Well, Hamas is the armed wing of the Palestinian people. Adding in a bunch of unarmed Palestinians isn’t going to add to their military strength. And force of arms is how the question of “first dibs” is settled in these kinds of matters. It’s not like the Israelis are all going to walk into the ocean because some international court or the UN or whoever issues a ruling in favor of the Palestinians. A one Palestinian state solution would by necessity require a genocide against the Israelis, and I suspect that isn’t something the Israelis are going to just let happen.
ETA. To bring it back to the question of the protests, that’s why I don’t support them. They ignore the fact that a Palestinian victory would come with a genocide against the Israelis. There’s no way around that unless Hamas all of a sudden becomes peaceful, and so har they have shown no inclination of even considering that.
Hamas is the government of GAZA. Hamas is NOT the government of the West Bank, which is another group of Palestinians, the Palestinian National Authority. The two groups are not friends since Hamas attempted to kill off the PNA.
As for elected… yes. Once. In 2006. Literally half the people living in Gaza weren’t even born yet when that took place. How “elected” it is at this point is highly debatable as they never held elections after that and seem to have absolutely zero intention of ever doing so.
Of course, a look at the map seems to indicate that the rest of Israel is downwind of Gaza so nuking it would seem to be counter-productive if you had any intension of wanting to live in the area afterwards.
It is a serious answer, and it has nothing to do with dibs.
If there’s going to be just one state, it’s gonna be Israel, because there are millions of Israelis who aren’t going anywhere willingly, and they have a powerful military and, yes, nuclear weapons - so you aren’t gonna make them.
Once we establish that reality, we can talk about a two state solution.
Yep, it is outside agitators doing most of the bad stuff, not students.
It does, absolutely.
Well, yes. Once, in Gaza. But Hamas has not allowed any free elections since.
Yeah. I do think those polls are a bit suspect, as people would be afraid if they said “NO!” some Hamas terrorist would do very bad things to them and their family. But the people do seem somewhat supportive, certainly.
Israel has a real democratic government. The people are doing well. Israel has done wonders. They also- more to the point- have a modern, organized, disciplined , well equipped army . “God is on the side of the big battalions”.
The correct answer is a question - why should Israel enable the creation of another sovereign country on it’s borders that is likely to become little more than a staging ground for rocket and terrorist attacks?
Because it’s a nice gesture to the Palestinian people?
There are people outside of the middle east who hope for a single peaceful ecumenical country inhabited by both Israelis and Palestinians. I don’t think anyone in the middle east expects or wants that to happen. Both the Israelis and the Palestinians want a country controlled by and run for their own ethnic group.
If there’s just one of those, Israel’s military strength means it’s Israel. That’s what Babale means by that terse response.
That’s kinda what there is now, too. And it’s obviously not a stable, long-term solution. And it really sucks for the Palestinians. Which is why a two (or three) state solution is the aspiration of many. Because a two state solution, with two prosperous states that the residents hope to keep, really could be a stable solution.
I think we’ve learned over the past few decades that multiethnic/multidenominational states just don’t work in the Middle East. Look at Lebanon, look at Iraq, look at Syria. We had a taste of their type of religious and ethnic conflict on October 7, and we want none of that. The best solution is to establish two (or three) separate states and set up hard barriers between them, at least for the first few decades.
The Israeli public had been willing to entertain the concept, albeit reluctantly, under Rabin, Barak, Sharon and Olmert; even Netanyahu paid lip service to the Oslo Accords early in his career. The Palestinians never truly accepted a two-state solution, neither their leaders nor the public at large. Hopefully that will change some day - but that day won’t come so long as Hamas is in power.
And I get all this. My overriding concern and cynicism is with someone’s belief that “we deserve this land because we were here 3000 yrs ago”, combined with a possibly tenuous historiography, and an old book that’s either a bunch of old stories and/or a bunch of morality lessons and/or sort-of history. And the West didn’t do anybody any favours after WW I in the Paris peace talks when we divvied up the middle east and again after WW II.
So there’s an appalling and tragic history here with the continuing cycle of violence and nobody’s completely innocent here. What Hamas does and did, especially 7 Oct, is absolutely deplorable and unconscionable. But carpet bombing Gazan cities, and having roving bands of Israeli settlers beating up random, possibly innocent, Palestinians, and certainly doesn’t help either.
I fully support a two state solution but that’s never going to happen because of the intransigence of the likes of Hamas and Israeli ultra-orthodox and hard-liners. And I honestly don’t believe that either the Palestinians or the Israelis have exclusive rights to that chunk of land.
The land Modern Israel stands on was very much not empty when the Zionist movement showed up. The people who lived there for centuries are understandably pissed off about the situation. The Israelis saying “it was our all along!” are not helping because it hasn’t been theirs for something like 1700 or 1800 years.
The whole situation is eff’d up and I don’t know how to fix it. I do know that what people have been doing the last 80 years is not leading to peace and security for anyone in the region. I dunno, maybe it’s time to try something else, something new (what I can’t think of at the moment) because for damn sure continuing to do the same thing is only going to generate the same results: lots of dead and maimed people and destruction everywhere you look.
If Israelis and Palestinians can’t figure out how to live in peace, then what’s the point of the state of Israel? Only fanatics will want to stay in a place of perpetual violence. The rest will eventually leave. A fanatics-only Israel isn’t really Israel, or at the very least isn’t worth saving/protecting.
The idea is that you cannot actually use nuclear weapons, certainly not in a madman “we’ll kill everyone” global thermonuclear war or other suicidal scenario, but that their existence might deter someone from marching a couple dozen divisions into your territory, by ensuring peace talks supervene.
Many Israelis (and Palestinians!) have left the region; nobody is personally obligated to eat shit. That does not mean that everyone remaining is a fanatic; there are certainly anti-government protests.
Of course – I’m well aware that many, many Israelis (and Palestinians, of course) desire and are currently working for peace (hard as it is). I’m talking about long-term.
“Don’t be so gloomy. After all, it’s not that awful. Like the fella says, in Italy for 30 years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder, and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, and the Renaissance. In Switzerland they had brotherly love - they had 500 years of democracy and peace, and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.”
Harry Lime, The Third Man
The past year or so has been rough - one of the worst periods in my country’s history - but sooner or later, this too shall pass. Israel has faced perpetual violence on and off since its founding, and yet we’ve survived, thrived and prospered. As an Israeli saying goes, we got through Pharaoh, we’ll get through this. I have faith.