This is deeply ahistorical. The concept of martyrdom wasn’t deeply embedded in German culture, but the concept of volk was, and it was a concept that both enabled Hitler and made it very difficult for many Germans to accept outside rule.
Nevertheless, we persisted.
not it’s not a codeword…it’s a fact.
“Islamophobia” is a nice buzzword, and is appropriate for use in America.But it is not appropriate in Israel (In America, houses are not built with bomb shelters. In Israel, we are not so lucky)
A phobia is an irrational fear, of a danger which does not exist.
The danger of Hamas missiles is real.
This is definitely true. Even so, if they stopped murdering civilians, it’d go a long way toward cleaning up their image. They wouldn’t be great, but they wouldn’t be the monsters we know.
The IDF does what it can to minimize civilian casualties. But “what it can” does not include ignoring Hamas, nor does it include completely preventing civilian casualties.
If you have a better plan for responding to Hamas attacks then please, do share it. But so far all I hear is “Well, Israel doesn’t have to respond to terrorist attacks from Hamas” which is absolutely ridiculous.
Only of you ignore repeated explanations that the elimination of Hamas requires the construction of something else to replace it.
Nope! It means the construction of something else to replace Hamas.
Nope! It means the construction of something else to replace Hamas.
Nope! It means the construction of something else to replace Hamas.
Nope! It means the construction of something else to replace Hamas.
Nope! It means the construction of something else to replace Hamas.
As I hope is now clear, it is not the former.
After we completely defeated Germany, removed ALL of its armed forces, yes the volk was able to accept a change to their culture. And the Japanese accepted an even more difficult (for them) change to their culture,to the point that they were not allowed to have an army.
In the current war, among all the people calling for Israel to stop defending itself and commit to a ceasefire–is there ANYBODY who is even hinting that Hamas must completely disarm?
Israel already takes great care in engagement with civilians. If they didn’t, they could have simply flattened Gaza and everyone inside a decade ago. There’s this narrative that Israel doesn’t care about civilian casualties but if that was true Israel would behave like Hamas does, lobbing explosives into Gaza indiscriminately. Despite Hamas sources screaming that this is exactly what Israel does, that has never been the case.
I get what you’re saying, and this isn’t a rhetorical question; I don’t know of any wartime government since the dawn of modern warfare that has actually adopted the second side’s philosophy. Can you name any? I’m sincerely asking.
Hamas is the government in Gaza. Part of the criticism that Bibi got for allegedly propping up Hamas is due to the fact that Israel provided Hamas with water, electricity, gas, and food to distribute to Palestinians which helped them gain legitimacy.
What you propose is literally the thing Netanyahu has done for years that have caused some to accuse him of purposefully building up Hamas.
The culture of the German people caused them to industrialize genocide on a scale never before seen in history. It also caused them to reject defeat after World War 1 and seek another round. And at the end of the war the culture of the Germans caused them to scrape together elderly men and children to use as front line soldiers.
That is a racist argument that should be condemned. The Gazans, like the Germans and the Israelis, are human beings who are capable of rational choices.
As Israel goes after Hamas in Gaza, settlers are ramping up brutal attacks (including murders) of Palestinians in the West Bank.
Reading and thinking about this leads me to suggest that if Israeli leaders don’t prioritize stopping this and protecting those Palestinians, wiping out Hamas won’t matter. It won’t make any difference to Israeli security beyond, maybe, the very short term. It’s these kinds of policies and decisions that lead me to believe that this Israeli government is incapable of achieving any success in Gaza, or in anything, for that matter.
It’s awfully hard to even consider supporting Israeli actions in Gaza when their leaders don’t seem to put even minimal effort in protecting Palestinians in the West Bank. How can we trust that they’ll protect Gazans when they’re not even trying to protect Palestinians?
Of course Gazans are human beings capable of rational choices.
So were the Germans…but only after:
1.being totally defeated in battle and
2.being forced to lay down ALL their arms, and
3.being forced to submit to a new government created by democratic countries.
None of those 3 conditions are even on the table for discussion among the people calling for Israel to surrender.
There is nothing racist about it.
Germany was capable of changing its culture.
Gaza is not. (unless these conditions are forced on them.)
But if you increase it a hundred-fold see, it would be like trying to drink from a fire hose and Hamas wouldn’t be able to take it all! So the civilians will get it! Or something.
I don’t know if the people who say Israel needs to supply tons more stuff are unaware of how much Israel already provides (and how much is stolen by Hamas) or if they are aware but are applying the sort of logic you joke about there, but either way it doesn’t make sense.
But that’s not about German or Gazan culture, that’s about those places being under authoritarian and warmongering rulers. The militaristic German culture was purposefully nurtured by the Nazis, and with the Nazis defeated and the forces that imposed that culture gone it simply went away.
In the Gazan context, that means removing Hamas and preventing Iranian sponsored militants from taking control again.
Wow, this is a hard thread to catch up with.
So did I.
I think the point that’s there to be made – although I agree that it isn’t always made clearly – is that the chances that any given surviving resident of Israel personally knows at least one person who was killed, injured, kidnapped, or has an immediate family member who was killed, injured, kidnapped in the original attack by Hamas is a whole lot greater than the chance that any given person who was resident in the United States on 9/11 personally knew anyone directly affected by that attack.
We generally expect people to react differently when they personally know the people involved. There’s a much higher percentage of the population of Israel in that category than there were of the population of the USA on 9/11. And look what the USA did – among other things, we attacked the wrong country entirely; and we certainly killed a whole lot of people, including both civilians and quite a lot of draftees with no choice in the matter.
I think that may at this point be the view of quite a few in Israel.
As you say – right or wrong. I would say: wrong, but at least some of it may be necessary: not as being right, but as being the least wrong thing.
I’m not in a position to be able to determine which specific actions I’d conclude come into that category; because I’m not a military strategist, because I don’t know the details of the military capacities of any of the sides, because I don’t know the details of the tunnel network. But I do hope, as Babale said, that Israel would for once be held to the standard of other nations on the planet.
Well, yes. That’s exactly the problem. Hamas are also the ones with the fuel supplies that are desperately needed by hospitals and water suppliers – which they are keeping for themselves with the aid of those guns, and using to fuel rockets to fire at Israeli civilians.
Gaza is under occupation, yes – by Hamas. This has occured, over the past decades, with the aid of both Israel and Egypt. Only one of which ever seems to get blamed for it; and it’s the one that would have been at far greater risk from further opening the border.
That’s in large part because the police are expected to have a reasonable chance of catching and arresting the shooter before the shooter mows down another batch of people; and another; and another.
In this case, the police in the area in question are Hamas. The situations aren’t equivalent.
This is unfortunately true. There’s a very nasty negative loop going on in that area; and has been for a long time.
This is very likely also true.
And a withdrawal on the part of Israel before a whole lot more of Hamas has been destroyed (I doubt they’re going to get quite everybody) will definitely be perceived as a win for Hamas; at least, for those most likely to get recruited.
Quite possibly it is.
War is hell.
Sometimes not having one is also hell.
Humans are fucked up. And, very often, fucked over.
Yup. And the Iron Dome can hardly be expected to hold forever; and, as has just been bloodily demonstrated, has vulnerabilities.
The choice isn’t between civilians dying and no civilians dying. Civilians are going to die, whether Israel does anything or not. I think more civilians will die, though probably not quite as soon, if Israel doesn’t do anything.
I very much agree that Israel badly needs a plan for doing something different about Gaza after this is at least temporarily over – and I don’t mean a plan for throwing everybody out of it. I’ve seen occasional references in the news to the possibility that they’re working on it. But they’re going to need at least some cooperation from other countries, Egypt included. I very much hope that they get it; and that the survivors of this current mess do wind up with another way out of it other than doing the same thing over again every few years, and very likely worse each time.
Not quite sure what you’re saying here: but Hamas has been deliberately targeting civilians. Israel has been targeting Hamas even when they’re in the middle of civilians. There is no side here that isn’t killing civilians. There is one side that’s deliberately trying to, and that’s Hamas.
It certainly isn’t of mine; and I don’t think it’s an accurate characterization of the views of anybody in this thread.
I will criticize the Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory during at least the last couple of decades up, down, and sideways. If it turns out, after the dust settles, that Israeli forces deliberately targeted civilians in locations where they knew Hamas was not present, or killed civilians in locations in which Hamas was present but in which they could have killed Hamas without killing the civilians, I will criticize that up, down, and sideways. If it turns out, after the dust settles, that Israel then intends to drive all the Palestinians out of Gaza, or to proceed to pen them in even tighter while actively preventing any opening of the border with Egypt, or even to flail around doing nothing in particular while Egypt continues to hold the lid on that pressure cooker, I will criticize that up, down, and sideways.
I don’t have it in me to criticize them for deciding that in the long run fewer civilians will die if they proceed to do their best to remove Hamas as an effective power. I am not in a position, and I really don’t think anybody in this thread is in a position, to determine what, exactly, they need to do in order to accomplish that.
My bolding.
I absolutely agree with you. But it will require the 3 conditions I listed above.
And it is deeply painful that NOBODY in the western world is willing to say so.
.
I agree that Hamas must be destroyed. I will quibble on point 3. I doubt a Western backed government would ever succeed in the near term. I think a constructed friendly government is not going to happen. A local, pragmatic regime is the more realistic path.
It is not. Netanyahu, in your words, “provided Hamas with water, electricity, gas, and food to distribute.” I am proposing that Israel, in my words, “attack the shit out of Hamas…[and] increase the amount of aid going into Gaza a hundredfold.” To be even clearer, I believe Israel should distribute the aid as part of “an international effort to rebuild Gaza”, and that this international effort should specifically exclude Hamas from any involvement (since Israel will be attacking the shit out of Hamas, not partnering with them in any way).
This is frustrating, @Babale. I specifically talked about the construction of something else to replace it. I know you realize that; but there seem to be posters in this thread who are not cleaar on it, including, I believe, @Riemann in the post I was responding to.
My position is that in the past month they have been taking insufficient care. I believe the facts bear this out.
Or something. Dude, that’s not productive.
The question isn’t how much they provide; the question is whether they’re providing, with international support and excluding Hamas, sufficient for the needs of Gazans. They aren’t. I think we’re in agreement on the need for massive rebuilding; but I think the needs are starting like three weeks ago, not after the war is won.
So this is a place where I think I’m in disagreement with other folks. When talking about killing civilians, the operative adverb, morally speaking, isn’t “deliberately”: it’s “predictably.” A civilian who’s killed by being deliberately targeted is no deader than one who’s killed as a tragic byproduct of a military strike. The warrior who deliberately kills a civilian, and the warrior who predictably kills a civilian, aren’t committing distinctive acts.
In either case, perhaps the ends justify the means. But the acts aren’t morally different.
Nobody in the western world is willing to say that Hamas must be totally defeated in battle and forced to lay down all their arms and be forced to submit to a new government? Is that seriously your claim? Or is it your claim that I should replace “Hamas” with “Palestinians” in the part about being totally defeated in battle?
Nation building is hard as hell. Iraq’s a great demonstration of that. But so is the Marshall Plan. I don’t see an alternative to an interim government by outsiders, except for alternatives that result in much greater bloodshed.
Clear on what? I have no idea what you are talking about.
Wouldn’t this require Israel to occupy Gaza first so that they can be the ones distributing the goods instead of Hamas, then? And how do you propose that come about without first invading Gaza and securing at least parts of it?
I very much hope that this is part of the current invasion plan. I think that would be a fantastic way to turn the war into something productive. But that’s not something Israel could be doing now, instead of bombing Hamas. That’s something they can do after Hamas’ main forces are defeated and they lose control of the Gaza strip, in the counterinsurgency stage of the conflict.
How does Hamas get cut out of the process? They currently rule the Gaza strip. Israel can’t send aid workers into Gaza to distribute aid until they eliminate Hamas, at least in a specific area.
I disagree that nobody is saying this, I’ve been pretty happy with Biden’s response. There’s nothing wrong with throwing out a “all due care to eliminate civilian casualties must be taken” even if I do believe that Israel is already doing this.
What’s meant by “removing Hamas” or “eliminating Hamas.” I may have confused you with another poster, and if so, my apologies; the thread is moving quickly.