Let’s come back to this post on 1st January 2024.
So you believe the governing regime will be gone by then? Is that the leadership of Hamas both inside and outside Gaza? Will the ideology of the group be lost when the leaders are gone?
What makes someone representative of the ideology of Hamas as a whole? Mahmoud al-Zahar is a founding member of Hamas, even more senior than Khaled Mashal even if he hasn’t climbed as high in the ranks.
How does that work?
Al-Zahar was foreign minister for one year between 2006 and 2007. Mashal was the overall leader of Hamas for 14 years, from 2004 to 2017.
…the terrorist attacks of October 7th were horrific, and unacceptable, and the organization responsible for those attacks, Hamas, should no longer exist. The innocent Israeli people that died that day didn’t deserve this. Israel has a right to defend themselves from terrorists. They have the right to take the attack to them.
But Israel also has obligations under international law. And the siege and the indiscriminate bombings that have killed over 3000 children, 30 journalists, 70 UN workers, 9000 people in total so far, that has shut down Gaza’s only cancer ward, that is putting the lives of premature babies at risk, where an estimates 2000 people are still trapped under rubble, with an estimated 1 million people displaced, almost certainly breach those obligations, are not proportionate, and if they continue, will certainly reshape the politics of not only the Middle East, but the rest of the world.
The Palestinian people don’t deserve this. They MUST be protected. Israel has to comply with the laws of war and if they don’t, should be held to account.
Hear, hear!
The terrorist attacks of October 7th were horrific, and unacceptable, and the organization responsible for those attacks, Hamas, should no longer exist. The innocent Israeli people that died that day didn’t deserve this. Israel has a right to defend themselves from terrorists. They have the right to take the attack to them.
Hamas also has obligations under international law. And the deliberate placing of their military infrastructure within and under civilian homes, businesses, and hospitals, resulting in the deaths of over 3000 children, 30 journalists, 70 UN workers, 9000 people in total so far, that has shut down Gaza’s only cancer ward, that is putting the lives of premature babies at risk, where an estimates 2000 people are still trapped under rubble, with an estimated 1 million people displaced, are in breach of international law.
There, fixed that for you.
That’s one position he held with Hamas. Is it the only, or first, position he held?
Anyways, this is all irrelevant. As your quotes explain, Hamas’s goals are limited to Israel and Palestine. There are other ideologically aligned chapters of the greater movement meant to deal with other regions. Whether or not Hamas members view the death of all Jewish people worldwide as a worthy goal or not, it is a goal that is out of their scope.
It doesn’t even go that far. Hamas and its leaders could be completely on board with a worldwide genocide while thinking that this is a job for someone else.
Oh, our bad. We’ll just stand by and let the Justice League deal with Hamas without causing any civilian casualties, then.
…you didn’t fix anything.
Well…it is.
That’s a much more accurate summary. I swear, some people seem to think that Israel is bombing civilians just for fun. (Maybe they’re confusing the IDF with Hamas?).
I mean, we could make fun of your simplistic statements like “Hamas must be destroyed” too. But that wouldn’t really help the discussion.
Yeah, how silly of us to try and stop the terrorists with weapons rather than using the Power of Friendship or calling in a team of X-Men. What were we thinking?
You’re more than welcome to, if you want to defend the idea that there is a path to peace while Hamas is in control of the Gaza strip. That’s not in and of itself a crazy idea, although the events of Oct 7 have discredited it as a realistic possibility IMHO. But if you want to make that case, go ahead. Otherwise, I don’t see another option.
Ah, so now they have a kinder, gentler kind of Hamas. Good to know. I’d prefer a version that does not shoot Israeli babies to stop them crying.
By the way - I find it very interesting how careful you are to separate Palestinians from Hamas yet how sloppy you are about equivocating the worst fringes of Israeli society with Israelis as a whole, despite the fact that Hamas has far more control over Gazan society than Likud or Otzma Yehudit has over Israel.
If you’d said something like
Just an observation; this isnt the first time I’ve noticed this tendency, but I figured it was time to point it out.
If I had any confidence that Israel’s approach would be successful and lead to a more peaceful Israel and Middle East, I’d be willing to agree that war is hell and civilian deaths are sometimes a necessary part of victory.
But I don’t see any such outcome with the current path. It hasn’t worked for Israel (or the US) in the past, and it’s not going to work now. From here:
To defeat terrorist groups, it is crucial to engage in long campaigns of selective pressure, over years, not simply a month (or two, or three) of heavy ground operations, and to combine military operations with political solutions from early on.
Indeed, the very effort to finish off the terrorists in just a month or two militarily with little idea of the political outcome — as Israel appears to be doing now — is what ends up producing more terrorists than it kills.
The only way to create lasting damage to terrorists is to combine, typically in a long campaign of years, sustained selective attacks against identified terrorists with political operations that drive wedges between the terrorists and the local populations from which they come.
I suspect you think this is what Israel is doing, that this is a “selective attack”. I would disagree.
…it isn’t an accurate summary. Not when the evidence presented that “Hamas are placing their military infrastructure under hospitals” are as flimsy and ridiculous as this:
If Israel thinks that the Jabalia refugee camp was an acceptable target under the laws of war then they should make that case. Because the alleged presence of a single member of the Hamas leadership isn’t sufficient justification.
You have to do more than make CGI videos to justify targeting civilian infrastructure. This isn’t a Reddit debate, and the standards of evidence need to be higher than just the repeated talking points that you and Dorjan are using. You can’t justify war crimes via rhetorical recontextualisation.
I find your glib response to the atrocities that Israel is undertaking right now to be dismaying. I don’t understand it.
What you describe makes sense when fighting insurgency. Thise kinds of terrorists need to be isolated from their populace and destroyed in the fashion you show.
How exactly is that strategy supposed to work for Hamas, which rules over 2 million people as theor governing body?
Once Hamas is removed from power, a counterinsurgency campaign like you describe makes sense. But first Hamas has to be reduced to an insurgent terrorist group rather than a government running what is essentially a country of 2 million people.
While I find the way that you buy Hamas propaganda hook, line, and sinker and describe standard military operations as “atrocities” dismaying to me, and not something I will pretend to understand.
By doing better for the Palestinians than Hamas is. Instead, what Israel is doing is the opposite of driving a wedge between them.
I’m glad you find it very interesting.
Would you care to provide examples to help illustrate the point you’re trying to make?