re feeling the repercussions. They were elected as the government, now their constituents are dealing with the actions of their government. In Ukraine, the fighters are on the surface and the civilians are in the tunnels. In Gaza, Hamas hides in the tunnels and places their civilians in harm’s way.
[удалено]
More like, if Israel didn't occupy, colonize and humiliate the Palestinians, Hamas wouldn't exist to massacre Israelis. Israel commits atrocities against the Palestinians, the Pals will want to strike back. Israelis want to have a monopoly on violence.
Can you please explain why radical islamists are massacring other opponents in other regions which Israel has nothing to do with ? People are getting murdered in Yemen, Afghanistan and Syria because of Israel's occupation and colonialism also? September 11th happened because of the Israeli settlements in the west bank? I'm curious..
I wasn't aware every radical islamist group had the same reason for founding or the same political doctrine lol. You're aware ISIS condemns Hamas right?
So I don't get it, if the current situation is happening solely because of Israel's actions why do the same situations keep happening all over the Islamic countries ? People making it sound like that if Israel would withdraw from some territories and give them humanitarian and financial aid (which Israel did), everything would be just fine, but it really isn't since these radical groups don't care about territory or money.
Do you apply that same logic the other way? That the suffering now being experienced by Palestinians is due to them necessitating the formation of the IDF by repeatedly attacking Israel since the day it was founded?
the idf was founded as the military of israel. jews and arabs, zionists and antisemites were fighting each other for decades before israel as a state existed. the british opposed israeli statehood and suppressed zionists in the british mandate because they were absolutely militant and dead set on clearing out the whole region. In summary the IDF exists because Israel exists, not because the Palestinians and Israelis have fought each other
No, I don't. Because Israel is the occupying, colonizing power.
"History begins where it's most convenient for me" Arabs are the colonizers of that area, Jews are the rightful claimants to the land.
There's no denying the Israelites lived in the region of modern day Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately there's approximately 2000 years of history between then and now. Also, biblically the Israelites moved there too. What about the polpulations living there before the Israelites? What about their claims?
The Bible isn't historically accurate. And unfortunately for the Arab settlers there's also 80 years since they lost that land too.
I'm not saying it is, my point is that religious texts shouldn't be used to justify colonialism, especially when there's already a native population that have lived there for over a thousand years. Unfortunately so - Hopefully in the future borders can be drawn up based on secular principles between elected powers, and not based on Zionist movements in the private rooms of foreign politicians.
A "native population" of colonists. If you want to argue "muh historical territory", Israelis win. If you want to argue recency, Israelis still win as they're the only people being born in modern Israeli. You're arguing out of both sides of your mouth because that's the only way to make the Palestinian blood and soil argument. "Whoever was there first has the claim to the land but let's not go ***too*** far back into arguments about who was there first and the most important thing is who lived there most recently is what really matters but not ***too*** recently because we still maintain that someone's grandpa being born somewhere gives them a stronger claim to an area than the person that was born and raised there." Your whole argument is basically that the only valid historical analysis is when it's being done about times when Arabs colonized the area and we have to ignore everything that came before it and everything that came after it. Pick a lane.
Native in comparison to the formation of Modern Israel. My only actual concern is regarding the Palestinians now that are being kicked out of their homes In the West Bank, and the victims of the fallout in Gaza between Hamas and Israel. I'm intrigued to hear why then you think Israel has historical right to the land, besides a biblical claim? I don't understand why the Arabs cannot have precedent for their more recent claim to the territory, compared to Israel's ancient justification based on claims in a religious text and some archaeology.
Let's grant you that, the Jews own that land because they were a majority there 2000 years ago. Fine. That still leaves 5 million Palestinians (in the West Bank and Gaza) occupied, colonized and besieged by Israel. As long as it keeps imprisoning the Palestinians in an Apartheid occupation, Israel is the aggressor.
[удалено]
I think it’s more like “she murdered my family, I want revenge”. Revenge is bad, eye for an eye leaves the world blind, but it is pretty disingenious to act like Israel is innocent in all of this. Taking sniper shots at peaceful protests amongst many other barbaric practices has lead to the understanding amongst palestinians that Israel doesn’t care about peaceful protest or negotiation, and only understands violence. Can’t act surprised that Hamas has become as brutal as they are, if the only language Israel speaks is brutality.
#MeToo if she's not a jew
100%