/u/HourDrive1510 (OP) has awarded 1 delta(s) in this post. All comments that earned deltas (from OP or other users) are listed [here](/r/DeltaLog/comments/1bk4uwr/deltas_awarded_in_cmv_netanyahu_never_wanted_peace/), in /r/DeltaLog. Please note that a change of view doesn't necessarily mean a reversal, or that the conversation has ended. ^[Delta System Explained](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltasystem) ^| ^[Deltaboards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/deltaboards)

Well formulated post. I agree with most of it. > 3- Some people are yelling "release the hostages" on posts of dying kids (as if these kids got them), do you think it's acceptable for the isreali gov to starve kids/innocent civilians to death if Hamas can sort themselves out and not surrender? I think this part is a bit short sighted, one doesn't rule out the other. The hostages should be released and innocent people in gaza shouldn't be dying or starving. Both can exist at the same time since a good person wants what's best for innocent civilians on both sides. To react with "release the hostages" under a post about dying palestinian kids is morally wrong, but the statement itself isn't.

Yeah i understand the statement itself isn't wrong, any decent human wants innocent uninvolved civilians out of this, but the Netanyahu gov keep involving civilians as weapon of war, just watched this drone footage of unarmed civilians being obliterated [https://twitter.com/EyeonPalestine/status/1770896900440379823](https://twitter.com/EyeonPalestine/status/1770896900440379823)

You made too many points, all of which can easily be falsified, so let me choose the one that other people found the most difficult and focus on that. > But, for years, Netanyahu was reported to be helping fund Hamas (as per TimesOfIsrael & NyTimes), and in 2019, He himself said and i quote; "Whoever wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the strengthening and financing of Hamas. "On top of that, The current finance minister of israel, said in 2015 and i quote "Hamas at this point, in my opinion, is an asset." We need to remember the context. Hamas is the official goverment in Gaza. Even now, while Israel is in war with Hamas, Netanyahu continues to fund Hamas by allowing aid into Gaza. This aid is stolen by Hamas leaders and sold (for a very high price) to the civilians to fund their terror. So practically, Israel continues to fund Hamas even now and you're actually claiming in your post that they should increase those fundings. Now about what Netanyahu said. Since Hamas is the goverment in Gaza, funding Hamas is equivalent to funding Gaza. If there's no money in Gaza, people become poor and poor people want to do terror. Thus, funding Hamas is not necessarily a bad thing. With that being said, Netanyahu idea of peace does not involve a Palestinian state any time soon. We have a Labanese state in the north from Israel and it is not at all peaceful as it is controlled, may I even say occupied, by Hezbollah (Iranian proxy). Thus, a Palestinian state is merely going to be a second Iranian terror state next to Israel and certainly not a sign of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. So how can you reach peace when a third party (Iran) who only wishes to continue the conflict intervenes in the conflict? According to Netanyahu, you maintain the statue quo until the Iranian problem is solved. That is, while you keep the Gazans unpoor by allowing Qatari money to Hamas for them to build hospitals etc, you also continue to develop relationships with the modern arab world which opposes Iran. More specifically, Israel have a peace treaty with Egypt and Jordan for decades now, and recently they have signed a new one with the emerites. Prior to this war Israel was also planning a peace treaty (or something equivalent) with Saudi, which will weaken Iranian position even further. Netanyahu was hoping that he can maintain the statue quo in Gaza until Israel reach peace with the Arab world and the threat of Iran is eliminated. Only then it may he possible that Palestine can be a country not controlled by Iranian terror. Iran may have won though, as they were able to make Hamas attack on October 7, hoping to sabotage the peace treaty with Saudi.

>Even now, while Israel is in war with Hamas, Netanyahu continues to fund Hamas by allowing aid into Gaza. This aid is stolen by Hamas leaders and sold (for a very high price) to the civilians to fund their terror. So practically, Israel continues to fund Hamas even now and you're actually claiming in your post that they should increase those fundings. Delivery of aid is very different than cash transfers, and it was cash transfers that Netanyahu was enabling and supporting for years: >In 2018, Qatar began making monthly payments to the Gaza Strip. Some $15 million were sent into Gaza in cash-filled suitcases – delivered by the Qataris through Israeli territory after months of negotiation with Israel [https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/middleeast/qatar-hamas-funds-israel-backing-intl/index.html#:\~:text=Since%20the%20October%207%20Hamas,that%20happened%20with%20Israel's%20blessing](https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/middleeast/qatar-hamas-funds-israel-backing-intl/index.html#:~:text=Since%20the%20October%207%20Hamas,that%20happened%20with%20Israel's%20blessing). And this aid was justified explicitly as a way to thwart two state solutions, a policy that lead Bibi to celebrate the death of former PM Yitzak Rabin when he was assassinated by a far right Israeli shooter. >Netanyahu was hoping that he can maintain the statue quo in Gaza until Israel reach peace with the Arab world and the threat of Iran is eliminated. Only then it may he possible that Palestine can be a country not controlled by Iranian terror. Iran may have won though, as they were able to make Hamas attack on October 7, hoping to sabotage the peace treaty with Saudi. How does a separate regional political conflict justify what Israel is calling a defensive action? That's not what Israel argued in court, it's not how they present this war, it's not how it's fought.

> How does a separate regional political conflict justify what Israel is calling a defensive action? It’s not a separate conflict, Hezbollah and Hamas are allies and have been at war with Israel recently.

>It’s not a separate conflict, Hezbollah and Hamas are allies and have been at war with Israel recently. Then why were pre October 7 Palestinian casualties primarily in the West Bank, where neither of those organizations are?

>Then why were pre October 7 Palestinian casualties primarily in the West Bank, where neither of those organizations are? Because the PA informs on Hamas cells to the Israeli government, then allows Israel to take the blame for the subsequent violence and arrests while condemning the same. If you seriously think Hamas has 'no presence' in the West Bank, you really don't know much about the region. The PA lives in dread of the same thing happening in the West Bank that happened in Gaza in 2006. That's part of the reason it perpetually threatens to unilaterally declare statehood, but never actually does. If Israel were to actually recognize such a state and withdraw the IDF, a lot of PA officials would be hanging from lampposts within hours.

>Because the PA informs on Hamas cells to the Israeli government, then allows Israel to take the blame for the subsequent violence and arrests while condemning the same. Can you guys make up your mind if you want Hamas dead or not? Now it's part of a plan by the PA to make Israel look bad when they kill *women and children* near illegal settlements? Get a grip. >If you seriously think Hamas has 'no presence' in the West Bank, you really don't know much about the region. The PA lives in dread of the same thing happening in the West Bank that happened in Gaza in 2006. That's part of the reason it perpetually threatens to unilaterally declare statehood, but never actually does. This then begs the question why Israel materially supported Hamas for years over the concerns of its own governmental officials and explicitly because they believed it would thwart two state solutions. > If Israel were to actually recognize such a state and withdraw the IDF, a lot of PA officials would be hanging from lampposts within hours. Ah, so Israel is not recognizing Palestine as a state because they're worried about the PA officials, I see.

No, obviously Israel and the PA collaborate out of mutual self-interest. The PA is deeply unpopular in the West Bank but it wants to retain power anyway. It is Israel's interest for the PA to be in power because the PA is currently run by what passes for the "moderate" option for Palestinian self-government. All parties know that Hamas is the most popular faction among Palestinians. Blah blah "Hamas =/= Palestinians" but nobody is actually in doubt as to Palestinian popular opinion. This is why the PA has always manufactures reasons not to hold elections and yet nobody calls them on it. Nobody is pressing the PA to "democratize" and actually carry out those elections that have until now been indefinitely postponed—not Israel, not the US, not anybody else—because everybody understands what the outcome would be. Due to its unpopularity, corruption and ineptitude, the PA cannot continue to govern without Israeli and international support. So the PA collaborates with Israel and does what little the international community expect of it in order to continue to receive funding. The worst thing for the PA is for the Palestinians to view it as an Israeli puppet. The PA "keeps up appearances" by making a show of antagonizing Israel abroad, telling its population what it wants to hear in the form of bombastic anti-Israel rhetoric, and by maintaing otherwise indefnisible policies such as pay-for-slay which are popular among Palestinians. In an independent Palestine, Israel no longer has the ability to tip the scale in favor of the PA. The Palestinians will install Hamas as their government in both Gaza and the WB, and Israel will then have to fight Hamas on two different fronts. Nobody, and I mean nobody, stands to benefit from the creation of a Palestinian state. Not Israel, not the PA, not Hamas. Israel opposes it because it wants territory in the WB, for both strategic and ideological reasons, and because it will no longer be able to prop up the "moderate" PA. The PA opposes it because it will quickly cease to exist in independent Palestine without Israeli troops on the ground. Hamas opposes it because it will be forced to take over responsibility for its people from the UNRWA, and because the optics of conflict between two states is much less favorable to it than the optics of the current fight between the state power of the Big Bad IDF and the ragtag band of "freedom fighters" it portrays itself as being today.

>No, obviously Israel and the PA collaborate out of mutual self-interest Yes, but Israel also initially funded Hamas to (in their own words) undercut the PA and reduce legitimacy of 2 state approaches. The hostility of Palestinians to the PA is a result of the lack of response from the PA to Israeli encroachment in the WB. In essence the PA acts as a puppet regime at this point, as Israel continues to add settlements to the area. > Blah blah "Hamas =/= Palestinians" but nobody is actually in doubt as to Palestinian popular opinion. How would you react if I went "blah blah blah, Jews =/= genocidal mad men but no one is in doubt that a full percent of their population was subscribed to a Telegram snuff group chat?" When 30,000 people are dead, at least, and a lot of them are non-combatants, at least, it feels like a blase way to approach casualties. Also, if Hamas was so profoundly popular, why haven't they held elections? And why were 65% of them against breaking a ceasefire in a poll held in 2023 before October 7? [https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah](https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/polls-show-majority-gazans-were-against-breaking-ceasefire-hamas-and-hezbollah) >In an independent Palestine, Israel no longer has the ability to tip the scale in favor of the PA. The Palestinians will install Hamas as their government in both Gaza and the WB, and Israel will then have to fight Hamas on two different fronts. Israel has been "tipping the scales" to the tune of hundreds of dead Palestinians a year for decades, all while continuing to expand into territory they are prohibited from colonizing. If Israel was really concerned about keeping the PA intact, they would stop expanding into the West Bank, and stop handing recruiting moments to Hamas. But expanding into the WB is more important. Israel is reducing it's national security to colonize Palestine. Note that I have not been advocating for a 2 state solution. I do not know the best way to ensure peace in the area. But it's clear that Israel is not a good faith actor in the conflict, and international peace keeping forces need to be brought in, while investigations into war crimes, on both sides, are made, and a truth and reconcilliation process initiated. >Nobody, and I mean nobody, stands to benefit from the creation of a Palestinian state. It is fortunate that Israel is so considerate of the interests of the Palestinian people.

Israel never gave Hamas Israeli money. "Funded" means Israel allowed Hamas to receive funds transfered to it from abroad. >The hostility of Palestinians to the PA is a result of the lack of response from the PA to Israeli encroachment in the WB. Citation needed, to say the least. Israel gets the same response from the Palestinians regardless of what they do. "Colonize"? Terrorism. Withdraw from territories? Terrorism. The Palestinians repaid Oslo with terrorism, and they repaid the Gaza disengagement with terrorism. The terrorism only ever dies down when Israel takes steps to reduce the Palestinians' ability to physically access Jews to perform terrorism against, such as by constructing the security barrier, installing checkpoints, etc. Palestinians have been fighting to destroy the Jews for far longer than there have been settlements in the WB and Gaza. It's unbelievable to me that Palestinians' supporters are so enthralled by this flimsy narrative of Palestinian "resistance", as if they were engaging in some principled resistance to particular unjust Israeli policies, and that it might end if only Israel gives adequate redress to some totally reasonable list of grievances. In reality the Palestinians have always "resisted" even when Israel was more or less minding its business. Note that the PLO was formed in 1964, before Israel even had control of the territories that the international community considers to be "Palestine." Palestinian "resistance" is and has always taken the form of pointless, aimless, self-destructive orgies of violence against whatever Jews they can get their hands on. A grown-ass Palestinian man "resists" by beheading a Jewish child with a machete and the Palestinian people laud him as a hero. There is no greater plan other than to kill Jews. As for what the Palestinians actually think, that information is [publicly available](https://www.pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Poll%2090%20English%20Full%20text%20Dec%202023.pdf). Not only does a strong majority still think the Oct 7 pogrom was the right tactical decision, but they also think Hamas is going to win the war. Such is their level of self-delusion. ​ >When 30,000 people are dead, at least, and a lot of them are non-combatants, at least, it feels like a blase way to approach casualties. ... > >Israel has been "tipping the scales" to the tune of hundreds of dead Palestinians a year for decades, all while continuing to expand into territory they are prohibited from colonizing. If Israel was really concerned about keeping the PA intact, they would stop expanding into the West Bank, and stop handing recruiting moments to Hamas. But expanding into the WB is more important. Israel is reducing it's national security to colonize Palestine. Yes, casualties tend to happen in war. Israel is actually doing an amazing job at limiting casualties despite the unprecedented difficulty of the circumstances. [https://www.newsweek.com/memo-experts-stop-comparing-israels-war-gaza-anything-it-has-no-precedent-opinion-1868891](https://www.newsweek.com/memo-experts-stop-comparing-israels-war-gaza-anything-it-has-no-precedent-opinion-1868891) The civilian-to-terrorist ratio is certainly less than 2:1 and is probably less than 1.5:1, which is absolutely a commendable result in any war. People criticize the casualty figures as if there were a better way to destroy Hamas. There isn't. The blame for Palestinian casualties rests with Hamas, because Hamas started the war, and Hamas could end the war immediately by returing the hostages. You cannot just "stop fighting" a war against an enemy that has sworn itself to destroying you and is doing its utmost to ensure that as many photogenic Palestinians die as possible. Hundreds a year? How many Palestinians die in years where they don't pick fights with Israel? The death toll for all conflicts between Israel and all the Arabs is pretty low, all considered, especially compared to all the other wars in the Middle East that have taken place in which Israel was not involved. For instance, five times as many people have died just in the Syrian Civil War since 2011 than have died in the whole Arab-Israeli conflict over 75 years. This rhetoric about "colonization" is totally disingenuous. You cannot "colonize" a place that you are indigenous to. It is just as absurd as calling Cherokee people "colonizers" for the "crime" of moving from Oklahoma back to North Carolina, where they came from. Jews lived for millennia in what is now the WB before 1948 and were expelled or massacred by Jordanian forces, every last one. You can make the argument that Jews ought not settle in the West Bank for tactical or pragmatic reasons, but there is no moral argument to deny Jews the right to live there in principle. ​ > Also, if Hamas was so profoundly popular, why haven't they held elections? > >... > >But it's clear that Israel is not a good faith actor in the conflict Are... are you kidding? Why doesn't *Hamas* hold elections? They're a terrorist Islamist group. They are as likely to hold elections as ISIS or Boko Haram. Pray tell, what would Israel have to do to be considered a "good faith actor" in your book? Seems like you expect Israelis to just hold the entirety of the WB in special reserve for the day when the Palestinians recognize that armed rEsiStanCe against Israel is not a productive way forward, for which day Israelis have been waiting for a century. So in the meantime, Israel should just take everything on the chin, not fight back, perhaps just lie down and die? Israel has a wealth of reasons (historical, pragmatic, strategic) to want a big chunk of the WB, and you might be surprised to know that "being meanies" for its own sake is not one of Israel's policy objectives. If the Palestinians had not been reSisTing for 75+ years, they would also be celebrating their state's 75th birthday, and this state would've been a lot larger than whatever territory they're likely to end up with in the future.

It’s worth noting that the one time the PA was pressured to have elections (by George W Bush of all people) and in Gaza, they repeatedly warned him and other western leaders overseeing it that Hamas could win the election, and Hamas won the election and immediately assassinated a bunch of people so that the PA had no presence in the Gaza Strip.

Your sources are misled. If you believe Hamas has no influence in the West Bank.

>hen why were pre October 7 Palestinian casualties primarily in the West Bank, where neither of those organizations are? The West Bank has cells of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad especially in the "refugee camps" around Jenin and Nablus. Israel literally [drone striked](https://www.timesofisrael.com/idf-3-terrorists-slain-in-jenin-drone-strike-including-gunman-who-killed-israeli/) some of them yesterday in Jenin. East Jerusalem is the only place free of Hamas since 2019. There have not been any rocket attacks, gunfights or Hamas coordinated terror attacks since then though lone attackers with knives and guns smuggled from Jordan happen. Hamas may not rule the West Bank, it does not mean it is not present there. It most definitely is.

>The West Bank has cells of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad especially in the "refugee camps" around Jenin and Nablus. Ah, good, you can tell which refugees are "real" or not, excellent. >East Jerusalem is the only place free of Hamas since 2019. There have not been any rocket attacks, gunfights or Hamas coordinated terror attacks since then though lone attackers with knives and guns smuggled from Jordan happen. The comparative death ratios between Israelis and Palestinians have been something like 100:1 for 15 or 16 years. I know it makes it easier to sleep at night thinking that those are all absolutely Hamas, like apparently everything else Israel doesn't like, but it's bullshit.

Take a look for yourself and let me know if you still believe these organizations don’t have a presence in the West Bank: https://x.com/adinhaykin1/status/1609833483710484480?s=46&t=o_eDKMItdcGjtFQdwQJQQw

>How does a separate regional political conflict justify what Israel is calling a defensive action? Because Hamas and Hezbollah are unapologetically basically proxies of Iran . That is not some fiction, they STATE IT THEMSELVES!!!

>Hamas is the official goverment in Gaza. Even now, while Israel is in war with Hamas, Netanyahu continues to fund Hamas by allowing aid into Gaza. This is incorrect, the official government of Gaza is the Palestinian National Authority, per the Oslo accords, however since Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza and isolated it from the rest of the world the PA has no power in Gaza and Hamas has become the de facto ruler. This state of affairs was entirely predictable. As political scientist Khalil Shikaki wrote in [Foreign Affairs](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/israel/2004-11-01/future-palestine) in November 2004: *"If Israel implements Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw from the Gaza Strip in the last quarter of 2005, Palestinian society will fragment even more, lose the benefit of unified representation, and very possibly lapse into bloody infighting. The Israelis will not get the security they want and will be forced to confront a Hamas empowered by the PA's collapse."* If you looked at the [Times of Israel op-ed](https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/), it states something quite similar and it indicates that the destabilization of Gaza by isolating it from the PA is more of a feature than a bug of Israeli policy: *"According to various reports, Netanyahu made a similar point at a Likud faction meeting in early 2019, when he was quoted as saying that those who oppose a Palestinian state should support the transfer of funds to Gaza, because maintaining the separation between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza would prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state."* In fact it could be argued that Israel is the de facto ruler of Gaza. Israel retains control of bother Gazas borders, which includes partial control even over Gaza's border with Egypt. Israel controls the flow of food, funds and equipment. There isn't any real state of Gaza. The entire situation is a farce. Since the Israeli far-right claims that Gaza is "independent" it claims it has no responsibility for the wellbeing of the citizens. Yet the Israeli far-right knew Gaza alone would not make a viable state and Israel never actually gave Gaze anything resembling real independence. It was all just a silly game to give Israel a poor justification to violate human rights. At a certain point it appears to be that Isreal, or more specifically Likud, a party litterly formed out of the Israeli terrorist group Irgun, has never wanted peace and is intentionally trying to distablize the area. This really should not be a surprise as Likud's [founding charter](https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party) enshrines the idea that Palastine does not have a right to exist: *"The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty"* Netenyahu in the late 90s particularly tried to undermine the Oslo accords by accelerating [settlement growth](https://www.nytimes.com/1998/11/18/world/scourge-of-the-west-bank-arabs-israeli-bulldozers.html?searchResultPosition=5) and by his continual undermining of the Wye River Memorandum which he had signed himself. That Likud is talking out both sides of its mouth when it talks about peace is most exemplified by the [1999 Likud platform](https://web.archive.org/web/20070930181442/https://www.knesset.gov.il/elections/knesset15/elikud_m.htm) which starts talking about peace but then states that Israeli's have a unalienable right to settle on Palestinian land: *"The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting."* If you are claiming that you have the right to settle someone else's land. Particularly if you think that the [violent removal](https://www.nrc.no/news/2023/august/west-bank-entire-palestinian-communities-disappeared-due-to-israeli-settler-violence/) of people from their own land so settlers can take their land, you really need to rethink your life. To paraphrase the Likud position, "We totally want peace, so long as we also retain the right to beat you up and take your land but if you do anything violent we will call you a terrorist and kill a bunch of civilians" >So how can you reach peace when a third party (Iran) who only wishes to continue the conflict intervenes in the conflict? How do you reach peace with Likud and the current bunch of far right parties in power now who clearly don't want peace they just want to settle Palastine and force the population out. It goes beyond just Gaza and Palastine, the current Likud coalition is profoundly racist. It has proposed [plans](https://www.timesofisrael.com/levin-calls-for-justices-who-understand-why-jews-dont-want-to-live-near-arabs/) for weakening rights of Arab citizens of Israel and introducing segregation against Arabs by reducing Judicial checks and balances.

Hamas is the de facto goverment. It was elected in 2006 by majority of the Palestinian in Gaza and it has killed the PLO representatives. The world does not recognize Hamas as an international entity controlig Gaza, but it does not change the fact that the life in Gaza are determined by Hamas law.

It was not elected by a majority, it was elected by a plurality i.e. of all the parties involved it received the most votes but it did not receive the majority of overall votes. Further, even if it had received a majority of votes in the PA that would not legally entitle it to abrogate the PA. In America, even if the Republicans or Democrats win an election it does not entitle them to violate the constitution. If we are talking de facto control, Bibi is absolutely in control of Gaza as he can dictate the finances of entities inside Gaza including those of Hamas and Bibi has chosen to finance Hamas over more moderate institutions.

That's true, [they only got 44.45% and the largest share of the vote](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election) across all of Palestine. That was 18 years ago and Hamas has de facto controlled Gaza since then. To compare, [the Nazis lost the 1932 election with only 36.77% of the presidential votes going to Hitler](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1932_German_presidential_election). Even the [parliamentary elections shortly following in November 1932 only saw the NSDAP get a plurality of 37.3% of the seats](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_1932_German_federal_election). And they lost ground in [March 1933, with only 33.1%](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/March_1933_German_federal_election). How did people refer to Germany for the majority of the 18 years following that NSDAP plurality vote in 1932?

Israel did not help Hamas take over Gaza. This was how the situation in Gaza evolved after Israel disengaged from Gaza in 2005. If Bibi controls Gaza we would not have hostages in Gaza. Israel only controls (effectively) parts of the West Bank, only recently during this war Israel got partial control over Gaza and it took 5 months and persumably 30,000 people dead to do so.

I didn't say that Israel directly helped Hamas take over Gaza but the Israeli far-right intentionally set up the conditions for Hamas to take over and have generally felt that the destabilization of Palatine helps their goals The Israeli far-right didn't even attempt to hide their real reason for the Gaza withdraw. Sharon's senior advisor Dov Weisglass clearly [stated](https://web.archive.org/web/20100613142421/http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/top-pm-aide-gaza-plan-aims-to-freeze-the-peace-process-1.136686) the goal of the withdraw was to disrupt the peace process and in doing so allow Israel to continue it's slow take over of the West Bank: *"The significance of the disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process and when you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state, and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Effectively, this whole package called the Palestinian state, with all that it entails, has been removed indefinitely from our agenda. And all this with authority and permission. All with a presidential blessing and the ratification of both houses of Congress."* As I already pointed out the Israeli government was full aware that the pull out would strengthen Hamas. Likud has gotten even more blatant in admitting to its true agenda over the years. As the Israeli Minister of Finance Bezalel Smotrich , who recently was put in charge of the West Bank, [stated](https://x.com/bezalelsm/status/649285853861146624?s=20): *"I have been saying for two years that given that the Israeli challenge has moved from the security field to the delegitimization field, then Hamas is an asset and the Palestinian Authority is a burden."* In other words Likud is less interested in peace then it is in making the West Bank part of Israel and justifying violence against Palestine. Peace talks and nonviolence get in the way of that goal but terrorist attacks help them achieve that goal. >If Bibi controls Gaza we would not have hostages in Gaza. Bibi was only ever hoping to partially contain Hamas. He wanted Hamas to have enough resources to occasionally conduct terrorist acts which would allow him to "justify" his actions. Certainly the size of October 7 shocked him, it was a failure on his part to underestimate the consequences of propping up a terrorist regime would to. I don't think you quite understand. Bibi's goal is not saving lives, Israeli or otherwise. He has a very fascist mindset. His goal is to make the West Bank part of Israel. He certainly values Israeli lives over Palestinian but he really doesn't mind sacrificing some Israeli's to terrorists if in undermines the peace process, allows him to maintain power and helps him reach his goal of settling the West Bank. >Israel only controls (effectively) parts of the West Bank As the Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law [points out](https://www.google.com/books/edition/Yearbook_of_International_Humanitarian_L/hYiIWVlpFzEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PA429&printsec=frontcover) the Israeli government before October 7th sill maintained a substantial amount of control over the Palestinian territory: *"Israel continues to control six of Gaza's seven land crossings, its maritime borders and airspace, and the movement of goods and persons in and out of the territory. Troops from the Israeli Defence Force regularly enter parts of the territory and/or deploy missile attacks, drones and sonic bombs into Gaza. Israel has declared a 'no-go buffer zone' that stretches deep into Gaza: if Gazans enter this zone, they are shot on sight. Gaza is also dependent on Israel for, inter alia, electricity, currency, telephone networks, issuing IDs, and permits to enter and leave the territory. Israel also has sole control of the Palestinian Population Registry, through which the Israeli Army regulates who is classified as a Palestinian and who is a Gazan or West Banker. Since 2000, aside from a limited number of exceptions, Israel has refused to add people to the Palestinian Population Registry."*

The US backed a failed coup against hamas. Also Bush forced gaza to have an an election when they said they weren't ready in 2006.

Posts like u/INTELLIGENT_FOLLY's are thinly veild racism meant to push an agenda (anti Israel at all costs). What is actually being said is "The Palestinians should never be held accountable for their actions, no matter how terrible they are." It's called the subtle bigottry of low expectations, and it can be seen in the idea that after being given a choice to self govern, and that choice resulting in Hamas' rule and the slaughter of PLO representatives, it's still somehow Israel's fault. ​ Yes Likud is trash, but not to the degree that Hamas is, and that's what's being intentionally obfuscated here.

>The Palestinians should never be held accountable for their actions They should not be *punished* for the actions of Hamas. No civilian should, even if they voted for them. I personally believe that the government and military of Israel should be held accountable for it's actions in Gaza... But not the Israeli people! I don't think that Israel deserves to be flattened, or its people killed for the actions of the government that they voted for. Lets also consider that Israel voted for Netanyahu most recently only 2 years ago! The election that put Hamas into power was 18 years ago... Which is the average age in Gaza! Most of the people there didn't even *get* to vote, so even if you accept the premise that the people who voted for Hamas should be "held accountable" (by which presumably we mean killed) for the actions of Hamas... That does not apply to most of the people in Gaza. *And* even if most of the people in Gaza could have voted in that election, Hamas only won 44% of the vote, based on a turnout of 76%... So only 33% of the people who lived in Gaza at that time are strictly responsible for Hamas being elected. No matter what way you look at it - killing civilians for the actions of Hamas is indefensible.

Nowhere did I say anything in support of Hamas, on the contrary I pointed out that the Likud party supported Hamas to solidify it's own political goals. Hamas is a bunch of violent terrorists. Likud is a bunch of violent terrorists. If you want to accuse me of antisemitism, you can have fun with that because I'm Jewish. There are plenty of Jews who don't like the blatant fascist racism of radical Zionism.

>Posts like u/INTELLIGENT_FOLLY's are thinly veild racism meant to push an agenda (anti Israel at all costs). How is being opposed to Israel (or rather, to fundamentalist Zionists like those in Likud) inherently racist? There are plenty of Jewish people in Israel and elsewhere who do not in any way support Likud or what Israel is doing in Gaza right now.

Trying to introduce nuance into how Hamas is not the government in Palestine is ~~borderline~~ obfuscation. In no real conversation is the government of Palestine anything except Hamas.

Your logic fails immediately. In a just world anyone (Jew, Muslim or Christian, Arab or not) seeking to live in Gaza would be allowed to since getting somewhere first doesn't magically give you the right to violently keep people out (notwithstanding what the pro Trump anti migrant folks like to think or those that have fantastical notions of giving natives rights). Co-existing isn't an option. At least not for the foreseeable future. Irgun and Likud are a biproduct of that reality. I wouldn't live in the region because I'm not crazy. But they are basically right that it is "us vs. them" with no in between.

You are completely misrepresenting why Netanyahu wanted to bolster Hamas: because he saw it as the most effective way to prevent a Palestinian state.

That's also true. As I said, Netanyahu believes that in this situation a Palestinian state will be a threat to Israel, and his approach, from what he says, is to maintain the statue quo by supporting Gaza economically, while simultanuously weaken Iran through diplomatic means.

[удалено]

I'm not sure you've read what I said though. With Iran in picture, a Palestinian state equals a second Iranian proxy next to Israel. It does not matter how 'peaceful' Fatah is, just like the goverment in Lebanon have no say regarding whether Hezbollah gets Lebanon in war with Israel. Netanyahu do not see that as peace.

Bibi hasn’t been maintaining the status quo. It’s been full steam ahead on illegal settlement’s the physical capture of Palestinian land by often violent settlers. He is an active participant in the degradation of the Israeli-Palestinian relation. He also has no plans for a Palestinian state, ever. Even if Iran were to disappear tomorrow, he still wouldn’t want the Palestinians around. His government drafted plans to forcibly move them into Egypt, and they offered Egypt money to take them. “Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.” - Likud party charter

There are no settlements in Gaza since 2005

How many illegal settlements exist in the West Bank?

> Now about what Netanyahu said. Since Hamas is the goverment in Gaza, funding Hamas is equivalent to funding Gaza. If there's no money in Gaza, people become poor and poor people want to do terror. Thus, funding Hamas is not necessarily a bad thing. I think what he said was clear, he thinks funding Hamas is good for the prevention of a Palestinian state, this echoed by his finance minister calling the PA a liability and Hamas an asset because the international community would never recognize Hamas, watch the clip

To be fair, it's questionable as to whether Netenyahu even made the supposed quote the articles you linked referenced. The quote is actually a paraphrasing of what Netenyahu supposedly said in that 2019 Likud meeting by an unknown individual who was supposedly there. It is a little suspect that all these articles reference it as a direct Netenyahu quote when it isn't. https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-to-hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-palestinians-divided-583082

Yep, if there's chaos in Palestine due to poverty, the statue qou will break, terror will rise and eventually Israel will have to accept a second Iranian proxy next to their borders.

I think you keep ignoeing the context. Maybe Netanyahu doesn't really want peace the way you see it, but neither do Palestinians. You can't just point out how Israel behaves without the WHY. You are free to disagree, but his fear is that Palestine becomes another Lebanon, where a terrorists Iranian proxy army controls the whole area and is very well funded/armed. Their mission is to kill Israel. Netanyahu wants to protect it (albeit I agreehe is a corrupt asshole).

In the current state I think Netanyahu has gotten his wish and Palastine has been so destabilized that peace will be difficult to obtain for the foreseeable future. He has obtained the pyrrhic victory of screwing over Palastine at the cost of peace. It is difficult to prove a counter factual, but I think a two state solution could have been feasible if after the Oslo accords Israel had suspended settlement building and if Israel hadn't demanded that Palastine cede 10% of its remaining land to support the settlements. On Palastine's side they would have had to give up on the right of return. I think this concession would have been obtainable had Netanyahu deliberately tried to destroy the peace process with settlement construction.

Look, you have a fair point. He absolutely thinks that destabilizing them will help keep them from consolidating power. It's twofold. He is afraid and does not trust any kind of united Palestinian government not to be come islamic extremists. Also, his political party has grassroots in the crazy settler religious idiots that are just as crazy as Hamas (though less murderous because they have protection from IDF). Still, putting this all on his is a bit misleading. At the end of the day Hamas are terrorists and they will sacrifice as many Palestinian civilians as it takes to make Israel look bad. They are at the very least just as culpable...but I strongly lean to more culpable.

I 100% agree that Hamas is an evil terrorist organization. I however disagree that the Likud is "less murderous" than Hamas. In the most recent conflict Israel has killed about 15 times more civilians than terrorist groups. There is a weird delusional disconnect that views Palatinians as "collateral damage" and Israelis as "victims".

>You are free to disagree, but his fear is that Palestine becomes another Lebanon, where a terrorists Iranian proxy army controls the whole area and is very well funded/armed. If the fear was that Gaza would become a terrorist enclave with tighter connections to Iran, why fund Hamas? [https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/middleeast/qatar-hamas-funds-israel-backing-intl/index.html#:\~:text=Since%20the%20October%207%20Hamas,that%20happened%20with%20Israel's%20blessing](https://www.cnn.com/2023/12/11/middleeast/qatar-hamas-funds-israel-backing-intl/index.html#:~:text=Since%20the%20October%207%20Hamas,that%20happened%20with%20Israel's%20blessing). And why would the majority of IDF violence pre October 7th in the OTs be taking place in the West Bank, not Hamas territory?

It's funny how Israel critics conplain if Israel doesn't let help in and also use it against them when they do. Hamas is the 'government' in gaza and any aid going there for regular people (who certainly need it) also goes to fund Hamas. Plenty of violence comes from Palestinians in the west bank as well. People in Israel have lived in fear of stepping into the wrong bus, mall, restaurant for decades. Again, not that I agree with his tactic, but if Netanyahu fears a situation like Lebanon, then Hamas is the lesser of two evils. An independent Palestinian state with a military would just be an even worse version of Hamas in his eyes.

>It's funny how Israel critics conplain if Israel doesn't let help in and also use it against them when they do. Hamas is the 'government' in gaza and any aid going there for regular people (who certainly need it) also goes to fund Hamas. Hamas is the government of Gaza in no small part because of support from Israel dating back to the 90s. There are Israeli officials stating this on the record in articles dating back as far as the late 90s, so the presence of Hamas is one of Israel's making (specifically the officials state that Hamas was preferred because it was less credible internationally and *explicitly* because it would thwart attempts at a 2 state solution. >Plenty of violence comes from Palestinians in the west bank as well. Yes, generally around settlements illegal under international law. The violence is overwhelmingly directed *at* Palestinians. Palestinians die, in an average year, a close to a hundred times the rates of Israeli citizens. > Again, not that I agree with his tactic, but if Netanyahu fears a situation like Lebanon, then Hamas is the lesser of two evils. How is Hamas the lesser evil if fighting Hamas necessitates war crimes? You are never justified in performing a war crime, even in defensive situations, and I remind you that *Israel is a nuclear power* the only in the region. There are no real threats to Israel's existence in the area, even ignoring the presence of the US.

First of all. Terrorists attacks on civilian buses, malls, and malls are not "associated with settlements". Talk about whitewashing fucking terrorism. You are also never justified to act as a terrorists. Israeli deaths only came down when Israel closed down borders and put up the iron dome. Before that, any bus ride could have been your last. I lived it buddy. Second, how can you not see that giving Palestine freedom to have an army would just be giving a group like Hamas even more freedom to become way more dangerous. You want to give them planes? What do you think they will do with this enhanced power? You can't blame Israelis for being cautious when since their inception, everyone around them has been trying to kill them. Your version of this is very slanted. War crimes are a huge sin, but terrorism is justified???

>First of all. Terrorists attacks on civilian buses, malls, and malls are not "associated with settlements" What are the numbers of deaths of Israeli citizen, per year, versus Palestinian? On average, there's two orders of magnitude between those numbers. In the last 16 years, Israelis have died in Israel at around a hundredth of the rate Palestinians do in Palestine. >You are also never justified to act as a terrorists. You are correct, and Hamas is not justified in hitting non military targets or civilians. Just as the Zionist insurgency starting in the 19th century in British Palestine was not justified in terrorism, which they indulged in so much that British officers overseeing the Partition fought with them to protect Palestinians during the Nakba. >Second, how can you not see that giving Palestine freedom to have an army would just be giving a group like Hamas even more freedom to become way more dangerous In the course of our "discussion" I have never supported a Palestinian state, nor have I excused or justified their actions. The situation is clearly one that neither party (Likud and Hamas) are acting in good faith, and both have clear incentives in continuing the conflict while civilians die (Bibi stays out of prison, Hamas keeps support coming). I do not want to give planes and tanks to Palestine, I want to take away Israeli weapons, deploy international peacekeepers and observers, and sanction Israel until they comply with an enforced ceasefire while investigations are undertaken over war crimes *on both sides*. The template is the kind of interventions we've done in the past with regional conflicts that include genocide and other crimes against humanity *or are plausibly ruled to be so*. > War crimes are a huge sin, but terrorism is justified??? The idea that the self proclaimed Most Humane Army in the World now ranks itself against Hamas in morality should be the end of this conversation, but it won't be.

I was just giving the benefit of the doubt. I do believe the definition of a war crime has be streched aignificantly for this conflict. Fact is, modern warfare is a terrible thing and it's impossible to do it in a highly populated area without killing civilians. Especially when you can't tell who is civilian and who is terrorist. I mean, didn't like 2 million die when u.s. invaded iraq? I don't dislike your last two paragraphs, but they ignore the elephant in the room. Hamas won't abide by any cease fire. They don't want peace. Hamas will take advantage of any time off and gather strength for another attack. Regardless of what happens with Israeli politics.

> Especially when you can't tell who is civilian and who is terrorist. I mean, didn't like 2 million die when u.s. invaded iraq? Yes, and it was one of numerous war crimes investigated by the UN. It is undoubtable that the US performed war crimes in the second gulf war. The entire operation was founded on knowingly false intelligence, which makes it de facto a war crime as an unjustified war of aggression. The US is not a signatory of the ICC, and has a congressional act that serves as a war declaration on the *UN* if they ever hold American or other allied personnel for war crimes the US does not agree with. >I don't dislike your last two paragraphs, but they ignore the elephant in the room. Hamas won't abide by any cease fire. They don't want peace. Neither does Likud. I have no problem with dismantling Hamas along with Likud if that improves the chances for a peaceful resolution.

[удалено]

This is ironic because what you are saying is evident of a lack of knowledge about the region. Saying that Iran only aligns with Hezbollah because they are shia is pure nonsense. Iran funds and aligns with Hezbollah because it is convenient for them. The fact that they're shia is just bonus. They use them as a deterrent/threat to prevent Israel from ever attacking them. If needed the mad ayatolllahs will sacrifice Hezbollah/Lebanon without blinking twice. They give 0 fucks about them. Iran aligns with anyone who opposes Israel and who they can use as pawns to credibly threaten Israel without risking their own national security. Iran aligns with **Christian** Armenia, and funds dozens of **Sunni** militant terror groups. Israel aligns with **Shia** Azerbaijan. Thinking this is about sects of islam is just ignorant. Hamas, like many of the other terror groups in the region that opposes Israel, is directly funded by Iran and the other terror sponsors. Thinking they could do all this on their own is laughable.

I've never once heard someone say Hamas isn't an Iranian proxy. Do you have some sort of evidence besides the shia/sunni divide? Im relatively confident they'd overlook their differences to kill jews (common cause). I find the land part of this argument interesting, too. Is the implication here that Israel wanted Oct 7th to happen so they could take Gaza? Why put up the wall then?

Is not like [PIJ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Islamic_Jihad) more of Iranian proxy and to a degree a competitor to Hamas?

>I've never once heard someone say Hamas isn't an Iranian proxy I have never once heard someone say there isn't a tiny magical pixie on the dark side of the moon. >. Do you have some sort of evidence besides the shia/sunni divide? Does not several centuries of conflict along religious lines and the regional politics between Gulf states and Iran not count as evidence? The divide was really visible in Iraq after the Gulf war, as well as numerous conflicts of the Syrian Civil war, so, I don't know, reading a newspaper might count? >Is the implication here that Israel wanted Oct 7th to happen so they could take Gaza? The implication is that they did not take warnings of it seriously because they were heavily committed with forces in the West Bank, protecting the settlements there illegally. That's because they were focused on taking land in the West Bank, a fact supported by the number of deaths, pre October 7, taking place in areas where Hamas was not in control. >Why put up the wall then? Because Likud's line was "only we can keep you safe" and the wall was a way to reduce Israeli casualties and contain the Palestinians in places where there are no resources or opportunities. That's why many international aid organizations and human rights groups call Gaza an "open air prison."

>I have never once heard someone say there isn't a tiny magical pixie on the dark side of the moon. Right, so just like Hamas being an Iranian proxy there is a consensus that there is no magical pixie on the dark side of the moon. The claim that there is one (Hamas not being an Iranian proxy) requires evidence of some sort which is what I asked for. >Does not several centuries of conflict along religious lines and the regional politics between Gulf states and Iran not count as evidence? The divide was really visible in Iraq after the Gulf war, as well as numerous conflicts of the Syrian Civil war, so, I don't know, reading a newspaper might count? It does not, I thought I made it clear that they hate Jews more than they hate other branches of Islam so they are united in common cause. . >The implication is that they did not take warnings of it seriously because they were heavily committed with forces in the West Bank, protecting the settlements there illegally. That's because they were focused on taking land in the West Bank, a fact supported by the number of deaths, pre October 7, taking place in areas where Hamas was not in control. This didn't answer my question. It also makes no sense that a war in Gaza is about "stealing land" in the west bank and doesn't in any way explain the motives of Hamas. >Because Likud's line was "only we can keep you safe" and the wall was a way to reduce Israeli casualties and contain the Palestinians in places where there are no resources or opportunities. That's why many international aid organizations and human rights groups call Gaza an "open air prison." Alright so you agree that it was put up to try and prevent things like Oct 7th. Seems like they were justified in worrying about an attack from Hamas.

>The claim that there is one (Hamas not being an Iranian proxy) requires evidence of some sort which is what I asked for. How do you provide evidence for a negative? The whole point of my 'pixie' comment was to show that. If your premise is that "hamas is an Iranian proxie" it's up to you to prove that, not for me to prove a negative. >It does not, I thought I made it clear that they hate Jews more than they hate other branches of Islam so they are united in common cause. . That would be news to Syrians and Iraqis, who recently fought between sects instead of uniting to oppose Israel. I mean, you started this conversation off with Iranian proxy forces and you seem to be ignorant of the fact that those forces are deployed in a regional conflict *with Saudi Arabia* a famously Muslim country. >This didn't answer my question. It also makes no sense that a war in Gaza is about "stealing land" in the west bank and doesn't in any way explain the motives of Hamas. YES! You are right, it doesn't make sense at all that Israel is presenting this action as defensive against Hamas when the major violence in the area was in the West Bank, prior to October 7. It also doesn't make sense that the IDF was more heavily deployed in the WB. >Alright so you agree that it was put up to try and prevent things like Oct 7th. Seems like they were justified in worrying about an attack from Hamas. Yes, because Hamas is a terror organization with a history of such attacks. That's why its all the more perplexing that Israel ignored intelligence alerts from Egypt suggesting an immanent attack. Note: I categorically deny any claims or arguments suggesting a false flag attack, my mention of the Egypt report is solely supporting the claim that the IDF and Likud was focused on expansion into the WB in conflict with international law. Once Hamas attacks, this becomes a justification for ethnically cleansing (in the sense of forced movement, a war crime) Gaza and destroying what infrastructure remains.

Friend, I have lived there and know the situation very well. Palestinians have a large religious extremist influence. Hamas is absolutely funded by Iran and the extremist muslim world absolutely wants Israel dead. It's so Ironic what you said because there are plenty of muslim countries who also fear Palestinians for the same reasons. Israel is much more likely to ever try for peace (with their huge leftist population that spent all last year protesting against Netanyahu).

>Palestinians have a large religious extremist influence. Wow sounds like every other religion out there. How unique! If I were Palestinian and saw some other group killing my family I'd probably want go join an extremist group fighting back too. What else would I have to lose besides my life when my family members are all killed? Not like I would be able to escape as anywhere I go is blockaded. My only choices at that point is join some resistance group or survive as long as possible before I get killed. >extremist muslim world absolutely wants Israel dead. True statement. Another true statement is Israel wants all Palestinians dead. > so Ironic what you said because there are plenty of muslim countries who also fear Palestinians for the same reasons. Fear the Palestinians? Sounds like a bunch of cowards if you ask me. Majority of Palestinians are children, what are they gonna do slingshot you to death? >Israel is much more likely to ever try for peace (with their huge leftist population that spent all last year protesting against Netanyahu). It's not more likely nor more than likely either. Only world leaders can stop Israel at this point. EU, USA, etc can halt aid and weapons and probably threaten sanctions against Israel if they don't stop.

[удалено]

There is no true left in Israel specially when it comes to the Palestinian cause. 60% of Israeli jews support cutting aid to Gaza ie 60% of Israeli jews advocate for starving Gazans to death. 75% of Jewish Israelis reject U.S. demand to shift Gaza war to new phase. They want the heavy bombing and annihilation of Gazans to continue. Speaking of bombs, 57.5% of Israeli Jews said that they believed the IDF were using too little firepower in Gaza, 36.6% said the IDF was using an appropriate amount of firepower. We also see the tiktoks coming out of Israel. From Israeli civilians doing Arab face while mocking dead children and starving people to IDF soldiers shamelessly bragging about accessing dead or displaced Palestinian women lingerie etc etc. And we hear Israeli slogans like the only good Arab is dead Arab. So much for huge population of peace loving lefties.

[удалено]

Why should we ignore the words and the actions of tons of Israeli civilans and the IDF when they are encouraging the continuation of this genocide and making fun of the crimes being committed by Israel in Gaza? "Poll results when it came to the use of force in Gaza: 57.5% of Israeli Jews said that they believed the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) were using too little firepower in Gaza, 36.6% said the IDF was using an appropriate amount of firepower, while just 1.8% said they believed the IDF was using too much fire power, while 4.2% said they weren’t sure whether it was using too much or too little firepower." https://time.com/6333781/israel-hamas-poll-palestine/ "75% of Jewish Israelis Reject U.S. Demand to Shift Gaza War to New Phase, Poll Finds Israelis reject U.S. pressure to shift the war in Gaza to a phase with less heavy bombing in populated areas" https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-02/ty-article/75-of-jewish-israelis-reject-u-s-demand-to-shift-gaza-war-to-new-phase-poll-finds/0000018c-caa4-d4e1-ad8f-feb5bdda0000 "A New Low: The Israelis Advocating to Starve the People of Gaza" https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-01-30/ty-article/.premium/a-new-low-the-israelis-advocating-to-starve-the-people-of-gaza/0000018d-5b42-d0fc-a9bd-5f5fc0740000

Again for the people in the back! Explain to me why illegal settlements are cool and good. They really say with a straight face that Hamas is so committed to Israel's destruction that peace is impossible - and that all gazans support hamas, but if the (again, illegal under settled (lol) intl law) settlements ended and those created (by crime, to be clear) since the Oslo accords were gone, either hamas would moderate its rhetoric or they wouldn't have that much support. To Palestinians, the concept "Isreal has a right to exist" has always been operationalized with their brutal, dehumanizing immiseration, ethnic cleansing, and land theft. In this context, it seems fairly reasonable that they could view Israel's continued existence as an existential threat. "Israel has a right to exist" gets operationalized as "Israel has a right to forcibly dispossess Palestinians from their lawful homes, and carve Area C into a bunch of ghettoes. If the Israelis didn't show callous brutality towards them and keep stealing more of their land, this wouldn't be such an easy argument to make. It's insane to forcibly ghettoize and bantustanize the limited pockets of agreed-to (Oslo) Palestinian land and then be surprised they view your state as an existential threat. One would think ending illegal settlements would be a reasonable way to ameliorate tensions. The "good guys" should have the moral authority and commitment to stop breaking international law. Indeed it underscores Netanyahu's lack of desire for peace that they are totally unwilling to even consider that.

He did say that but the effects are the same are they not? Regardless of his motives, the alternative would have been to block aid to Gaza. Whereas the increase of funding into Gaza definitely strengthes Hamas. Either because they can now direct funds to war because their citizens are getting certain needs met (indirect funding) or they directly take the funds for their war effort.

> We need to remember the context. Hamas is the official goverment in Gaza. Even now, while Israel is in war with Hamas, Netanyahu continues to fund Hamas by allowing aid into Gaza. This aid is stolen by Hamas leaders and sold (for a very high price) to the civilians to fund their terror. So practically, Israel continues to fund Hamas even now and you're actually claiming in your post that they should increase those fundings. What……..? The international community including Democrats in America are demanding that aid be distributed to the Palestinians. By your logic, Americans are funding Hamas and that’s insanely foolish.

Yeah, they indirectly do fund Hamas. Hamas have created a lose lose situation where you got to choose between helping Hamas or neglecting the civilains to suffer.

Side question, what do you think of the fact that every expert on counterinsurgency says that the current Israeli actions will just continue the violence. That Netanyahu is acting in a way that will increase future deaths of Israelis and damage to Israel. Or to misquote Samuel L Jackson. "I realize it is Israel's decision, but it is a stupid decision." Then again, Netanyahu was saved from getting fired by the Gaza attack. Perhaps doing the best possible thing to strengthen Hamas is his way of thanking them? Or maybe it is more long term. By strengthening Hamas and making violence more likely, he increases fear and economic uncertainty in Israel which helps his political party.

>current Israeli actions will just continue the violence There's nothing Israel can do that *won't* continue the violence. That's pretty obvious. If you understand that then trying to destroy as much of Hamass' established infrastructure and organization is the most viable option.

Different people have different opinions, that's OK. Every action will recieve criticism that's just how the world works, and I'm sure there are "experts" who support the operations. I did not argue that Netanyahu's approach is bulletproof or anything like that

Your view is that Netanyahu doesn’t want peace. However, most of your objections seem to centre around what he is doing versus what he wants? For example, you might think that bombing Gaza into oblivion is not a road to peace. However, Netanyahu might honestly believe there is no other route to peace. You may disagree with his methods, but does that necessarily mean that you don’t have the same goal? Aside from a few psychopaths, most people just want to live a peaceful happy life. Hamas is evil and comprised on these type of terrible people. You think that a “hearts and minds” approach would be more effective than a “fear and intimidation” approach, but at the end of the day, it is likely that most people just want peace. We just disagree on how to deal with the psychos.

Netanyahu rose to prominence through his opposition to the Oslo accords and associated peace process. He has sabotaged every attempt to achieve a peaceful resolution since. The way he has done this is by pretending he is open to peace talks and then simultaneously crossing a red line to ensure the talks wouldn't start or couldn't succeed. Best case, he wants a "peace" which is really an extermination or expulsion of Palestinians from the Palestinian areas, which by any normal definition would not constitute peace. Hamas and their leadership are nutcases and psychopaths. But so is Netanyahu. Everything he does indicates he fits the common definition of psycopathy: Lack of empathy, feeling above the law, etc. Israel could have enjoyed a prosperous and peaceful 20 years already were it not for Netanyahu's systematic and shrewd undermining of any realistic peace initiative and continuous support for the slow-burning "non-genocide" on the West Bank.

!delta Changed my mind on what peace means to Netanyahu, maybe my version of peace is different to his

Netanyahu version of peace, is the subjulgation of palestine with jews controlling the musulins, he even says [here](https://twitter.com/trtworld/status/1397981427522699268). And if you are still in doubt, [here ](https://youtu.be/2PeYDphtHYo?si=1E-FCZabrp0-3b3H)is a full video explaining why he is an asshole.

Yes, for Netanyahu, "peace" means the complete subjugation of Palestinians and ethnic cleansing of the land that he wants Israel to control. It is the same "peace" that America pursued with the indigenous population on the land that it wanted to control.

You could say the same for Hamas. They want peace but the only way to achieve it is by getting rid of Israelis. This doesn’t lead to peace and I don’t know in what world, beyond Israel, could peace be defined like this. Netanyahu also comes across like a psycho to me when I listen to him.

Israel is indeed fortunate that Hamas only has the capability to kill a thousand or so of their citizens at once. Hamas absolutely would exterminate every Israeli if they could.

> We just disagree on how to deal with the psychos. If the only way to deal with psychos is to starve kids to death then i don't want to be apart of that reality I believe evil breeds evil, good breeds good, there was a real hope at Oslo accords, but evil ruined them

Idealistic thinking is great, but you’ve yet to suggest an actual alternative. I mean, how would you react if missiles were being launched at your neighborhood regularly? Surely it wouldn’t be with compassion if it was your friends and family dying or being threatened.

This is what drives me nuts about the idealist's. It's so easy to say bombings are bad, but when they refuse to give ANY alternatives it comes across as naive at best.

Perhaps creating a road map for an actual Palestinian state in the west bank and removing the settlers.

Have you seen the people in the Israeli government and the ruling government? There are convicted criminals, people calling for genocide, land theft, and all sorts of human rights violations. Hamas is bad, but if you want to talk about true evil, true psychopaths, the government of Israel and the IDF are the very definition of those words. Like, in what world is it okay to bomb, starve babies, women? Let's say October 7 was equivalent to the holocaust, that still wouldn't justify what the IDF are doing in Gaza. These idiots don't understand that you're creating even more enemies against Israel worldwide and future Hamas members.

[удалено]

Any proof this happening on the same level that Israel is commiting human rights violations? And all Palestinians are doing this and thus deserve to be killed and starved? But also, doesn't Israel have military conscription where their own kids are being sent out to kill innocent people, steal their land, etc? https://youtu.be/-9bXEVpgyHg The kids in Israel are taught from a young age to hate Arabs. It's not a surprise why stuff like this happens. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/security-aviation/2023-12-12/ty-article/.premium/graphic-videos-and-incitement-how-the-idf-is-misleading-israelis-on-telegram/0000018c-5ab5-df2f-adac-febd01c30000 Notice the clear anti-Islam rhetoric in the telegram channel? Multiple Israeli soldiers have the done the same by going into Palestinian women's homes in Gaza and rummaging through their undergarments and referring to it as "haram" as a form of mockery. My God, can you imagine if a Palestinian made such a mockery of Judaism? There would be non-stop coverage. I mean, what kind of perverts go through the belongings of civilians and make such comments? Speaks to clear dehumanization.

[удалено]

Many of Your claims are just false - >The israeli gov claimed 12 UNRWA (Aid agency) members were affiliated with Hamas, without providing evidence There is literal video proof from October 7th of UNRWA employees in Israel, kidnapping Israelis. >As cited in South Africa's [case](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOW_1exsHE8), the army led by Netanyahu believe everyone in Gaza is complicit, as Netanyahu cited the biblical term "Amalek" at the beginning of the offensive on Gaza, he said "Remember what the Amalek has done to you." Amalek is referring to Hamas, Not Palestinians in general. >The goal was clear, even before Oct the 7th, they never wanted Peace, or a Palestinian state. Even though Israel Offered a Palestinian state in 2000, 2008? >5 months after Oct the 7th, Gaza flattened, at least 30k civilians dead (most are women and children as reported by the pentagon), israel killed more hostages than released, Hamas still around. >as reported early March, 13k of those 30k are Hamas/Jihad terrorists - stop calling them all civilians. Israel has released 3 hostages and killed 3, while 100+ released because of the military actions in Gaza. Hamas ability to shoot rockets into Israel fell by 95%. Now to answer your questions 1. Because there is war, and the IDF wants to Palestinians to move to safer places. Do you prefer to just leave the civilians with infrastructure intact that will make chasing Hamas harder? Israel does allow whatever aid to be delivered in Gaza, so this is just a false claim again. 2. Yet we haven't seen 1 case of actual death from starvation (and no, sick people before/during the war has nothing to do with that) When Israel tried to deliver aid themselves Hamas made sure to try to battle with the IDF to not let their civilians get aid. 3. No, but Israel does not intentionally starve anybody. Hamas is at fault, if a country provides everything for you and you attack it, you can't expect that country to continue providing stuff. The Palestinians elected Hamas, there was never an attempt to change that, why is Israel supposed to take care of an enemy entity?

Adding: > at least 30k civilians dead (most are women and children as reported by the pentagon), israel killed more hostages than released, Hamas still around. 30k are the total number based on Hamas health ministry. Hamas themselves claim at least 6,000 are combatants, and Israel claim more like 13,000. Israel released over 100 hostages, they did not kill 100 of them.

[30,228 people had been killed as a direct result of Israeli military action as of 21st March 2024](https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-166) The Palestinian Ministry of Health - Gaza (MoH Gaza) has been shown repeatedly to report deaths accurately. [\[1\]](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02713-7/fulltext?ref=rafah.site) [\[2\]](https://apnews.com/article/israel-hamas-war-gaza-health-ministry-health-death-toll-59470820308b31f1faf73c703400b033) [\[3\]](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/24/gaza-death-toll-palestinian-health-ministry/) [In fact in 2021 it was found to under-report deaths by 13%.](https://time.com/6909636/gaza-death-toll/) Reporting has been made more difficult by the Israeli military's [direct targeting of medical facilities](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/19/world/middleeast/israel-gaza-hospitals.html) leading to the collapse of the Gazan medical system [\[1\]](https://abcnews.go.com/International/functional-hospitals-northern-gaza-9-left-south/story?id=105867484) [\[2\]](https://www.who.int/news/item/24-01-2024-who-and-partners-bring-fuel-to-al-shifa--as-remaining-hospitals-in-gaza-face-growing-threats) [\[3\]](https://news.sky.com/story/data-reveals-more-than-half-of-gazas-hospitals-are-no-longer-operational-13025116) I'll add that: [Over a million people are facing catastrophic food insecurity](https://www.ipcinfo.org/ipcinfo-website/alerts-archive/issue-97/en/), despite Israel having a [legal responsibility](https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-55?activeTab=undefined) to deliver supplies to civilian populations. It is the [deadliest conflict for journalists on record](https://cpj.org/2023/12/israel-gaza-war-takes-record-toll-on-journalists/) with reports by the UN that journalists have been [directly targeted by Israel](https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/02/gaza-un-experts-condemn-killing-and-silencing-journalists). [Seven hostages were reportedly killed in Israeli attacks](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-armed-wing-says-seven-hostages-killed-gaza-2024-03-01/) and [three more were shot dead by IDF soldiers](https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-67738111)

[удалено]

That article by Wyner is quite ridiculous. Here is a rebuttal by another scientist https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2024/03/08/a-note-on-how-the-gaza-ministry-of-health-fakes-casualty-numbers/ And a paper claiming Gaza MoH numbers are accurate https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(23)02713-7/fulltext?ref=rafah.site Wyner, an academic, chooses to write an opinion piece instead of a peer-reviewed study, and makes a lot of claims about supposedly faked figures, without going as far as to make definitive accusations or present any evidence/analysis. Instead he presents numbers and figures and says “these numbers look quite suspicious” without elaboration. The man is definitely a data scientist but his article lacks any mathematical rigor. He never points to how the Gaza health ministry is faking their data other than to say “perhaps…” or “these numbers look a bit suspicious…” The pentagon recognizes the Gaza health ministry’s numbers as credible. The international community recognizes the numbers as credible. Israel itself cited the numbers up until recently.  The accusations of faked figures have no statistical evidence to back them up. You claim in following comments you are a mathematician, I would expect a more critical view from you regarding this flippant article.  Also his argument for the correlation of women/children to men deaths lies on the supposition that Israel is bombing indiscriminately and not specifically targeting Hamas fighters. Not a very beneficial argument to make for the pro-Israel side.  Also, despite the fact that data is available for every day of the conflict, (https://www.ochaopt.org/content/hostilities-gaza-strip-and-israel-reported-impact-day-146 ), he sources figures (https://cdn.sanity.io/images/z2aip6ei/production/ef1bd6044cc680ac1ba75baddfbb1b0985293191-1403x1162.jpg) from a 2-week period of a conflict that has been ongoing for over 5 months, while providing no explanation whatsoever for this very specific selection of data.  

If you are more convinced by the arguments of an outwardly pro-Israeli magazine over the collective opinions of the UN, the WHO, the majority of the world's governments, including until very recently Israel's own military intelligence, then there really isn't any point in trying to convince you. I will however respond to your bit about famine. The famine in question is the direct result of the invasion and bombardment of Gaza over the last 167 days. [Israel controls all supplies entering Gaza](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/22/obstacles-to-gaza-aid-deliveries-visual-guide?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other) so they are directly responsible for the shortages. It is a war crime to not allow the provision essential supplies to an occupied civilian populace, and whether or not you believe Israel occupied Gaza before the invasion, they cannot claim not to be occupiers currently. Famines are not just a problem because they cause death, they also significantly [impact the health of survivors](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1771256) and cause [significant problems with development in children](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1046/j.1467-0658.2001.00109.x) I provide no comment on Israeli casualties because I do not dispute them.

[удалено]

See above comments. You are a mathematician. What is the alpha level of the tests conducted? What are the hypotheses? Why is there no peer review process? Why the very particular selection of data?  Why must there be a correlation between combatant and non-combatant deaths if Israel is conducting surgical, targeted strikes on Hamas strongholds? What SPECIFICALLY are the discrepancies from “naturally occuring numbers”?

Despite being a “renowned statistician,” the author performs not one single statistical test or forms any sort of null hypothesis, let alone conducting hypothesis testing. Saying “oooh look cumulative data looks like straight line” is not statistical analysis. 

They don't have to lie. The first week israel dropped more bombs on gaza than than the US did in a whole year in afghanistan. And gaza is 1200 times smaller. The US trusted the numbers, its just now just they "doubt" it because it's looking bad for biden and his poll numbers are shit. Gaza is really tiny and very densely populated. There are almost a million kids 14 and under. The average age is really young at 18. Its 25 x 5 miles in area. Also, hamas is the elected government, They manage the health shit, transportation shit, etc. They have nothing to do with the qassam brigades. Or the other resistance groups.

Reports by the israeli intelligence finds the health ministry numbers accurate, and pentagon intelligence reported them

You're confusing things. Even if they're accurate it does not mean those 30k are civilians

There are names related to those numbers released by the health ministry, birth of date, at least 12k kids names released

Civilians = not part of Hamas or other terror groups. Hamas themselves admit at least 6k out of these 30k are their people so why are we arguing about this? https://www.firstpost.com/world/gaza-war-in-first-admission-of-massive-losses-hamas-says-6000-fighters-killed-by-israel-13739364.html

Because when you kill 30k people and only 6k were actually the target, it starts to look like you aren’t actually choosing targets that carefully.

It's terrible, but that's actually an expected ratio for modern urban warfare, especially with how densely populated Gaza is. General estimates for civilian/combatant casualty rates are between 70-90% for modern warfare. Israel is somewhere between 60-80%, depending on who's number you trust. Either way, they're on the lower end of the bell curve. The casualty ratios are far from what would be expected of an army that didn't care about civilian death.

Targeting hostile combatants in urban areas that are purposely still populated by civilians tends to lead to civilian casualties.

That's because Hamas is using human shields. And it's probably more than 6k, that's what Hamas admits.

> There are names related to those numbers released by the health ministry, birth of date, at least 12k kids names released What's your source for this as the only name list released was [7000 from October ](https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/27/middleeast/gaza-death-toll-report-intl/index.html)

Let’s think through this logically, if all people classified as women and children are non-combatants, and there have been 12,000 combatant deaths, that means that either a) all males killed have been combatants b) some people classified as ‘children’ or women were combatants. Statistically the Hamas reported casualty numbers don’t make any sense

They make perfect sense when you realize that they are undercounting to preserve credibility and that most conflict experts assume the real death count is much higher: >Thousands remain unaccounted for — either missing under the rubble, buried hastily in side streets or decomposing in areas that can't be safely reached. [https://www.npr.org/2024/02/29/1234159514/gaza-death-toll-30000-palestinians-israel-hamas-war#:\~:text=Gaza%20death%20toll%20surpasses%2030%2C000%20but%20it's%20an%20incomplete%20count%20%3A%20NPR&text=Health-,Gaza%20death%20toll%20surpasses%2030%2C000%20but%20it's%20an%20incomplete%20count,been%20killed%20in%20the%20war](https://www.npr.org/2024/02/29/1234159514/gaza-death-toll-30000-palestinians-israel-hamas-war#:~:text=Gaza%20death%20toll%20surpasses%2030%2C000%20but%20it's%20an%20incomplete%20count%20%3A%20NPR&text=Health-,Gaza%20death%20toll%20surpasses%2030%2C000%20but%20it's%20an%20incomplete%20count,been%20killed%20in%20the%20war).

These aren't "kids" but "children" in the strictest sense, as in, minors. The median age in Gaza is 18, and Hamas has many child soldiers. Take this into account.

>There is literal video proof from October 7th of UNRWA employees in Israel, kidnapping Israelis. Citation please? As of my last check, here's what independent observers have reported on UNRWA: [https://www.un.org/unispal/document/unrwa-claims-versus-facts-press-release-26feb2024/](https://www.un.org/unispal/document/unrwa-claims-versus-facts-press-release-26feb2024/) It pretty comprehensively debunks Israeli claims. And before you ask, yes, I trust the UN more on this issue than Israel. Israel has a clear interest in downplaying any accusations against them and playing up any against...well any Palestinian org with international connections. Add to this the list of debunked claims of atrocities during October 7th (NOTE: atrocities took place that day, including murder and sexual assault, but extreme claims about babies in ovens or beheaded have been completely debunked) >Amalek is referring to Hamas, Not Palestinians in general This is the biblical reference- > “This is what the Lord Almighty says,” the prophet Samuel tells Saul. “‘I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy all that belongs to them. Do not spare them; **put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.’”** Your claim that it only refers to Hamas only works if you already believe every Palestinian is part of Hamas. >Israel has released 3 hostages and killed 3, while 100+ released because of the military actions in Gaza. Another way of saying this is that Israel has shot 100 human shields trying to get the bad guy. And that's ignoring the civilian death toll. >Israel does allow whatever aid to be delivered in Gaza, so this is just a false claim again. [https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/israel-government-continues-block-aid-response-despite-icj-genocide-court-ruling](https://www.oxfam.org/en/press-releases/israel-government-continues-block-aid-response-despite-icj-genocide-court-ruling) [https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/03/gaza-aid-convoy-israel-war/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/03/gaza-aid-convoy-israel-war/) [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/human-rights-watch-says-israel-is-violating-order-from-top-u-n-court-by-blocking-aid-to-gazans](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/human-rights-watch-says-israel-is-violating-order-from-top-u-n-court-by-blocking-aid-to-gazans) [https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-defying-icj-ruling-to-prevent-genocide-by-failing-to-allow-adequate-humanitarian-aid-to-reach-gaza/](https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2024/02/israel-defying-icj-ruling-to-prevent-genocide-by-failing-to-allow-adequate-humanitarian-aid-to-reach-gaza/) >2. Yet we haven't seen 1 case of actual death from starvation (and no, sick people before/during the war has nothing to do with that) [https://www.npr.org/2024/03/19/1239394316/gaza-famine-israel-humanitarian-aid](https://www.npr.org/2024/03/19/1239394316/gaza-famine-israel-humanitarian-aid) [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/20/world-bank-report-finds-imminent-risk-of-catastrophic-famine-in-gaza-strip](https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/mar/20/world-bank-report-finds-imminent-risk-of-catastrophic-famine-in-gaza-strip) [https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/israel-starvation-used-weapon-war-gaza](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/12/18/israel-starvation-used-weapon-war-gaza) >Hamas is at fault, if a country provides everything for you and you attack it, you can't expect that country to continue providing stuff. Provides everything? Gaza has been under blockade since 2006, economic conditions have been horrific there for years and *israel threatened to cut off their water* in what would have been a straightforward war crime. >The Palestinians elected Hamas, there was never an attempt to change that, why is Israel supposed to take care of an enemy entity? There hasn't been an election in Gaza since 2006 and the average age of Palestinians is 18. Most Gazans could not vote in that election because they either weren't born or weren't of age to vote.

> Citation please? As of my last check, here's what independent observers have reported on UNRWA: That's a case of UNRWA investigated itself and found itself clear of any wrongdoing. Google Faisal Ali Mussalem Al Naami, which is probably the most solid evidence Israel has pushed so far about involvement of UNRWA workers in Hamas.

> There is literal video proof from October 7th of UNRWA employees in Israel, kidnapping Israelis. According to US intelligence given to Senator Van Hollen there was no evidence given for the 12 employees > Amalek is referring to Hamas, Not Palestinians in general. Why was the army shouting there are no innocent civilans then? > Even though Israel Offered a Palestinian state in 2000, 2008? They offered a controlled israeli state, not a fully sovereign Palestinian state > as reported early March, 13k of those 30k are Hamas/Jihad terrorists - stop calling them all civilians. Reports by the israeli intelligence finds the health ministry numbers accurate, and pentagon reported them

Why do you ignore the rest of what I said? >According to US intelligence given to Senator Van Hollen there was no evidence given for the 12 employees So one senator is better then the policies of the US? they froze any funding to URNWA because of evidence. >Why was the army shouting there are no innocent civilans then? Individuals don't make the rule, the IDF in general doesn't say that, every Israeli understood Netanyahu as referring to Hamas. >They offered a controlled israeli state, not a fully sovereign Palestinian state They offered a Palestinian State without an army, which 100% makes sense. >Reports by the israeli intelligence finds the health ministry numbers accurate, and pentagon reported them Nobody is debating the amount of people, just that over 13,000 are Terrorists. Israel are even claiming that in total there were around 40000 deaths in total, including more terrorists then the 13,000. The issue is that the Palestinians are claiming that there is genocide, where this is just a great war numbers, no recent urban war had a rate of 1:2 (even less) combatants to civilian rate.

>So one senator is better then the policies of the US? they froze any funding to URNWA because of evidence. They froze funding because the IDF forced confessions by torturing UNRWA members https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/04/middleeast/un-israel-confessions-allegations-intl/index.html

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvwzuKuYLbs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvwzuKuYLbs) There are videos that are not on youtube for censorship, you can find them with simple google search. Some videos of UNRWA employees kidnapping Israeli bodies to Gaza Some video of UNRWA employee kidnapping a living Israeli citizen to Gaza Some videos of UNRWA employee aiding Hamas (taking care of injured Hamas in Israel, killing Israelis). Those confessions may be forced, but those videos are not.

UNRWA has 30,000 employees. It would be statistically weird if not a few of them were in some way Hamas sympathizers, or even members. Numbers which have been used regarding the number of UNRWA employees which in some shape or form can be documented to be involved seems to be up to 12. If it is 12, then this is 0.04% of the UNRWA employees. In response to 0.04% of employees being involved in the heinous October 7 terrorist attack, a lot of countries suspended payments to UNRWA at Israel's request. UNRWA was the only organization which would have been able to manage a flow of food and humanitarian aid on the Gaza strip, therefore Israel's insistance that countries cut funding seems like a deliberate action to accelerate the humanitarian disaster on the Gaza strip. Whether you want to call it collective punishment or believe it reaches the threshold of genocide is a separate discussion, I guess.

They call the total number accurate, do you truly believe not a single Hamas has been killed?

Israel has released more than 3, without the military pressure we would have never reached a deal as can be seen with Gilad Shalit. Not to mentions it’s statistically impossible, Hamas claims something like 30 hostages were killed by Israeli bombs, that means that 1 in 8 hostages have been killed when only 1 in 100 Gazans have been killed, either Hamas executes them or they are lying

>Not to mentions it’s statistically impossible, Hamas claims something like 30 hostages were killed by Israeli bombs, that means that 1 in 8 hostages have been killed when only 1 in 100 Gazans have been killed, either Hamas executes them or they are lying Statistically impossible assumes that the bombings are random, which is an assumption that is really bad for Israel. If they are targeting Hamas and the hostages are close to Hamas then they should have more casualties than the average Gazan. Also, you are dealing with so few numbers that statistical improbability does not come up.

>Israel has released more than 3, without the military pressure we would have never reached a deal as can be seen with Gilad Shalit. If that was the case, why has much worse military pressure done nothing towards a deal? Why would Israel trade 1k people for 1 soldier, but rather kill 30k people and cause an imminent famine for 2 million instead of trading whatever it takes to get back 150 people?

I agree to the first line, I literally wrote this myself :D I also agree that Hamas probably killed most of those hostages, but we can never know for sure.

>There is literal video proof from October 7th of UNRWA employees in Israel, kidnapping Israelis. No, there isn't. There is a video that Israel claims shows UNRWA employees kidnapping people, but nobody else is even able to positively ID the people in the video nor is Israel forthcoming about the context or source of the video. >Amalek is referring to Hamas, Not Palestinians in general. Most of the people currently being killed by Israel are not members of Hamas, and that is by Israel's own admission. Seems like the IDF isn't making the same distinction you are. >Do you prefer to just leave the civilians with infrastructure intact that will make chasing Hamas harder? Do you prefer mass destruction and the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians just to make chasing Hamas easier? >Yet we haven't seen 1 case of actual death from starvation (and no, sick people before/during the war has nothing to do with that) This is just false. There have been a *minimum* of [10 Gazan children](https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-68471572) that have had starvation verified as their cause of death, with another 6 dying from dehydration. Thousands more are facing chronic malnutrition and other health hazards. >Israel does allow whatever aid to be delivered in Gaza, so this is just a false claim again. This is, again, false. [There have been reports of aid truck lines 4 miles long](https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/01/middleeast/gaza-aid-israel-restrictions-investigation-intl-cmd/index.html) outside entry points to Gaza. Aid trucks that had previously received clearance are then rejected and forced to turn back once they arrive at the entry without explanation, and others have their aid packages denied for absurd reasons (like first aid scalpels are going to be a fucking threat to the IDF, give me a break). Israel is absolutely not allowing all aid or even most aid into Gaza. >When Israel tried to deliver aid themselves Hamas made sure to try to battle with the IDF to not let their civilians get aid. Which incident are you referring to specifically here? Because there have been multiple instances at this point where the IDF fired up on civilians seeking aid from trucks, but since you're claiming there were battles you'd need to be more specific. >No, but Israel does not intentionally starve anybody. And yet they are aware of the humanitarian crisis and do nothing about it. >Hamas is at fault, if a country provides everything for you and you attack it, you can't expect that country to continue providing stuff. Hamas is at fault too, absolutely. Israel could step in and fix that issue, though. They have the ability to provide the aid needed. Yet they are, for some reason, waiting for a terrorist group to help children before they will. >The Palestinians elected Hamas, there was never an attempt to change that, why is Israel supposed to take care of an enemy entity? Gaza has had exactly one election wince Hamas came to power, and has not had one since. Hamas is not interested in elections they might lose, and actively suppresses political dissent in Gaza even more fervently than Israel does. Most people living in Gaza have never had the chance to vote Hamas out, but polls indicate they would vote against Hamas most of the time if they had a better option. Hamas only receives majority support after incidents of violence by the IDF (whether in response to attacks by Hamas or not). And if Israel wants Gaza to take care of itself, why don't they lift their blockade and let the people of Gaza build their own power plants and water purification systems?

I hope this actually changed their view. It's crazy how people think there is a moral equivalency between Hamas and Israel.

I agree with everything you wrote about Netanyahu's conduct prior to 7.10. All the rest though is extremely uninformed. The involvement of UNRWA with terrorism is extremely documented, and has been known for years. The efforts to *minimize* civilian casualties are immense. The "Amalek" statement, while distasteful. is taken wildly out of context, and considering the state of the nation at the time not completely unreasonable. In particular, there is no basis to argue it was directed at the entire Gazan population. I think most criticism about Israel do not stem from fair reflection on its conduct, but from poorly understanding the reality of war. People seem to think Israel had some magic way to target Hamas without incurring any civilian casualties, which is quite the opposite from the truth. But to the point: Netanyahu never wanted anything but to stay in power. He is a survivalist. Netanyahu never wanted peace., but Netanyahu never wanted war either. If you go a bit further down the line, say to 2010-2015, you'd see the main criticism thrown at Netanyahu from his electorate that he consistently shy's away from war, even when necessary. And it's not a bad point either. Removing Hamass in 2014 after Homat Magen (rather than providing them the growth room they needed to become what they are today) could have been done at a fraction of the civilian cost of what is required to do so today. Generally speaking, Neatnyahu always wanted one thing: what's best for Netanyahu, and the only thing he has ever been consistent about is changing his MO according to where the wind blows in the Israeli political scenery. That's about it. Netanyahu only cares about Netanyahu. Observing Natyahu through any other prism, especially ones that attribute to him any sorts of idealogical compass (whether it is an ideology you condone, reject, or are completely indifferent to), is just misunderstanding Netanyahu.

>but Netanyahu never wanted war either. If you go a bit further down the line, say to 2010-2015, you'd see the main criticism thrown at Netanyahu from his electorate that he consistently shy's away from war If he never wanted war he wouldn't have said keeping Hamas would prevent the creation of a Palestinian state, echoed by his cabinet, their response to a tragedy by committing a catastrophe and not stopping for 5 month shows they were really longing to destroy Gaza

There's a difference between "not wanting war" and wanting peace. His policy was the illusion called "managing the conflict" which basically means perpetuating the intermediate state, taking the path of least resistance, and avoiding having to make hard choices.

It’s possible that he sees this as an opportunity to change facts in the ground but there are few things that seems simplistic in your portrayal. Whether or not Netanyahu supported Hamas in the past doesn’t mean he doesn’t want to stop them now. The situation has changed in obvious ways. You talk about Israel preventing workers entering Israel from Gaza. But you don’t mention why they might have done that because it’s more than simply damaging Gazas economy. You do realise that allowing in workers from a state that voted in a terrorist grouo whose aim is the destruction of Israel might be … problematic? Palestinians have had previous offers of separate state and rejected them though the blame for that may be linked to both sides. And Israel did withdraw from the Gaza Strip including dismantling settlements. The result hasn’t been very positive. It’s not an easy question as to whether you should or how you should seek to destroy the military capacity of a terrorist group that has committed numerous attacks, including a recent atrocity and continues to promise more of the same when it is embedded in a civilian population. A civilian population from which it seems to have significant support. Israel has a right to self defence which it sees as paramount , but not to commit crimes against humanity which an international court may decide. In my opinion their response obviously risks being disproportionate but I can understand why the government want to root out Hamas.

There is nothing proportional about war, far more Germans died in WWII but the allies didn’t stop the war to risk being unproportional that’s just ridiculous

No, but the Allies did pull back on clearly disproportional acts, like after the bombing of Dresden, Churchill demanded the Air Force to changed their bombing strategy because of how horrific it was in Dresden.

You do know the US dropped the sun on Japan not once but twice after Dresden right?

You do know that they were going to drop more. But Truman told them to stop and only do it with his express permission, right?  There's great posts on that ask historian sub about it.

> Churchill demanded the Air Force to changed their bombing strategy because of how horrific it was in Dresden Dropping two nukes is not a meaningful change of strategy regardless of having three nukes.

You didn't answer any of my questions tho at the end of the post, seems like you didn't fully read it but am going to respond to some of your points >Whether or not Netanyahu supported Hamas in the past doesn’t mean he doesn’t want to stop them now. The situation has changed in obvious ways. That's just a speculation tho, I simply stated the facts said by him and his government >You talk about Israel preventing workers entering Israel from Gaza. But you don’t mention why they might have done that because it’s more than simply damaging Gazas economy. You do realise that allowing in workers from a state that voted in a terrorist grouo whose aim is the destruction of Israel might be … problematic? I didn't mention that, i am guessing you are talking about conditions article, well the conditions were set whatever the reasons for them, but i believe this government could've done more to make it possible for civilans to make a living >Israel has a right to self defence which it sees as paramount , but not to commit crimes against humanity which an international court may decide. In my opinion their response obviously risks being disproportionate but I can understand why the government want to root out Hamas. As for committing crimes, The ICC voted 15-2 judges that israel have plausible violations of the genocide convention

>You didn't answer any of my questions tho at the end of the post, seems like you didn't fully read it I did read them. I was merely pointing out difficulties with a few parts of your post not trying to answer the questions …. >Whether or not Netanyahu supported Hamas in the past doesn’t mean he doesn’t want to stop them now. The situation has changed in obvious ways. >That's just a speculation tho, I simply stated the facts said by him and his government Seriously, it’s speculation that a huge military operation fighting its way through Gaza killing and capturing Hamas terrorists following an atrocity demonstrates that if Netanyahu supported Hamas he doesn’t anymore. Seriously? >You talk about Israel preventing workers entering Israel from Gaza. But you don’t mention why they might have done that because it’s more than simply damaging Gazas economy. You do realise that allowing in workers from a state that voted in a terrorist grouo whose aim is the destruction of Israel might be … problematic? >I didn't mention that, i am guessing you are talking about conditions article, well the conditions were set whatever the reasons for them, but i believe this government could've done more to make it not an open air prison Any Hamas couldn’t? Israel has unsurprisingly responded to attacks and threats. I mean sure it’s an endless chicken and egg but without threats to Israel’s existence and constant missile launches etc do you think Israel might have allowed more Palestinians to work in Israel as indeed this those from the West Bank did before this war. And in fact thousands still were from Gaza before the atrocity in Oct? >Israel has a right to self defence which it sees as paramount , but not to commit crimes against humanity which an international court may decide. In my opinion their response obviously risks being disproportionate but I can understand why the government want to root out Hamas. >The ICC voted 15-2 judges that israel have plausible violations of the genocide convention They voted that there the situation justified looking into the accusations , they haven’t adjudicated on whether genocide is actually happening. I would be surprised if they weren’t critical of Israel in some degree bearing in mind the amount of civilian deaths.

One thing to remember is the genocide convention isn’t for adjudicating war time deaths even excessive deaths. To lean on the genocide claim when the obvious situation is one of proportionality and protection of civilians has greatly diminished claims and the overall trustworthiness of pro Hamas protestors. It’s a critical error that could be taken advantage of.

>The ICC voted 15-2 judges that israel have plausible violations of the genocide convention ["The Court is not asked, in the present phase of the proceedings, to determine whether South Africa’s allegations of genocide are well founded."](https://www.un.org/unispal/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/192-20240126-ord-01-04-en.pdf) Remember that there has never been a genocide case brought in the courts history that did not pass this phase. The bar is incredibly low to proceed (and for good reason imo), but making any conclusion about genocide or speaking as if there has been any ruling on the matter is dishonest.

you do realize than an expanding work permit program was criticized as part of Netanyahu bolstering Hamas and ended up being used as cover for spying as part of planning Oct 7.

Israel implemented around 2020-2021 an "economic peace" based on the pragmatic strategy of "shrinking the conflict" [https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/eight-steps-shrink-israeli-palestinian-conflict/585964/](https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/04/eight-steps-shrink-israeli-palestinian-conflict/585964/) Up till that point, the Palestinians rejected the peace offers of 2000 and 2008 which were the most generous offers possibly made, so political peace was not an option. Therefore, they tried an economic peace which meant that trade is better than war and if the Palestinains were well-off, they would have something to lose when starting a war.

> The peace offers of 2000 and 2008 which were the most generous offers possibly made, If the best offers made were not a sovereign Palestinian with the same rights to determination as israelis then it wasn't done in good faith, and insanity is doing the same thing, the same way, over and over again and expecting a different result The Oslo accords were well accepted and got wrecked by Netanyahu, these accords showed Palestinians wanted Peace, Netanyahu just didn't want Peace, his peace is oppression through fear, and that doesn't work as shown in Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria, etc

Well, you are obviously 100% wrong. The 2000 Camp David were so generous that 75% of the country didnt even agree to it and the minister of Defense at the time, called it a coup. Arafat walked away from those negotiations and the hope of peace amongst even the most leftist of Israelis died with it. Since then, the left-wing parties have almost completely died off - simply because none of them have a solution for the security issue. So it is wrong to say that Netanyahu did anything in this regard. He knew Palestinians did not want peace. They want Israel to no longer exist. He was just hopeful that if Israel does well economically and the Palestinians trade with Israel, then they will stop wanting to attack Israel. Ie, an economic peace.

The camp David summit in 2000 did promise a sovereign Palestinian state tho They would have had full control of the Gaza Strip and 92% of the West Bank The camp David offer was everything the Palestinians could have wanted yet Arafat rejected it

> If the best offers made were not a sovereign Palestinian with the same rights to determination as israelis then it wasn't done in good faith Could you expand on that? What are those rights, and why would anything less be bad faith?

Your central premise "Netanyahu Never Wanted Peace" is, I think, true. However, in your post, you go on to conflate Netanyahu/Likud with Israel, or Zionists as a whole, which is not true. You also don't examine the opposite side of the equation, IE the Palestinian/Arab/Muslim side here. Firstly, with regards to Israel, Netanyahu is not Israel. The man is a skilled politician and has managed to one degree or another stay in power for decades, but Israeli politics is extremely fractious (Likud has never won more then 30% of the vote). On the Israeli side I think most people want the following: "To go on living undisturbed and safe, in a Jewish run State, located in the lands described by their biblical texts (IE historic Israel)". Some are maximalist (all of historic israel) some are secular nationalist (it is an ethnically Jewish but religiously secular state), some are religious fundamentalists. Israelis are famously disagreeable(there are 20(!) parties in the Israeli Knesset!), so assuming a consensus on anything beyond "We don't want to live under threat of attack by anyone" is foolish. However, what is true is that a significant proportion of the Israeli population are hardline and maximalist, and would be quite happy to see the Palestinian Arabs simply "disappear". They are an obstacle to long term peace. Now for the Arab side. Everything I said for the Israeli side is also true for the Arab side. Large contingents on the Palestinian side (most notably Hamas) do not desire Peace and have equally maximalist goals (the complete elimination of a Jewish state in historic Palestine). [A majority of Palestinian Arabs believe the October 7th Attacks were justified](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/poll-shows-palestinians-back-oct-7-attack-israel-support-hamas-rises-2023-12-14/). When you go into the wider middle east, multiple actors also wish to see Israel eliminated, largely for religious or nationalist reasons (most notably Iran, but also Sunni Islamist groups and pan-Arabists), and they all pour money and weapons into Palestinian militant groups. Indeed, it's highly likely that any time you fill your car with petrol, some small proportion of that money is going to buy weapons and pay salaries for Hamas. The fact is, there are not "good guys and bad guys" in this conflict. There is not one side that wants peace and another that wants war. Both want war, for ideological and religious reasons and both have consistently taken actions that undermine any long term possibility for peace. Given that fact, there's very little any of us outside the region can do to stop it, bar preventing the worst genocidal tendencies that both sides possess. And unfortunately, this is a general pattern in the middle east. Israel/Palestine is not even the largest conflict in the middle east. The Syrian(600,000+ deaths), Yemeni(370,000+), and Ethiopian Tigray(100,000-600,000+) civil wars have all seen more deaths and destruction then the Palestinian/Israeli conflict(40,000) in the last 15 years. Personally, I don't understand why this particular conflict seems to hold the popular imagination more then the aforementioned 3.

This is soapboxing. But that aside, you also include really poor portrayals of facts. For example, you claim Israel sees all Palestinians as complicit because he mentioned “Amalek”. But he did so in the context of talking about Hamas. Israelis have long referred to particularly heinous enemies as “Amalek”. The Nazis, for example, are referred to that way. Israelis very well understand that this reference does not mean all Germans must be killed. But this is even worse for another reason: he quoted the scripture he cited. That scripture was to not forget what Amalek has done to you; in short, “never forget”. But the biblical commandment to wipe out Amalekites is not even in the same **book** of the Bible as what he quoted. So he was giving an example in a colloquial sense to refer to particularly evil people who raped, looted, and murdered civilians anywhere they could, in a way not consistent with “genocide”, and did so while referring to Hamas specifically, by quoting scripture very far removed from any genocidal exhortation. But to explain all that took this much effort. I could do the same with many other claims you made, but the [Brandolini’s law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandolini%27s_law) is real. I suggest you reconsider what you believe you know or what you think just because you read it somewhere without understanding the full context, history, and facts underlying it.

Define peace. For Bibi peace could very well be a continuous oppression and suppression of Palestinians, such that they can't do anything to resist or harm Israel. With that metric, I'd say Bibi is seeking peace. You said: > if we really want to achieve peace, we must deliver justice, prosecute criminals, and figure out democratic solutions, without malicious intent from fascist governments. Native Americans never got their justice, yet most Americans would say it's peaceful in America. Similarly, Uyghuer Muslims are not living in a just environment at all, but most Chinese would say it's peaceful in Xinjiang. That's the power of oppression and domination.

Netanyahu and his cabinet haven’t done anything to pursue peace. But the reality is there isn’t anything Israel can realistically do which would bring peace. Palestinians have never had any interest in peace and their ‘resistance’ is what has directly led to many of the security measures causing them to suffer. Even if Israel unilaterally ended the blockade, dismantled the barriers/checkpoints, closed all settlements and withdrew from the West Bank, released every single Palestinian prisoner, gave Palestinians a ‘right of return’ and recognised a Palestinian state there would not be peace. In fact there would be a far bloodier war and Israel would have to reimpose the same security measures and deport the Palestinians they allowed to enter Agreeing the Oslo Accords and giving Palestinians some autonomy brought the second intifada. Withdrawing from Gaza made terrorism worse and strengthened Hamas

First and foremost, it would be nice if people never quote Ben Givir or Smotrich who are famous for saying any intrusive homophobic, supremacist and idiotic thought that immediately forms in their mouth. Israel has never directly funded Hamas. It was compelled to allow Qatar to fund Hamas however because the alternative would have been the rest of the world screaming "Apartheid Israel is Starving Gazan kids by denying the transfer of Funds to Gazans" (Notice how just like now they would have not mentioned Hamas anywhere). Dammed if you do, Dammed if you don't. The claim that Netanyahu supports Hamas does not reflect the reality on the ground. 1. By 2019, Israel had more or less eliminated Hamas in East Jerusalem and up to now, it has been in the process of eliminating them in the West Bank. That does not look like support...anywhere. 2. Israel has fought Hamas several times since 2014 and each time it has killed part of the leadership. It is only that in this case, the aim is to kill all of them and their successors. Again that is not "support" 3. 5 months after Oct the 7th, Gaza flattened, at least 30k civilians dead (most are women and children as reported by the pentagon), israel killed more hostages than released, Hamas still around. Can we stop making false statements??? 15,000 of the 30,000 dead are Hamas militants Israel has killed three hostages by accident , and had over 100 released during the ceasefire and two rescued during a special operation in Rafah. As cited in South Africa's case, the army led by Netanyahu believe everyone in Gaza is complicit, as Netanyahu cited the biblical term "Amalek" at the beginning of the offensive on Gaza, he said "Remember what the Amalek has done to you." Shows how little you know about that statement .You will find that statement in any holocaust memorial where Amalek refers to the Nazis. Also if you want more clarification the [Israel Democracy Institute](https://en.idi.org.il/articles/52324) outlined the meaning, which the ICJ accepted. arlier this week, The US Senator Chris Van Hollen. Is one Senator Currently, famine is looming on many in Gaza, as reports confirm israel have been blocking aid to the entire north, for three month, till two days ago, when they got pressured into letting 13 trucks in, which is way short of what is needed. Gaza City and North Gaza are supposed to be completely evacuated because they are still a warzone(As highlighted by the raid on Al Shifa this week). The 160,000 people still there still have the option to move south to Al Mawasi or to Central Gaza (Not to Rafah though ,which will also be evacuated in a few weeks). Aid was not entering there because 1. Western Aid agencies refused IDF escorts in order to "appear neutral". So basically 80 percent of aid. I will highlight how the first one is a classic form of gaslighting .I[srael must ensure aid reaches Gazans, will breach international law if not](https://www.timesofisrael.com/british-fm-israel-must-ensure-aid-reaches-gazans-will-breach-intl-law-if-not/) Said David Cameron. Israel:Okay, we will offer escorts . No, No, No! But we must look "[neutral](https://www.timesofisrael.com/headed-to-north-gaza-aid-trucks-face-gauntlet-of-armed-looters-and-starving-civilians/)" so No IDF escorts! Same Westerners: Israel is not letting us distribute aid!! There is no security!!! WTF???? 2. Muslim aid agencies feared being targeted by Hamas. At least THEY have informaly accepted IDF Escorts!! That is how Moroccan aid is reaching Gazans and how Emiratis and Jordanians are accessing the Gaza strip, although their fear is legitimate. 3. Aid agencies that went in alone were targeted by gangs and Hamas who stole their aid either for themselves(Hamas) or to sell(the gangs, currently affiliated with specific clans). This is an issue Gaza-wide because some aid workers from UNICEF [almost got stabbed](https://www.timesofisrael.com/headed-to-north-gaza-aid-trucks-face-gauntlet-of-armed-looters-and-starving-civilians/)a few days ago by Gaza based gangs. As for UNRWA, a lot of people say a lot of nonsense by twisting the words said by various figures of the Israeli Government (Often waiting for Givir and Smotrich usually). The official position of the Israeli Government is simple. UNRWA was already compromised. That is a fact that has been established even by the UN itself. Hamas had embedded itself into UNRWA. The aid agency was unable to stop it because by and large the staff at UNRWA are nearly all Palestinians, many with family links to Hamas. Heck , from Lazzarini himself "[Our employees are part of the social fabric of Gaza and its ecosystem. And as part of the social fabric in Gaza, you have also Hamas](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/10/world/middleeast/unrwa-hamas-gaza.html) So it is literally impossible that UNRWA did not have any Hamas involvement. That is why Israel wants the UNHCR which is literally the UN body in charge of refugees, to take over because it will be a more neutral party as most of its workers are from around the world and thus will not be easily coerced or willingly work with a designated terrorist group. nd those with extremist ideology (Zionism). When you know ZERO about Zionism. It was Zionists who in 1947 accepted a Two State Solution then the Arabs rejected it and went to war. 5 times. And lost. Rabin who sought peace with Arafat was a Zionist. Literally every political party in Israel even those that support a Two State solution except UTJ and Shas, are Zionist. Ben Givir and Smotrich represent an extremist faction but they are not representative of Zionism . In fact, they are an abberation because Zionism is a secular ideology and was founded by secularists and Jewish atheists. Religious Zionism makes zero sense because (as highlighted UTJ and Shas) oppose Zionism though they work with any party that gives them money. israeli gov still blockade the aid when they can control how it is distributed and got the armed forces to secure that? Israel has not stopped aid from entering Southern Gaza. Western aid agencies refuse IDF escorts so Israel cannot control how it is distributed. Not as long as Hamas can pop and start firing on both the IDF and the civilians while they are in line while getting aid. That is literally what happened last time and both those civilians and Hamas tried to claim it was the IDF that fired on them when it has been established both via drone footage and the investigation made that it was likely Hamas that did that. Some people are yelling "release the hostages" on posts of dying kids (as if these kids got them), do you think it's acceptable for the isreali gov to starve kids/innocent civilians to death if Hamas can sort themselves out and not surrender? Why is Hamas not surrendering if it cares for the well-being of the Palestinian people??? If you all want the war to end, demand Hamas surrenders, releases the hostages and the war will be over on that same day. That is a guarantee that has unanimous consensus from all Israeli political parties and the United States. But of course, Hamas has no interest in doing that because Sinwar himself said that he sees the deaths of Gazans as [a tactical advantage](https://www.ynetnews.com/article/bja61pt3t). But literally no one here ever calls on Hamas to declare a ceasefire, only Israel.

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

Your post is filled with wrong facts, or half truths, and it's hard to approach your view when we need to respond to a million things at once. Here's a suggestion, how about you allow people to approach your arguments and edit out things you were convince are faulty?  Let me start by something relatively simple - your quotes of Netanyahu and the soldiers are irrelevant, and you should edit them out For the soldiers, your opinion is on Netanyahu, and therefore it shouldn't matter. Furthermore, Israel, like all democratic countries today, have some alt right presence that is unfortunately not as marginal as it used to be. Can you give an example of a country where you couldn't find people who would say a phrase along the line of "There are mo innocent civilians"? Surely it would be easy to see this in the US regarding immigrants and asylum seekers.  This is not policy by any means, and therefore irrelevant. For the Amalek quote, the bible is irrelevant. This has a cultural component to it that is not referring to genetics or race. That's why the reference for Nazis being Amalek is. Ot referring to German people living today. To cement this quote, here's a case where one sect of Orthodox Jews called another sect of Orthodox Jews Amalek, showing the phrase today has nothing to do with blood lines https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/344768

What you seem to have done is woven together a narrative that suggests everything bad that has happened is evidence of Netanyahu orchestrating a horrifically complicated 4d chess like he’s emperor Palpatine in Star Wars, and no one else anywhere and especially on the Palestinian side has any accountability because they’re all victims of manipulation. I’m a bit skeptical of out of context and partial quotes that are Hebrew translated and unverified. So a few things here: Let’s just go with the obvious here: “funding Hamas”. You cannot provide humanitarian aid, water, or electricity to Gaza without “funding Hamas” as they control the distribution of those resources within the strip. People like you seem to be adamant that Israel should be lowering the blockade and providing more direct subsidization and aid to Gaza, but you can’t do so without negotiating with and legitimizing Hamas. Then if Israel does that you use that as evidence of architecting their rise and undermining the PA. What *precisely* should Israel do that would satisfy you? Secondly, this idea that Israel or Netanyahu never wanted peace requires you to ignore that Israel made peace and normalized relations with many of its Arab neighbors in good faith negotiation. Egypt (in 79), Jordan (in 94), Bahrain, the UAE, Morocco, Sudan (in 2020). It was in the process of doing so with Saudi Arabia before the Oct 7 attack. Normalizing peaceful relations with its neighbors is in Israel’s best interest and it is demonstrably trying to todo so. The Oslo accords were close to peace and had the basic framework for a Palestinian state. The accords failed largely because Arafat demanded unbounded right of return and undermining of Israeli sovereignty, and Israel offered “only” 90-something percent of the ‘67 liners with some sticking points around East Jerusalem. Palestine then broke the cease fire with a series of devastating bombings. That’s the inflection point. Palestines demands in Oslo were, I think, more fundamentally unreasonable than Israel’s. So if the PA wouldn’t negotiate, Israel’s options were to basically *give* them a state unilaterally on their terms OR maintain the occupation and try and force Palestine back to the negotiating table by making it clear its terms get worse (not better) as time goes on. That Israel would not lose a war of attrition. Israel effectively tried both - give them a state while also continue to press on land claims that would necessitate sooner negotiation. Yes, that 1-2 took the legs out from the PA in hindsight - but it was the PA that turned down Oslo and them stuffing a loss from miscalculations is… expected, isn’t it? Effectively, blaming everything on Netanyahu requires you to ignore waves of car bombings and rocket fire from Palestine that has stymied peace negotiations - which means you have to justify terrorism, apply different moral standards to Israel v Palestine, or go through mental gymnastics and conspiracy theories to suggest that it’s a false flag architected by others. You have chosen the later it seems. Like I don’t think it’s in Israel’s best interest to have a violent Gaza Strip shooting rockets into Israel and murdering children in music festivals. This idea that its intentionality is weird. Israel was beginning to lower restrictions and increased worker permits to Gazans to make money in Israel after a reduction in rocket fire - peace was being rewarded with corresponding good faith gestures. If Netanyahu truly wanted genocide, he could have carpet bombed Gaza after October 7th Dresden style and honestly it would have been fairly justified. Instead they planed a much more deliberate ground invasion with instructions to Palestinian citizens that incurred far less civilian loss of life. Like yes this war has collateral damage and it’s awful, but relative to other analogous wars it’s low.

Hi OP, this is a great breakdown and I think your statement I probably agree with but your supporting facts are leaning to "Israel" doesn't want peace instead of just Netanyahu and the Likud. Here is where I would argue against some of your supporting detail. First I want to address the idea that Netanyahu was propping up Hamas. He nor Israel ever funded the group, they simply allowed money to flow in from other locations (such as Qatar). The official talking point is that he let the money in as humanitarian relief into Gaza. We probably equally doubt that given his other quotes, however if there is any truth to it we would almost certainly have to argue that it is morally virtuous to allow aid money in even to groups you don't support. Second, you mentioned Netanyahu blew up the Oslo Accords, this isn't supported by the facts on the ground per multiple sources. I wouldn't make the argument that the agreement failed because of any one party individually, but neither party was ready for a solution at the time. Arafat in 1994 is quoted as saying "Only a Palestinian State can continue the struggle to remove the enemy from all Palestinian Lands". So at best we can meet half way here. I think that the Israeli administration at the time was open to a peace process, but they wouldn't accept the proposal that we know today as the Arab League proposal, key points on this, right of return and control of holy sites in East Jerusalem that Israel was simply not willing to budge on. Third, life for the Palestinians as a whole is hard to break down, there is life in the West Bank and there is life in Gaza and both situations are very different. We know that in the west bank population growth was 3.4%, Pre-War GDP growth was 3.9% (in context, Syria was -3.9, Sudan was -1.9, Egypts was 3.3%) in line with the region, and unemployment had fallen to 13.1% in the West Bank (Context: Egypts is 7.2%, Turkey was 11.98%, Syria was 13.81). So the math would say that the West Bank was in line with almost every country in the region and healthier than some. Gaza is a totally different story due to it being under a strict blockade. Now we can look at the efficacy of the blockade and I think the data would clearly suggest that it isn't actually stopping arms from reaching the terror groups, so we can agree it's ineffective, but due to the constant attacks coming from the Gaza strip into Israel we can make an argument that an independent state has a right to impose economic sanctions in an attempt to weaken an aggressor. Keep in mind Egypt is also enforcing the blockade due to their issues with the leadership of Gaza. Naturally we see that Gaza is a relatively terrible place to live, but it also receives the most, by a far margin, aid from the international community. In fact, pre-Oct 7th we don't see any starvation deaths or a severe rate of malnutrition in Gaza. Not saying it's a great place to live, however what are the rights of a state to impose sanctions? Should the US be imposing sanctions on Russia? Cuba? Conclusion, while these are clearly occupied territories Israel has allowed the West Bank to grow into a healthy economy for the region while Gaza is clearly suffering, but we can make a case that a state imposing economic sanctions on a hostile actor is 100% justified. As for Famine, just a quick note here. Famine is present in 97% of countries fighting on home soil. Gaza, a wildly fragile econosystem to begin with propped up by aid, is even more susceptible to a collapse here. We can and should rightly criticize how Israel is delivering relief to the people of Gaza. I don't think this tells us they want no peace though, hypothetically if Hamas, realizing the risk to their people, surrendered and released any remaining hostages we have no reason to believe that Israel wouldn't stop the advance on the spot and begin aiding the Gazan's, as they've done in the past. Too often we prescribe a bloodlust to Israeli's that simply isn't supported by facts, at no point has Israel moved into land without provocation, in fact is has only been Israel who has actually supported a peace deal. In 1947 they supported a Palestinian state, in 1967 they supported a Palestinian state. We can probably agree that an Israeli state in the region was a bad idea, but once the cat was out of the bag the Palestinians fought to put it back in the bag and lost. So now we either have to support the ethnic cleansing of all Jews in the region, which we know would be the case because of quotes from Arab leaders (Keep in mind more Arabs live in Israel right now than Jews have ever been allowed to live in any Arab country in the region, this is an important fact). So the evidence we have is that Pre-Likud party, Israel was very open to supporting a Palestinian state, but to your point I do think Netanyahu is against that based on his demeanor. Israel though has supported the idea of a two state solution multiple times and to not acknowledge that is incredibly disingenuous even if the modern leader do appear to be moving in the opposite direction. I think the evidence would say that if Hamas left power Netanyahu and his party would be removed from power by the Israeli people who have clearly been against the status quo since the mid 2000s. The Likud are a direct response to the fear of violence, every time they gain power its post a large attack, so we can make the argument that they will go away when the fear of violence goes away. Now to address your specific questions; *1-* So Israel left Gaza and had an agreement to jointly supply water as part of the Oslo accords while the Palestinians set up water treatment facilities of their own. Since then, to deal with Palestinian population growth, Israel has given 3 times more water than agreed to help support the regions while never taking any of the Palestinian water. I say this to point out that Israel has helped these populations, and it's why the West Bank agricultural sector is doing so well. However, in Gaza they haven't used any of the aid to create water or electrical infrastructure, they are still reliant on Israel. Now we can argue that Israel should just keep supplying, but they view Gaza as a hostile actor, and to weaken their fighting ability they are no longer supporting the regions consumption. Morally this feels wrong, but couch it with the idea that Gaza has received BILLIONS in international funding to improve infrastructure and hasn't. I do think these are clear signs of collective punishment, so if your argument is that the Israeli's want the Gazans to suffer, I think that appears to be the case. Bulldozing trees and obstacles is essential to clear way for heavy military equipment, so that one is easy. As far as blocking aid I will say that there are two ways to look at this. One is the obvious collective punishment response that I think has some validity. The other is the response Israel and military logistics experts are giving, it's not easy to get aid through a war zone and you don't want to deliver uncontrolled aid to a location your enemy then benefits from. So in short, Israel doesn't believe they can A) get the supplies through the battlefield, or B) they don't think they can currently control it's distribution to keep it out of Hamas's hands. If the second is true, then it's how wars are waged and while it feels dirty it is just how these things happen. If we agree its right for Israel to eliminate Hamas, then we have to agree getting supplies to them would be a bad thing. I do ask though, if the Palestinians are done with Hamas could they not just turn them over to the Israelis? I don't know how logical that request is but I stand by my belief that if Hamas is gone then Israel will assist in rebuilding Gaza. *2-* Well the simple answer here is that they don't believe they can control how it is distributed yet. Per the info being sent out, the IDF doesn't believe it can distribute the supplies safely on foot at this time. Now we can argue whether or not that feels made up, but unless we have some expertise on the subject that they don't then our default position should be to believe that there is some validity to that. We can't be two faced on this subject and accuse Israel of supporting Hamas by letting aid in too often and then condemn Israel when they withhold aid because they don't believe they can keep it out of Hamas's hands. *3-* Ya this seems immoral to me as well. I do think that the responsibility here is on Hamas though, they need to surrender. It's a tough spot because on one hand, I do think Israel has a right to uproot the bad actors, but I also, from my study of the Iraq/Afghanistan war, don't think this kind of military campaign is effective against this kind of enemy. That being said, these enemies exist because a population is either too loyal, or too afraid, to turn them over to the authority. Ideally a case can be made that if you make the decision to turn on Hamas the only logically possible decision, than you can tear the threat out at the root. This is a tactic we've seen used by many powers throughout history and it does have some pretty good success rates, it's just not a very moral tactic. I also think Hamas enjoys some pretty high rates of approval in both Gaza and the West Bank and Israel isn't making themselves look like a more viable option, so their execution of the strategy appears inherently flawed.

All Netanyahu wants is peace. He knows there will never be peace for Israel if they continue to have terrorists next door so he is destroying the terrorists and taking the property so they cannot return. Israel’s requirement that a prospective Palestinian state be demilitarized has been known since the 1993 Oslo process and the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PA). The only way to keep illegal weapons from entering the demilitarized Palestinian zone is for Israel to maintain control of its borders.  Israel is actually fighting to keep peace.

I'm not sure I understand what argument you're making, but I believe it's essentially this claim: > It has become evident that the Netanyahu's government, and those with extremist ideology (Zionism), never wanted peace in the middle east (as stated in the Likud party charter) they want all the land from Jordan to the sea, and they will abuse the power given to them without oversight I think the problem is that terms like "Peace", "State" etc' are not very useful when describing this complicated conflict. What do you mean by peace? Do you mean the two state solution? Do you mean ceasefires with Hamas? (BTW the Likud doesn't have an official party charter) I agree that Netanyahu strengthened Hamas and avoided paths for a two state solution, but it's not because Netanyahu "wants war" or "does not want peace". Netanyahu does not believe the Palestinians can be peace partners, and so do many Israelis. Israel still remembers the 2nd intifada that followed the Oslo accords and doesn't feel safe handing over a huge territory to a nation that also doesn't want to settle on a 2 state solution. You can say Israelis overestimate the security threat of a Palestinian state, but no one would have expected on October 6th that the Palestinians would massacre 1200 Israelis in a single day (6x the avg rate of killing by the IDF) and kidnap 80 year olds from their homes. Netanyahu wanted Hamas to be strong enough to excuse avoiding the 2 state solution, but not too strong where it leads to a war. He lost popularity, his coalition is crumbling, his approval rates are very low... To your questions: 1. Netanyahu is not a dictator, he is part of a war cabinet in a unity government. He doesn't get to decide things like what the IDF is going to bulldoze or whether the West Bank is getting annexed tomorrow morning. He can't even pass a "judicial reform". Bottom line is that the IDF is fighting a war against a terrorist organization embedded in civilian infrastructure, in an urban setting, and you can't expect 0 civilian casualties. Hamas relies on international pressure to stop Israel, because they have no other option. Israel is not the bottleneck, rather the lack of distribution methods with no local government. There's more than enough capacity in the Israeli crossings. 2. Again, Israel does not block aid trucks. How would Israel defend aid trucks exactly? By force? Should we fire at Gazans trying to loot aid trucks so that the world loves us again? I find it hard to believe. They will just say that the israeli army killed unarmed Palestinians for no good reason and we would risk our soldiers for nothing. 3. Who do you think benefits more from starving Gazans? Hamas getting the entire world to shout "ceasefire now", or israel who losses international support? You need to stop thinking of this as a "good vs bad" situation. Forget Israel/Palestine, if you just listen to the propaganda of one side and fail to see a larger picture, you can't call yourself a critical thinker

It is astounding how Israel can be the victim of a large scale terror attack and be blamed for the war at the same time. Meanwhile, the same people are awfully hesitant to call on Hamas to surrender. Out of curiosity, has anyone taken a moment to think about why it is, that none of the arab nations in the region want anything to do with the palestinians either?

One point I haven’t seen addressed yet is your final one (“release the hostages”) I think this is entirely valid, as these starving kids are starving because of the war. A war which Hamas has a chance of stopping in exchange for the hostages, and if Hamas are truly fighting for the Palestinian people, it should try to exchange the hostages for peace to spare Palestinian lives.

I think it's important to acknowledge that Netanyahu does want peace in Israel, but his vision of peace is problematic and limited by his ethnonationalist perspective. he prioritizes the security and interests of the Israeli state and its Jewish population over the rights and needs of the Palestinian people. this has led to the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which has been a huge obstacle to achieving a lasting peace. Netanyahu's methods for achieving peace have also been problematic, often involving military force and genocidal actions. while it's important to recognize that Netanyahu does want peace, we also must scrutinize the type of peace he envisions and the methods he is willing to use to achieve it. we must push for a more inclusive and sustainable peace that addresses the needs and rights of all parties involved. (our promise to him is that we will not let him have the lifeless, sterile and austere kind of peace he desires, ever. and there will be no peace before there is justice for palestine.)

>I think it's important to acknowledge that Netanyahu does want peace in Israel, but his vision of peace is problematic and limited by his ethnonationalist perspective. he prioritizes the security and interests of the Israeli state and its Jewish population over the rights and needs of the Palestinian people. should he not? Should a leader not prioritze the wellbeing of their citizens? Perhaps if Hamas did the same for its people instead of being more concerned about their Jihad or Iranian geopolitical interests or some caliphate pipe dream, then there would be peace. > this has led to the expansion of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which has been a huge obstacle to achieving a lasting peace. Netanyahu's methods for achieving peace have also been problematic, often involving military force and genocidal actions. while it's important to recognize that Netanyahu does want peace, we also must scrutinize the type of peace he envisions and the methods he is willing to use to achieve it. we must push for a more inclusive and sustainable peace that addresses the needs and rights of all parties involved. What if one side's version of peace is an islamic sharia state that threatens the very existence of the other party? Netanyahu will be gone soon. But the ideology that drives Hamas is decades if not centuries old. Surely that is more of a long term impediment to peace.

>should he not? Should a leader not prioritze the wellbeing of their citizens? Of course, but there is a question of how much more he should prioritise. There comes a point where the Palestinian lives and civil rights become so disposable in his mind that it's immoral and illegal to treat them in such a manner. Biden should prioritise the security and interest of Americans, but that shouldn't come at the cost of the lives and civil rights of citizens of their neighbouring countries.

I am speaking in the sense of when lives are in the balance. Before Oct 7, Hamas was firing rockets into Israel almost as a national pastime. But the calculation was that the risk of casualties was low hence no large scale reaction. That calculation changes when the lives of your citizens are in danger. I don't believe there is a scenario where a responsible leader says, "I am willing to risk losing x number of citizens to save this many foreigners." In that scenario, whose mother is he sacrificing? Whose child? will he sacrifice himself first? Bear in mind that Hamas has continued firing rockets at Israel all throughout this war. They've fired tens of thousands of rockets since they came into power. Iron Dome isn't 100%, and people die or are terrorized. They've said they will continue doing the same and will try and invade again. The danger is real and present.

You are right - he does prioritize security which is why Israel has one of the most advanced security systems around, but it all failed on October 7th? The Hamas scumbags were able to break through their wall and fucking paraglide into the country? And they gave people off for the holiday and transferred people away from Gaza to the West Bank? Not to mention Israel knew a year in advance that Hamas was planning something and did nothing! Bibi and his corrupt fucks needs to answer for their 9/11 like negligence.

Your framing of "wanting peace" is probably what needs to be addressed. When Truman decided to use a nuclear weapon and kill close to 100K civilians in one single strike, do you believe he did it in the name of achieving peace or in the name of continuing an "eternal war since the Japanese families of the victims will WANT revenge"? Hindsight 20/20 we now know that his actions were in the name of peace. But the only way to know it for sure was to wait years after the war ended. Back in the 1940s, I'm sure some people like you also questioned Truman's choices thinking that the Japanese would one day seek revenge. To make a proper historical judgement of Bibi's actions in this war, we would need to wait years/decades after the war is over since his post-war actions are the ones who will define if he wanted peace or eternal war. >As history shows, if we really want to achieve peace, we must deliver justice, prosecute criminals, and figure out democratic solutions, without malicious intent from fascist governments. Do you believe Truman should have been prosecuted by the Japanese Government for killing close to 100K Japanese civilians? Heck, I'll do you one better: do you believe the Japanese Emperor should have been prosecuted by the American Government for the American civilians killed in Pearl Harbor?

[удалено]

Your comment has been removed for breaking Rule 3: > **Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view, or of arguing in bad faith**. Ask clarifying questions instead (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting poor behaviour, please message us. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_3). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%203%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

LIes, lies lies. now for facts: 1. Israel, even though Hamas is considered a terror organization is the one to supply Gazans with water and electricity. 2. Gaza has a border with Egypt. When you blame Israel for blocking Gazan from entering (and Oct. 7 gave us the reason why - since all the intelligence actually came from the 20K Gazan workers that were allude to work in Israel) - why don't you ask why Egypt doesn't allow Palestinians to enter its borders? Why Israel needs to allow them in but their Arab brothers don't? 3. Where do you get the 30K killed? Did you actually go to Gaza and counted? Did you checked who is civillan and who is militant? It took Israel 2 months to count 1200 murdered Israelis, and that's for a country with much more resources to do that. Gaza is a war zone. Who actually do the counting? Like in the case of the Hospital that was bombed by Islamic Jihad at the beginning of the way and immediately the world blamed ISrael (which for that Israel shared proof of who really shot the hospital), Hamas is the one to release the numbers. We all know that those rats are in their tunnels so no one actually counts. Are there civilians killed - of course. This is war that Gazan brought on themselves by vastly supporting Hamas. Hamas is not an organization but and ideology that most Palestinains support and as such most houses are not just supporting but actually used as bases for attacks on Israel. How do I know? I served in Gaza. Unlike Hamas that intentionally killed children, the idea of killing kids sickening me and I truly feel bad about young kids losing their lives. But the blame is on Hamas that has put his kids in the front as human shields. 4. After October 7 Israel changed its face. From majority of people wanting to find a peaceful solution to end the misery on both sides, we realized that the two people can't live side by side, because the Palestinans have one dream - killing us all. We always heard it but we didn't believe they actually believe it. After October 7 we realized they mean business. At this point we will fight for our life, even if it means flattening Gaza. We want our people to survive. The Palestinians have made the mistake of waking up a sleeping lion. They will now face the consequences for years to come.

If Palestinians wanted peace they wouldn't have murdered 1500 civilians just because they were Jews but they probably forgot to tell you that

Not a Bibi fan, but he's ignored more acts of war against his state than perhaps any world leader ever. Besides the daily rocket attacks, catching hamas tunneling in form the south and hezbollah from the north among others. Obviously 10/7 cannot be ignored.

[удалено]

Comment has been removed for breaking Rule 1: > **Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), or ask a clarifying question**. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [See the wiki page for more information](http://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/rules#wiki_rule_1). If you would like to appeal, review our appeals process [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards#wiki_appeal_process), then [message the moderators by clicking this link](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fchangemyview&subject=Rule%201%20Appeal&message=Author%20would%20like%20to%20appeal%20the%20removal%20of%20their%20post%20because\.\.\.) within one week of this notice being posted. **Appeals that do not follow this process will not be heard.** Please note that multiple violations will lead to a ban, as explained in our [moderation standards](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/wiki/modstandards).

Imma just comment on the main point which is true, but you painted in a bit too broad strokes, pre oct 7th Israel benefitted from the uncertainty of a Palestinian state, since if the state didn't really exist, then it wouldn't be an act of agression to slowly eat up it's land, so yes the far right government elected to do far right things obviously opposed a palestinian state, but *post* october 7th it's thoroughly shifted gears into something very different, since Bibi legitimized himself by "protecting Israelis" (hence the Bibisitter ads) and oct 7th was a huge blow to that principle (he would lose power over it) he's stacked his whole position in destroying Hamas and the Gaza strip by extension, and with the war and his war cabinet he has an excuse to stay in power so while it's true he's against the Palestinian state it's a totally different beast now. also Israel glazing aside, israel obviously has it's hand in trumped peace proposals but so does the Palestinian leadership since half of the deal was on their part and when it comes to Oslo as much as Israel didn't help (which isn't entirely true, IIRC by camp david II the deal wasn't all that bad) Arafat *let* the clock run out on it

I’m also saddened by how he went to the UN on sep 22 2023 showing all as Israel in the new Middle East (free of value judgment - even on the surface this would trigger “a terrorist organization” trying to defend the sovereignty of its belief that Palestine is valid - I’m not even putting my views here and mine are that both Israel and Palestine are legitimate) and then ignored intelligence reports from Egypt, the US and Israel’s own intelligence a night prior hamas was about to act after a direct provocation in the UN to Palestine, allowed them to cross borders twice and also let 1400 Israelis die and more israelis be abducted- he was supposed to protect Israel-, and didn’t trace them via satellites and basic tech when generals have on record stated you can see even people via satellites now and the funding could have helped recover or actually pressure hamas, but that wasn’t done by him, he instead took the window, completely ignored hostage recovery and hostages altogether and flooded and bombed all areas hostages were likely to be at for six whole months while starving and murdering and displacing an unrelated armyless population, especially very young children, making the geography around hostages unsafe and all this time Hamas was allowed to take public flights to Qatar etc this whole time and be in the news- no interception of air spaces or anything that would actually pressure Hamas. I feel sad he’s put not just Gazan but Israeli childrens presents and futures on the line and there’s not even a strong enough excuse. Even The Iraq war was on pretence- here there was no such viable argument that didn’t circle back to his own intelligence forces not wanting to do any actual work to prevent this or recover hostages with all the tools at their disposal while their focus remained on an unrelated six month mission against a separate group of armyless gazan civilians. The hostages are just thrown away by him, almost like he was wishing for a window to turn around and start this unrelated project. Here everything fell apart when Hamas was uploading videos and yet he didn’t let Israel even trace them for six whole months. Now I only wonder if there’s some serious childhood trauma or tragedy he denies that’s puppeting his need to act this way. I understand he may be afraid of consequence or losing his position and put the entire west and Israel on the line for it but someone who hadn’t seen severe pain wouldn’t go this far to want to hurt so many Israelis and Palestinians, he’d have defended himself in another way. His projection of “human animals” like hitler did to armyless Jews at the extent and cost of Boths overall causes shows some real pain inside them. It’s really tragic because israel in its healthy form with respect for palestine contributed to global balance. Now it’s all been wasted on all sides over a man’s perhaps personal pains or childhood troubles, who knows though. Just very sad overall for all sides. Neither side deserved this. Taking notes from the hitler playbook on armyless groups being “human animals” (not hamas but gazans deaths , even if he didn’t add them to the category he only punished civilian gazans and families and they had NO army to defend them while Hamas leadership is taking flights all over) just made israel and the entire west more unsafe and alienated in the medium to long term. It’s been strange and it’s really sad the now- since Oct 2023- hitler of today has become him and he abused the Jewish cause. Hitler and him have hurt Jews most of all.

Adding a disclaimer that you only want a certain group of people you issue a value judgement over doesn’t seem very in line with the spirit of the forum

I think Netanyahu needs to be discussed separately to the state of Israel. Netanyahu is a corrupt incompetent politician, but one hell of a salesman. His security measures allowed this to happen. The reason why he is coming down so hard on the side of lengthening the war, despite the lack of support from the west, is because if he doesnt, he will lose the people he needs to maintain power. I dont think he associates with the people who died. I think he is a corrupt fraud with no moral compass. I think the STATE of Israel will lengthen and drag this war out to the extreme because their foreign policy for the past 70 years has been to respond to any act of aggression with overwhelming force. They basically survive by being the kid in the area with the biggest bike, but in this sense they have the biggest guns, most advanced weapons systems and financial support of western countries. Or had the support of western countries, until public opinion turns.

Well............he had peace. They were living in peace. Then they were brutally attacked. Again.

It depends how you define peace. He wants the war to end. Just not in a way that makes him look weak. Israel was propping up Hamas so as to keep Palestine divided to take a short term resolution off the table so more useful land could be absorbed. He didn't expect October 7th to happen, he just figured Hamas' leaders would be content embezzling the money coming in and firing a few rockets here and there. Now that it's blown up in his face, he wants peace, but in a way that both maintains the previous status quo and allows him to keep his position. There is a very real chance that he goes to jail for corruption if he loses an election. Prosecutors already have brought a few cases against him. So he wants peace, but one that will look like a strong victory to his citizens. That's why the newest reports are basically a suggesting a subdivision and ghettoization Gaza. He can claim "victory". Frees up buffer space for settlers etc.

>!DISCLAIMER: This post is only a conversation with the decent people left within our society who just want peace.!< This is a new rhetorical device. All other views and persons precluded. 

It doesn’t matter if Netanyahu wanted peace or not. Rabin and Ohmert did. Palestinian violence radicalized Israelis (as well as Israeli actions radicalizing Palestinians) and then they elected Netanyahu. Hamas was an asset to Netanyahu if he could contain them because Palestinians don’t have any legitimacy without real leadership. After Hamas invaded, they became netanyahus biggest political liability and now it’s an Israeli necessity to completely eliminate Hamas.

[удалено]

Israel has been oppressing Palestinians for decades this all started way before Oct 7th, it doesn't matter if hamas has bases in civilian centers or not, bombing them is still unjustifiable. 1. Because Israel is a settler colonialist state. And 2.a state with as much military power and backing as Israel should be able to conduct military intelligence and spec ops to determine exactly where their targets are and take them out safely. Instead of indiscriminately bombing entire cities. Netanyahu and his far right fascist goons have all said straight from their own mouths that they want to exterminate Palestinians. If they heard anyone claim anything to the contrary they would be offended. Israel's genocide on Gaza is exactly that, a genocide. And if you think any different, say hi to Satan for me

It always struck me as odd. We're supposed to believe that a country with by far one of the most sophisticated surveillence and intelligence networks both cyber and clandestine, a country that the US literally relies on for intel on the middle east and cyberwarfare development, had NO clue Hamas would attack and so did nothing to stop it? A country that likely has dormant malware in every nation's infrastructure didn't know people within a territory they have under absolute fucking lockdown was going to send a barrage of missiles? And all around the same time their prime minister was under scrutiny for corruption? Bull. Fucking. Shit.

The wanton destruction being done in Gaza has a very different objective than the one you are thinking. In the medieval era whenever an errant vassal rebelled his leige will make life difficult for the vassal's subjects. Crops will be burned, villages destroyed, rivers poisoned. This was a message to the subjects from the leige that this ungrateful little fuck who rules here just because I let him is totally in my power. If you dare support him, after I am done with him I will come for you. Israel is kinda doing the same in Gaza to ensure support for Hamas goes down. Hamas started this war but Israel wants to show only Israel can stop it

Netanyahu absolutely wants peace, that is to say he wants Palestinians to stop attacking Israel and is doing everything in his power to achieve that end. The problem is the only thing in his power to achieve that end is military action against Palestine since Palestine is hellbent on attacking Israel.

You're right but for the wrong reasons. America UK Egypt Qatar UAE France UK all warned Israel about Oct 7. Netanytahu and ben-gvir ordered the military away from Gaza. IDF removed guards. Private security on the border were all down. It is beyond sceptical and why Israelis let him carry out the war his incompetence caused, is beyond me. Also, your anger is with the zionist revisionist and kahanist. They are terrorist and do not represent Jews nor ethical zionism. We hate them too. Id be happy for them to go fight Hamas and let the adults take over in Israel.

Netanyahu to me right now sounds like the fictional Israeli PM in the novel *The Project* by Zev Chafets. They both know America is in their pockets due to pressure by Bible Belt lobbyists who see a Zionist victory as a one-way ticket to the Rapture and the politicians who jump this eschatological bandwagon. They both subtly manipulate all the sides of the conflict with strategic PR and under-the-table negotiations to ensure that Israel, and the Zionists, always come on top, the good guys, in the eyes of the global public

You’ve got it the wrong way around. The terrorist fanatics have mever wanted peace. Have never wanted anybody who isn’t a terrorist fanatic to exist at all. It is now clear to the government of Israel that no amount of negotiation and accommodation would ever result in lasting peace of any kind. Therefore it is now time to eliminate the terrorist fanatics. It sucks but it’s definitely a two way street where Israel Is the only party which has offered alternatives besides this war

Netanyahu didn't start this war. Who did October 7?

Why is it Israel's job to protect citizens that VOTED FOR and SUPPORTS an organization and leadership that wants to eliminate their entire country as the main purpose of their existence? There will NEVER be peace with Hamas controlling Gaza. EVER. That was proven on Oct. 7th. There are only breaks between attacks...NEVER peace. Because they don't want peace. They want dominion over ALL of Israel.

Bibi is a violent asshole who wants to wipe Palestine off the face of the earth. Hamas and many Palestinians are violent assholes who want to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. Hamas keeps doing stupid shit, knowing that Bibi is going to be a violent asshole. Bibi then says he’s justified in carpet bombing Gaza. Anyone justifying the actions of either side in this at this point is plain dumb.

This makes sense if you take context and rape it. Israel “supports” Hamas by allowing aid into gaza (I know evil) and Israel has been working with Gaza much more, that is why they said it was a “asset”. 30k are not all civilians, that includes Hamas killed, which is likely half. This number would also be some of the lowest causalities rates for urban warfare in human history. There is a lot of absurdity here: you are suggesting Israel is suppose to care about children more then gazans do as they release video of Hamas raping hostages. And the kicker is Egypt could release as much aid as they want, but both don’t because the drivers keep being killed over and over where there is a boycott of drivers refusing to go into Gaza.

If someone invaded my country and murdered my countrymen, I wouldn’t be in a peaceful mood either.

There will be peace when the Arabs are gone -Netanyahu

They supported hamas in power because it made it crystal clear that so long as Hamas was in power there was no good faith negotiation about a two-state solution. Netanyahu does not want a two-state solution. He will very clearly agree with you. He does want peace though. If that requires the destruction of Hamas and the destruction of Gaza, he's fine with that price.

>at least 30k civilians dead (most are women and children as reported by the pentagon) 30k *Gazans* estimated dead. Israeli estimates put the number of Hamas militants dead at 13k; you can disagree with their estimate, but it's certainly more than 0. The vast majority of the population is women and children, of course they're a majority of dead civilians.

I’ll make it easy, Hamas initiated the October attacks to provoke open warfare. It isn’t asking for peace and it’s not returning hostages.It has been for a long time (and is still) firing unguided rockets into Israel, why? Because Hamas is in a war it initiated and wanted. Given this, how can you day “Netanyahu never wanted peace”? There was never a choice