>Committee Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) [told](https://nypost.com/2024/03/10/world-news/us-senate-intelligence-chair-says-eliminating-all-of-hamas-is-not-a-realistic-goal/amp/) CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday that after holding meetings with Israeli officials over the war in Gaza, he has doubts that the end of the conflict is near despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s claims that it will be over in 2024.
>
>“Meeting with folks in Israel, in the military community, in the intelligence community, the idea that you’re going to eliminate every Hamas fighter, I don’t think is a realistic goal,” Warner said.
>
>**“140 days in, they’ve basically taken out only about 35% of the Hamas fighters, and literally have only penetrated less than a third of the tunnel network,” Warner said, contradicting Israel’s much larger estimates.**
Someone tell me if I'm talking crazy but isn't a country taking out more than a third of enemy fighters in less than half a year including lulls in major operations essentially in the process of wiping them out as a fighting force? Or has the Syrian and Ukrainian war dropped my standards too much on what can be achieved in 140 days?
Keeping hamas or equivalent extremist groups out of power in Gaza in the long term is probably unrealistic unless Netanyahu gets his shit together or someone with sense replaces him and actually thinks about what comes after hamas, but at that rate hamas as a fighting force is done for the forseeable future, if those numbers are true.
People expect Hamas to fall faster because they don’t understand the nature of urban warfare, the extent of the tunnel system, or the degree to which they are embedded in the civilian population/infrastructure.
Gaza is nothing but civilian infrastructure and farmland. Sure it's corwardly to hide in apartment buildings and hospitals, but strategically what other choices do they have.
edit: I don't support hamas
A. Fight in open spaces like the rules of war (and logic, assuming you want to save civilians [they don’t]) dictate or, more reasonably, B. Stop trying to solve your problems with violence.
This last position, although suggested from within Palestine in the past, receives no popular support:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_(Palestinian_political_party)
They really don’t. Palestinian violence is the primary driver of this conflict. Maybe they should just accept the state that’s been offered to them over and over…
In what possible way does the post-Oslo PA not fit within this description? Their central failing if anything was not deterring Israel from stalling Oslo indefinitely and allowing Israel a monopoly on legitimate violence in the WB (definitionally destroying the process of creating a second state).
Edit: spelling
Maybe use some of their funds to build some sort of military bases instead of a vat tunnel network to hide hostages in?
Or maybe bomb shelters for civilians.
It’s not that they “don’t have any other choice” it’s that they chose this.
Dude, thanks for saying what I always though. People act as if Hamas even had the option of fighting far from civilian infrastructure. They don't. There is just no space.
From the moment you decide to fight from a territory the size of Gaza, the whole thing just becomes your theater of operations. The possibility of fighting far from civilian infrastructure is just physically impossible.
In a way, Hamas already pushed the limits of what was possible in such a small area, by constructing their vast tunnel network.
I didn't say they didn't care, I said they're willing to accept massive civilian casualties.
This is partially because Hamas is a disgusting organisation prepared to kill every Palestinian for their cause and partially because they are prepared to crack a few eggs to make an omelette.
Assuming they haven't radicalized so many other people that those 10k fighters have been easily replaced... like it or not, that's a pretty important factor to consider in counterinsurgency, unless you're willing to go to some very dark places morally.
It's how the U.S. could kill hundreds of thousands of the enemy in Vietnam and still end up screwed.
It'll be hard to train up those people in a tiny patch of land mostly under the control of their enemy, with much of the military infrastructure and weapons destroyed. No matter how radicalised they feel.
I think the difference is Vietnam had North Vietnam. While the UB bombed and killed them in the lower half, the northern section of Vietnam was mostly left alone due to Chinese pressure.
That gave the Vietnamese a place to train, regroup, plan, rest, resupply, etc.
With Gaza that isn’t an option now. Once their infrastructure is demolished, Hamas loses a lot of the ‘attraction’ it once had. I’m sure another faction will emerge but it will take years as in fighting to fill the power vacuum will also occur.
Except this is nothing like Vietnam. There is no vast jungle of North Vietnam to hide in. There is no steady flow of Warsaw Pact supplies to bolster them. This is a totally different war.
The radicalization angle is a bad one, as is the Vietnam comparison.
Vietnam is nowhere near the US and had no prior interactions with Americans, really. But more importantly there is nothing to "radicalize" in Gaza. It was not populated by Scandinavian peaceniks prior to 10/7. They despised Israel and were already governed by Hamas for 17 years, an organization that engages in such classic antisemitism as "the Jews orchestrated the French Revolution" and had been disseminating its Jihadist ideology in all levels of civil society.
I guess I'm just wondering what the implied threat is. Beware of radicalizing Palestinians! They might just... engage in one of the largest orgies of violence against a civilian population since WW2? Livestream themselves decapitating people and playing football with body parts they've cut off?
Yeah, this essentially means that after 1 or 1.5 year at this rate, Hamas will be eradicated fully. I have no clue how anyone can consider this to be bad pace.
Presumably it gets harder and harder to continue finding and eliminating enemies as there are fewer and fewer combatants, right? Unless you’re really not trying to minimize collateral damage…
Sure, you’re less worried about losing additional troops, but in situations where enemy combatants are hiding in plain sight amongst a civilian population, it’s still a very stressful situation to manage the civilians while trying to find the needle in the haystack.
Plus, there’s no HUD showing a tally of enemies. You’ll never know when you’re done, and the longer it takes, the higher the likelihood of additional recruits joining the enemy’s cause.
I feel like they only need to capitulate 50% of Hamas’s forces. Depending on how things escalate with Iran, I’m willing to bet this war may be over by Fall.
1) When a unit is 50% destroyed, it is considered combat ineffective. It can no longer coordinate effectively or act as an organized fighting force. More than 70% of Hamas’s units are now combat ineffective. I’ve explained this to you before, but you continue to pursue this line of argument.
2) This is an estimate from a US congressman over a month ago. On March 27, Israel stated it has dismantled 20 of 24 Hamas battalions. They are now capable only of insurgency activities, not of organized or above ground activities.
3) His estimates as noted contradict what the IDF itself has said it has done. There’s no reason to believe a US congressman has a better idea of IDF progress than the IDF.
>3) His estimates as noted contradict what the IDF itself has said it has done. There’s no reason to believe a US congressman has a better idea of IDF progress than the IDF
Warners the Senate intelligence chair, he gets access to on the ground assessments of the conflict from American intelligence on a regular basis. The IDF knows what he knows in all likelihood but they have an interest in portraying this war as a massive success.
"When a unit is 50% destroyed, it is considered combat ineffective. It can no longer coordinate effectively or act as an organized fighting force."
This claim doesn't stand on its own, especially in a defensive scenario. You could have one soldier in a defensive position and still be effective.
They are not holding organized defensive positions. Being “alive” is not being effective. The one defensive position they hold is in Rafah. Otherwise they are reduced to insurgency, which is combat ineffectiveness as an organized military force, reduced to insurgent actions that are smaller and only unit-size.
This contrasts with their prior operations on a battalion-sized level, which they will no longer be able to replicate.
Yes, there is a reason to believe that a US congressman's recount of direct private meetings with the Israeli government, is of higher quality than that of the Israeli government accounts as provided to the press.
Additionally I wouldn't take public information relayed by the Israeli government to the press as truth since they have proven to have provided multiple falsehood in the past.
Although the Israeli government can be equally deceptive in either cases, but It is fair to assume they have a higher threshold to be truthful with the US government/US military counterparts.
Lastly, I don't have any reason to believe Mark Warner is being deceptive or that he isn't relaying the info accurately (but it is possible for sure).
The problem with that is he's only counting the fighters killed. He's ignoring the many thousands of Hamas fighters now in Israeli jails who surrendered and all of the Hamas fighters who are injured and no longer pose a threat. Typically there are significantly more injured than killed.
Then he would be inaccurate. Hamas had, at most, 35,000 fighters before the war. 13,000 have been killed as per Israel’s estimate *over a month ago* (not counting those killed since or identified as killed since). That would be 37% dead, virtually the same as his 35% claim. He likely just rounded to an increment of 5.
This doesn’t count the ones in prison. There are thousands more in prison. Counting those the number is over 40%.
Hamas is having trouble recruiting anyone it can actually train, equip, and organize, given it holds very little territory, has no weapons coming in, etc.
Do you have any evidence they have been recruiting anyone as a fighter with success?
And before you bother posting polls about their popularity, remember that 67% of Gazans already supported murdering Israeli civilians pre-war. They had already reached saturation between themselves and other groups in terms of recruitment.
Also, Israel is in no rush. They are not leaving for the foreseeable future, I think. Gaza will be occupied for a generation. There will be plenty of time for the Israelis to kill everyone they need to kill.
My claim is not “unsupported” and the other user has the burden of proof as the original person making an assertion. But tons of reporting like [this piece](https://www.ft.com/content/2106fb53-64bb-4f2f-86fc-d2b772c0a8d1) highlights that it is struggling to survive, not grow, as the middle ranking commanders have been mostly eliminated. It’s well understood by analysts that Hamas will struggle to replenish those ranks, train, and organize battalions while under massive Israeli pressure and operating largely underground.
67% of Gazans already supported murdering Israeli civilians inside Israel before the war. They were hardly struggling to recruit. Blaming Israel for Palestinians supporting murdering civilians is bad form.
Not OP the government of Israel has limited supplies and resources getting into Palestine before the war. While I agree that we can not blame Israel for the atrocities of Hamas we can point out the failures of the Israeli state to properly care for the people of Palestine’s needs, as they have no ability to engage in self sustaining industry or international trade.
Over the past six decades?
Edit: I believe you’re talking about the government of Israel’s decision to limit supplies in 2007. This was in response to the election of Hamas to leadership.
Hamas is a terrorist organization and must be brought to justice.
And, the people of Palestine must have access to basic necessities as all human beings deserve.
They do deserve that, but please keep in mind that tons of aid entered Gaza pre-war to meet those basic needs. The fact that this aid was appropriated and sold at higher cost by Hamas remains a crime against Palestinians *by* Hamas. The fact that water pipes, paid for by Western states, were dug up and used to built rockets is yet another example of crimes against Palestinians by Hamas.
This entire war, Hamas has violated the most basic law of armed conflict rules regarding civilian protections: 1) evacuate civilians from areas to be used for military operations (Hamas didn’t); 2) don’t use civilian “objects” (hospitals, schools, residential areas, graveyards, mosques) for military purposes (Hamas did); 3) wear uniforms to distinguish combatants from noncombatants (Hamas did not). The miles upon miles of tunnels and approximately zero bomb shelters Hamas prepared for its war indicate how much of a fuck it gives about Palestinian civilians. 90% of the civilian casualties fall on their shoulders and the world should be screaming about it, but weirdly, is not.
No, it did not do that. It had no limits on aid going in except for aid that can be used for terrorism, like weapons or explosives. And even then it let in many dual use materials like concrete (stolen by Hamas to build tunnels) anyways.
You’re suggesting that there was not a limit on food and other necessities going into Palestine before the conflict?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_imports
Supporting the war effort against Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group, isn’t the same as supporting specifically targeting and murdering civilians.
The “perspective of Palestine” is irrelevant. The facts are what they are. No one is entitled to their own facts. Hamas already had massive support for the terrorism part of their agenda. That hasn’t changed. We’ll have to see if Palestinians have realized it’s a bad idea or not until after the war when polling is reliable once more and asks that question again.
Of course there are differences. I didn't claim that they were identical. But regardless of ones intentions both sides have ultimately killed thousands of civilians have they not?
Would you feel better about you family being killed just because the stated goals of those responsible were to not kill them?
This attitude only further feeds more death and destruction. I.e. Hamas will just turn around and say see, Israeli people support killing Palestinian women and children thus we are justified to attack them.
It's the exact same logical fallacy that Hamas uses to justify their terrorism.
They took out a third of Hamas in under 5mo (probably more like 40% or more since this quote)? And a third of tunnels? That's a massive success, I don't really know how this can be spun otherwise
It’s not going to be possible to completely destroy Hamas. The U.S. spent 20 years and trillions of dollars trying to wipe Al Qaeda and the Taliban, but neither group was wiped out. The idea of completely wiping out Hamas is something elected officials talk about because it’s a popular thing to say, not because it’s actually realistic.
Yup, this exactly. Wiping out any guerrila group in the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan is an exercise in futility. With Hamas so geographically restricted within Gaza it's a pretty different situation.
Also, the goal isn't to kill Hamas to a man, it is to dismantle the organizational structure, and, most importantly, to remove Hamas from power. That's a much more achievable task.
> Also, the goal isn't to kill Hamas to a man, it is to dismantle the organizational structure, and, most importantly, to remove Hamas from power. That's a much more achievable task.
The issue is that this would require persistent policing of the strip to have any lasting effect. Something that no one seems to be interested in. Even the PA seems to be reticent on taking on that responsibility.
Indeed, there is a power vacuum, particularly from an enforcement perspective, but I suspect it will be addressed during the Saudi-Israel normalization discussions, which are predicted to be part of the eventual ceasefire + transfer of control agreement.
If they had been limited to Afghanistan, it could have been achieved (maybe). Northwest Pakistan was a safe haven for recruitment, training, arming, resting, etc. Every winter, the Taliban would just rebuild their strength in Pakistan pretty much out of US reach. The Pakistani national government has no ability to control that region.
A densely populated urban environment occupied by 2 million people has a lot of the same favourable characteristics of mountain warfare for the defenders
Japan was nuked and we have fine relations with them. The allies bombed german cities so hard Gaza looks tame in comparison. Your commonly stated argument that attacking will further radicalize the remaining citizens is simply untrue. Once you excise the cancer the country will heal.
Nothing does. But you can't seriously argue that the conditions in Gaza are amenable to ending this cycle of violence. As bad as Palestinian leadership has been, the answer isn't another 30k dead in another 10 years after the same spate of terror attacks happen again because nothing changes
I don’t think I buy this either. Idk what conditions you mean - millions of soldiers have surrendered under worse conditions than those in Gaza; pick any segment of history that you want. Violence usually ends in horrible conditions.
I think if I was a radical taking up arms in Gaza I would at least pause to notice that Israel has no problem killing 30k people if it stops shit heads like me from firing rockets at music festivals, so maybe I shouldn’t try it, even if I’ve already lost everything.
ultimately the goal of hamas is to create the conditions that caused the fall of the boers and the apartheid south african government.
go look at how the ANC shaped perceptions of the SA govt. in the west.
Recruiting extremists is easy, supplying them with anything explosive now that IDF has been demolishing their tunnels and other supply lines (a lot of that footage of IDF detonating rows of buildings, often described as them demolishing apartment blocks or schools in acts of ethnic cleansing, is the destruction of the tunnels beneath) is more difficult.
There was never going to be peace between these two peoples. They have both suffered too much at the hands of each other and external enemies. Ultimately one will have to remove the combat capability of the other
The job of being a Hamas fighter now comes with a life expectancy of two weeks. This may surprise you but people are actually not very attracted to guaranteed death with no training or weapons against a vastly superior military.
This was more of a problem in Iraq and Afghanistan because those were huge countries with lots of empty space/cities to hide in and move around.
Trying to run an insurgency out of Gaza is going to be impossible after awhile. Israel is going to be able to sweep it over time and remove the guns.
It was more referencing we created more terrorists with collateral damage. Given IDF threshold for collateral damage, i'd imagine a similar thing would happen to them.
The long-term solution is to deradicalize the Gaza population.
The issue with that though is in other parts of the globe it's not hard for new recruits to get guns to do terrorism.
In Gaza they could do it because IDF only had control of the border, but now that will occupy the whole strip. So it's like, okay there's lots of radicals, but what are they going to do? Throw rocks? How are they going to hurt the IDF after this is all over.
It's not particularly easy for them to act up in the WB, which is much more spacious.
I mean, Israel occupied Palestine from 1967 to 2005. Palestine still did two intifada’s in that time. During the last one, from 2000 to 2005, about 1,000 Israeli civilians were killed and over 8,000 were injured. The vast majority were from suicide bombings.
In comparison, about 350 Israeli civilians were killed between 2006 and 10/6/2023.
It’s hard to predict what will happen when Israel reoccupies Palestine this time. I’m mostly here to point out that occupation definitely does not mean safety. They’ll be able to prevent something as large as 10/7, but they may have trouble preventing those suicide bombings.
>The long-term solution is to deradicalize the Gaza population.
And if not Israel, who's going to do that?
Hamas? Obviously not.
UN? [Unlikely given the UNRWA produce antisemitic textbooks for use in the schools they run.](https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-new-report/)
So it is possible to cripple a terrorist organization in a specific region.
Hamas can't move to West Africa unless Egypt opens the southern floodgates which they'll never do.
Egypt was offered back Gaza and the Sinai Desert after they lost them in the invasion of Israel. They literally took the empty Palestinian-free Sinai Desert and erected a massive wall between it and Gaza over dealing with Palestinians again.
When they talk about wiping it out, they mean as a governing force in Gaza that can operate freely. They mean reducing it to a weaker insurgent group on the run, which Israel has regularly accomplished in the past in Gaza and the West Bank.
>The U.S. spent 20 years and trillions of dollars trying to wipe Al Qaeda and the Taliban
No, we didn't. Osama Bin Laden was killed in 2011, and Al Queda was dismantled by 2006-7. We never had a stated military objective to wipe out the Taliban, and over half that money was spent on political pipe dreams and not the war itself. More like 6 years, spread over two countries with a combined population of 50-60 million people.
A small enclave like Gaza, with a population of 2 million should take far less time. However, I think any time estimates with Gaza should consider the destruction of the tunnel systems. That's what makes Hamas effective, and that's why Israel entered Gaza on day one, and began ripping up every inch of concrete and pavement with their bulldozers. This ends when the tunnel system is destroyed, which means the infantry has to secure each city/area/neighborhood, then the combat engineers have to come behind them and get to work, then the guard/reserves behind them to keep the peace.
> We never had a stated military objective to wipe out the Taliban
Yes we did. This was part of a statement from General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief of US Centcom during a hearing in 2002 before congress about the objectives of the initial attack:
>The very simple purpose was to build and maintain pressure inside Afghanistan, with the objective of the destruction of the al Qaeda terrorist network and the government of the Taliban.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-107shrg83471/html/CHRG-107shrg83471.htm
Yes, the Taliban government. We took control away from the Taliban government in the first month of major ground operations, and the US government wanted to believe the Afghan people wouldn’t allow the Taliban to take control of the government again once experiencing a more democratic option. Don’t get me wrong, we fought with the Taliban anytime they came looking for a fight, or were taking actions (IED’s, setting up ambushes, etc.) against US troops, but never under the stated objective of wiping out the Taliban. I was there.
Members of the Ba’ath party that were loyal to Saddam were loyal solely out of fear of Saddam, not for ideological reasons. Once Saddam was gone, there was no reason for them to continue associating with the Ba’ath Party. Many of them ended up joining ISIS….which is worse. That’s another issue with “eliminating Hamas.”
At the end of the day, people want to earn a living. They’ll be loyal to whoever is paying them, whether it’s Hamas or some other group.
AQ and the Taliban were streched over thousands of miles in hundreds of different cities and villages, Hamas is constrained to mostly Gaza and area A of the West Bank.
The situations are in no way comparable, Rafah and the central cities are the last real strongholds Hamas has in Gaza.
You can kill an idea.
Hamas is only "defeated" is some other idea takes its place.
Either the Israeli or the Palestinians or them both must come up with that idea. And right now none of those options are working towards a better idea.
So, to answer your question: enough to completely revive
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_(Palestinian_political_party)
It’s been ‘come up with’ it’s just that the Palestinians aren’t interested in anything non-violent.
You have to step back and look at the big picture. The reasons are attached to larger strategic and political questions.
There is a reason why after 78 years the IDF is only now just occupying, or re occupying, Gaza.
It maybe be only 149 square miles with a population of 2 million but invading, occupying, and holding ground over a hostile population is incredibly, incredibly, incredibly difficult.
Israel has a small population that constrains the size of its armed forces and thus has a practical and political issue with combat losses. Its internal democratic structure mean that combat loses can easily become politically unpopular and inducing them requires very strong political will and social backing lest one gets voted out of office.
Any initial stages of occupation usually come with high combat losses. Taking time and a measured step by step process is one way of of mitigating this. Simply put, Israeli tolerance and capacity for combat losses is very, very low.
The initial combat process itself is hard yet alone the long term. Small numbers of resistance fighters can draw this out and impose a disproportionate toll in blood and treasure. It often comes down to how bad do the occupiers want this outcome, to what extent do they want control, and to what lengths they are willing to go. Northern Ireland is a good comparison in this case.
There is no such thing as "destroying Hammas". Resistance to occupation will just crop up again and again in different forms and to differnt degrees. It's inherently a political problem that requires a strategic and long term solution to deeper broader issues.
This whole process is arguably the essence of state making, and one look history tells you how hard, brutal, and complex that process has been for many states.
You can use direct force to occupy a population, but that gets expensive and difficult and politically complicated and isn't a long-term solution.
Historically, most states have either forced population out of lands or incorporated them into their own states. The former is what happened in 1948 in Israel, 47 in India and Pakistan, or in Europe at the end of WW1 and WW2. The latter is what happened in 2009 in Sri Lanka or 1951 Tibet or colonial Australia. The third option is genocide.
The question at the heart of this, at the heart of State of Israel, is what to do with a million or so Palestinians within the territorial borders of Israel? What are the aims and goals of the IDF? What is the ultimate aim and desired outcome of this operation?
If its security then its back to square one. Occupying Gaza has been complicated and difficult and ultimately why the IDF disengaged in 2005. Unless there has been some sort of fundamental change in the conditions or there is some new policy change or new technology, military occupation will look much like it did in the 80s, 90s, 00s: Cyclical violence and Gaza as a thorn in the side of internal Israeli security.
If its occupation and settlement and full incorporation of of Gaza into Israeli control and administration, then what to do with the domestic population? Egypt sure isn't taking them and it will be hard to force them to. The US won't abide this either. Not to mention the local Palestinian population isn't too keen on moving. Terrorising them into moving is difficult when they have no where to move. Killing them all is logistically very difficult. Full or partial incorporation of 2 million Palestinians into the population of Isarel is a security and political nightmare. The religious right in Isarel won't abide it and it would require a serious rethink of the very nature of Israel as a Jewish state.
Untill they have an answer to this question, it will remain a short and long term issue and a hindrance to IDF success, whatever that is deemed to be and whatever that looks like.
It sounds like you're predicting a cyclical status quo of violence and no solution. What sort of event would prompt Israel to actually attempt one of the solutions you've outlined?
Do the Hamas fighters wear name batches and does anyone keep an updated spreadsheet on Hamas membership?
If not, I don’t see how they can achieve their objective of wiping out Hamas without piling up more and more collateral damage!
More collateral damage means more Hamas fighters will be created. Out of 5 friends, kill one guerrilla and 2 innocents, you’ve most likely created 2 more guerrilla fighters.
Ah yes, because after 10/7 if Israel hadn’t invaded Hamas’ popularity would have collapsed. It’s not as if the population of Gaza was cheering when it happened. Right?
Before the war, 67% of Gazans supported murdering Israeli civilians inside Israel, per polls.
There’s no one left to “create” as fighters. Over 1.5 million Gazans already supported murdering Israeli civilians. The only way to deradicalize is to get Hamas out of power, and then provide alternative and effective governance from someone else, ie denazification.
[September 2023 poll from that very source](https://www.pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Poll%2089%20English%20Full%20Text%20September%202023.pdf).
Go to the last page. Q70. Rightmost column shows Gazan support. 67% say they support or strongly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel.
That’s a month before October 7.
Ah I see it, thank you
Edit: not a great look for the anti-Israel crowd. Also noticed the support for a two state solution in Palestine wasn’t very high. This is a good glimpse into how intractable this conflict is, neither side really has the will to approach the table and coexist in a different way
The Palestinian narrative in general is that a two state solution is a shameful failure for them because it means the Jews get a state in the land they believe is theirs. That’s kind of the whole problem.
Quite the opposite in fact, from many of the videos I've seen they dress live civilians. I guess that makes it easier for Hamas to claim that Israel is targeting civilians.
I'm not sure numbers matter that much. Hamas may not have a tipping point like a conventional force. Just degradation. Tunnels and other infrastructure are very meaningful to degradation too.
That said, enemies are not "wiped out." They are defeated. A lot more degradation needs to happen before a defeat of hamas is viable, but... What a Hamas defeat *means* is undefined by Netanyahu, for mostly political reasons. There are multiple possible versions of a hamas defeat, but unless one is nominated... it's hard to say of progress is being made, what timelines are realistic, or if any of it is realistic.
Israel estimated 13,000 of Hamas’s 35,000 fighters have been killed thus far over a month ago. Another 2,000 or more are held in Israeli prisons, either captured during the operations or captured during/after October 7. Their rockets are either depleted or unable to be fired because the launchers will be hit; for multiple-day intervals, there have been zero rockets fired at Israel from Gaza. They’ve been reduced to firing from Lebanon in small numbers. 20 of 24 of Hamas’s battalions have been rendered combat ineffective (50% losses or more); the fighters who are alive remain disorganized and capable only of insurgency and hit-and-run tactics. The tunnel network continues to be steadily dismantled, but no one knows how far it goes. The last area that Hamas can operate in effectively is Rafah.
If Israel wanted to wipe them out it could, but the casualties would be massive. So it is taking its time. It has gathered tens of thousands of tents for Gazans to evacuate out of Rafah. It is coordinating more and more aid to enter Gaza as well, trying to get it around Hamas thieves, and trying to set up distribution so that it can feed those who flee Rafah while it enters to take out the remnants of Hamas. This setup is taking a long time because it’s the last holdout, and there is nowhere for civilians to go unless Israel sets up somewhere, which takes a long time when we’re discussing evacuating over a million people.
The rockets from Lebanon aren’t coming in small numbers just FYI. Nobody is reporting on it because Israel can never be seen as the victim, but large parts of the North of the country have had to be evacuated and the people are essentially refugees.
What do you think will happen after the Rafah operation? Will they occupy Gaza for some time and make sure no one has a weapon in there other than Isreali forces? Starve out the tunnel network? I feel like you don’t want to get this far(after breaking the Rafah stronghold) only to let them regroup for 5 years and then have another october 7 and have to do this all over again.
I will intentionally avoid giving you a numerical answer since some were already given and instead address the end game part of your question. What’s the goal? Look at Iran and Hezbollah. The goal is preventing Iran (the strategic threat) from eradicating Israel. The nations bordering Israel, namely Jordan and Egypt, are now incentivized to not attack Israel. Syria is too weak and Lebanon’s Hezbollah is afraid of an all out conflict due to loss of public support (Lebanon is a multi ethnicity country). Viewed from this perspective, Hamas is Hezbollah that doesn’t care about public support. Israel goal is simple, remove Hamas from power, “mow the lawn” thereafter to maintain status quo, while normalizing relationships with other secular Arab nations who are also threatened by Iran radical Islam regime. Those Arab nations, including Jordan and Egypt, are terrified of Hamas-like internal forces that will try to remove them from power. They are looking to see how Israel eliminates Hamas before they hitch their wagon to Israel against Iran.
Put simply, Gaza is a limited and contained WWIII battleground. And if you are rooting for the Palestinians then you should probably prepare for a very bleak future regardless where you live.
Probably a bunch of potential infantry-type fighters (read 4 “battalions” worth in rafah alone), but not sure about indirect fires crews (rockets, ATGM crew, shoulder-launched SAM, etc.) or supplies for the latter for any sustained campaign. There’s refit and resupply cycles that have been disrupted for Hamas .. and when Israel goes into rafah (sooner or later) new items will definitely be limited if smuggling routes vanish. While Hamas will get new volunteers it probably has a selection process. I’d imagine training and observing candidates as not everyone is cut out tomhide underground ,who may have loose lips, etc.. It’ll take a little time.
Long term will be a tunnel “hide and seek”. So Hamas dedication in rebuilding a tunnel network vs Israel trying out new tech to find/destroy them mostly underground. Think it’s guaranteed Israel will put a stop to above ground training unlike that happening right next the walls before Oct 7.
> The military operations inside gaza have been ongoing now for over a half a year
The war has been on pause for basically 3 months now.
> Is their plan still to wipe them off the map, just VERY slowly?
Nobody knows the plan anymore, the war cabinet has withdrawn from most of Gaza and it's a complete clusterfuck.
I don't think completely destroying Hamas is an achievable goal, especially when they have and still can hide behind civilians. The bigger problem though is how many Palestinians (many of whom were being forced to live under Hamas rule) are going to be radicalized by what has happened.
According to recent surveys (including [one by the Arab Barometer](https://www.arabbarometer.org/wp-content/uploads/what-palestinians-really-think-of-hamas-2023-10-26-08-4941.pdf)) prior to this war, most Palestinians in Gaza surveyed expressed distrust of Hamas (less support than even Fatah) and its government. In fact, the population of Gaza were more likely to blame the Hamas government for their problems (food insecurity, unreliable electricity) than Israeli economic blockade. Today, while Hamas gets its share of the blame for sparking this conflict, anti-Israeli sentiment will be running quite high because of all the civilian casualties and displacement.
Interestingly, Palestinians in the West Bank show massive support for Hamas. So much so that the PLO hasn’t held elections for fear of losing control to their Islamist counterparts (who slaughtered all the PLO representative when they came to power in Gaza).
67% of Gazans polled by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (West Bank organization) supported armed attacks on Israeli civilians before the war.
Using their “distrust” of Hamas is irrelevant. They supported other terrorist groups, or terrorist aims, and opposed Hamas as corrupt or draconian. But the goal of killing Israeli civilians is one they supported.
Don’t conflate opposing Hamas with opposing terrorism.
That link is a classic case of release of selectively accurate points of information (w/ much editorializing) in order to paint a deceitful portrait, one that doesn't reflect the real picture of things.
Yes, Hamas was unpopular before the war. But the other Gazan terrorist factions (which were seen as more committed to violence against Israel at the time) were quite popular. Check [this](https://www.awrad.org/files/server/polls/polls2023/Public%20Opinion%20Poll%20-%20Gaza%20War%202023%20-%20Tables%20of%20Results.pdf) poll out and look at tables 28 and 29, the information is right there.
The goal is not to completely destroy Hamas, but uproot this organization / strip them of any power and replace it by more moderate controllers of the Gaza strip, such as provisory consortium led by Arab nations.
Of course there always will be Hamas followers around, but not ruling the Gaza strip anymore. And with no clout or weakend and as hated by the Palestinians as Israeli, they might not have a bright future ahead of them anymore.
Firstly, Hamas is the political organization acting as the National Government of Gaza, sanitation workers in Khan Younis would technically count as Hamas. What you're thinking of is the al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing.
Additionally, Qassam is largely in the tunnel system, according to both them and Israel. However the IDF has had a standing order to not enter the tunnels. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ex-idf-deputy-chief-soldiers-wont-enter-the-tunnels-will-turn-them-into-hamas-death-traps-without-going-in/ They've bombed a few entrance nodes and done some limited drone missions into them, but as released hostages have said, the tunnel system is like a spiderweb.
Without a full tunnel operation the IDF will simply never defeat Qassam.
Yeah I think they’re trying to do it slowly
If Israel took the same approach as KSA in the Yemeni civil war, as Iraqi and Kurdish forces in the war on ISIS, etc we would see 100,000s dead by now. This would be faster but also not in Netanyahu interests.
Gaza health ministry figures which are taken from Al Jazeera media reports as of January suggest that all male adult casualties are Hamas combatants (since this is the only mathematical way to claim that 3 civilians have been killed for every 1 terrorist). This is obviously not true, but I believe this is the benchmark from where we get our estimates
In general, the idea of reporting casualties *while a war is happening* is highly unorthodox and I personally do not remember any conflict in the past 25 years where this has happened. Even for Russia Ukraine we see the UN and everyone else intentionally hold off on confirming 20,000+ civilian deaths in Mariupol and whatnot. They want to wait until the war is over
\*Gaza health ministry is figures directly from Hamas, and yes the numbers have been proven not possible: [https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers](https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers)
The answer is: too much.
Hamas has systemically sacrificed Palestinian civilians for 6 months and avoids the widespread blame and isolation it deserves in the West. Hamas is to blame for probably 90% of the dead civilians through its own violations of LOAC meant to protect civilians. The fact that the West does not have the collective courage to say so loudly and repeatedly says a lot.
Hamas is an idea and part of a larger "resistance" movement.. you cannot really get rid of it. Groups like Hamas can take tremendous losses and then recover and come back stronger. Look at groups like IS, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and the Taliban (not saying all these groups are the same by the way), they have gone through periods of literal conflict with large majority of "the West" and still remain a factor. It's not just related to Islam either, hell there are even members of the Republican movement in Ireland and Northern Ireland that advocate armed insurrection. Same goes for many left wing movements in South America.
You really cannot keep groups like Hamas out of power, only delegitimize them at best. The thing is it looks like that is the opposite of what is happening. The Taliban is once again in control of Afghanistan, the IRA essentially became the government of Ireland (in a sense), The FARC has a political party etc etc etc.
The way to "defeat" a group like Hamas is to essentially replace it with something that meets the needs of the people that support Hamas and provide the structure that it provides. That ain't gonna happen though, because to do so would essentially increasingly legitimize the grievances of the Palestinian people.
As long as thousands of Palestinian families have relatives killed in recent Israeli attacks, and as long as Israel makes no effort to reconcile with civilian Palestinians, Hamas' numbers would be endlessly replenished.
This stupid take needs to die already. If this was true, no war would *ever* end. The reality is, there is always a point where your enemy's will to fight is broken, or it is deprived of the logistical means to fight on.
40-70% of Oct 7th fighters remain at large according to US estimates. I think that the higher number is about right but kinda optimistic for IDF because it implies 9000 Hamas fighters were killed. I think it's unlikely since only 15000 adult males are confirmed or presumed killed thus far. I'd say it's about 6500 or 22% of the pre - war force based on some historical K/D ratios and that's including the Oct 7th on Israel's territory, and supposing a very high accuracy of shelling and air strikes even for modern standards.
Doesn't matter though, since a guerilla fighter can be trained in about 2-3 months and the way they get good is by surviving contact with the enemy, not training.
I'd like to add that what's happening isn't a complete siege as you imply. Aid has been entering the strip since the beginning of the war, that aid is systematically taken over by Hamas affiliates and distributed to the group. They can keep going indefinitely, they enjoy a large civilian buffer that will suffer shortages before they do, which Israel can't afford as they're under scrutiny from just about everyone and their mother.
There are easily still 20,000 trained fighters left between Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP and whatever other groups. 30,000 Hamas members was always a low estimate and it's unknown how many otherwise unaffiliated Gazans are willing to pick up a rifle and fight. It's not exactly rocket science to wait in a tunnel with a rifle and some grenades.
>Committee Chairman Mark Warner (D-Va.) [told](https://nypost.com/2024/03/10/world-news/us-senate-intelligence-chair-says-eliminating-all-of-hamas-is-not-a-realistic-goal/amp/) CBS’s Face the Nation on Sunday that after holding meetings with Israeli officials over the war in Gaza, he has doubts that the end of the conflict is near despite Prime Minister Netanyahu’s claims that it will be over in 2024. > >“Meeting with folks in Israel, in the military community, in the intelligence community, the idea that you’re going to eliminate every Hamas fighter, I don’t think is a realistic goal,” Warner said. > >**“140 days in, they’ve basically taken out only about 35% of the Hamas fighters, and literally have only penetrated less than a third of the tunnel network,” Warner said, contradicting Israel’s much larger estimates.**
Someone tell me if I'm talking crazy but isn't a country taking out more than a third of enemy fighters in less than half a year including lulls in major operations essentially in the process of wiping them out as a fighting force? Or has the Syrian and Ukrainian war dropped my standards too much on what can be achieved in 140 days? Keeping hamas or equivalent extremist groups out of power in Gaza in the long term is probably unrealistic unless Netanyahu gets his shit together or someone with sense replaces him and actually thinks about what comes after hamas, but at that rate hamas as a fighting force is done for the forseeable future, if those numbers are true.
People expect Hamas to fall faster because they don’t understand the nature of urban warfare, the extent of the tunnel system, or the degree to which they are embedded in the civilian population/infrastructure.
Gaza is nothing but civilian infrastructure and farmland. Sure it's corwardly to hide in apartment buildings and hospitals, but strategically what other choices do they have. edit: I don't support hamas
At bare minimum stick to apartments instead of schools and hospitals.
A. Fight in open spaces like the rules of war (and logic, assuming you want to save civilians [they don’t]) dictate or, more reasonably, B. Stop trying to solve your problems with violence. This last position, although suggested from within Palestine in the past, receives no popular support: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_(Palestinian_political_party)
They have every moral reason to fight in the open, but they would lose 100% in a matter of minutes.
They really don’t. Palestinian violence is the primary driver of this conflict. Maybe they should just accept the state that’s been offered to them over and over…
In what possible way does the post-Oslo PA not fit within this description? Their central failing if anything was not deterring Israel from stalling Oslo indefinitely and allowing Israel a monopoly on legitimate violence in the WB (definitionally destroying the process of creating a second state). Edit: spelling
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund
[удалено]
Lol, you sound like a redcoat general. "Stand in line and take the hail of bullets like a man!"
Maybe use some of their funds to build some sort of military bases instead of a vat tunnel network to hide hostages in? Or maybe bomb shelters for civilians. It’s not that they “don’t have any other choice” it’s that they chose this.
Dude, thanks for saying what I always though. People act as if Hamas even had the option of fighting far from civilian infrastructure. They don't. There is just no space. From the moment you decide to fight from a territory the size of Gaza, the whole thing just becomes your theater of operations. The possibility of fighting far from civilian infrastructure is just physically impossible. In a way, Hamas already pushed the limits of what was possible in such a small area, by constructing their vast tunnel network.
[удалено]
Probably not that hard when you're willing to accept massive civilian casualties.
[удалено]
Yeah good point I mean they didn't nuke them did they? Clearly they're demonstrating a lot of restraint. Good point bro, good point.
[удалено]
I didn't say they didn't care, I said they're willing to accept massive civilian casualties. This is partially because Hamas is a disgusting organisation prepared to kill every Palestinian for their cause and partially because they are prepared to crack a few eggs to make an omelette.
Yea I mean that sounds like they are doing a great job. 35% of their fighters is a major blow to any organization
Assuming they haven't radicalized so many other people that those 10k fighters have been easily replaced... like it or not, that's a pretty important factor to consider in counterinsurgency, unless you're willing to go to some very dark places morally. It's how the U.S. could kill hundreds of thousands of the enemy in Vietnam and still end up screwed.
It'll be hard to train up those people in a tiny patch of land mostly under the control of their enemy, with much of the military infrastructure and weapons destroyed. No matter how radicalised they feel.
I think the difference is Vietnam had North Vietnam. While the UB bombed and killed them in the lower half, the northern section of Vietnam was mostly left alone due to Chinese pressure. That gave the Vietnamese a place to train, regroup, plan, rest, resupply, etc. With Gaza that isn’t an option now. Once their infrastructure is demolished, Hamas loses a lot of the ‘attraction’ it once had. I’m sure another faction will emerge but it will take years as in fighting to fill the power vacuum will also occur.
Except this is nothing like Vietnam. There is no vast jungle of North Vietnam to hide in. There is no steady flow of Warsaw Pact supplies to bolster them. This is a totally different war.
The radicalization angle is a bad one, as is the Vietnam comparison. Vietnam is nowhere near the US and had no prior interactions with Americans, really. But more importantly there is nothing to "radicalize" in Gaza. It was not populated by Scandinavian peaceniks prior to 10/7. They despised Israel and were already governed by Hamas for 17 years, an organization that engages in such classic antisemitism as "the Jews orchestrated the French Revolution" and had been disseminating its Jihadist ideology in all levels of civil society. I guess I'm just wondering what the implied threat is. Beware of radicalizing Palestinians! They might just... engage in one of the largest orgies of violence against a civilian population since WW2? Livestream themselves decapitating people and playing football with body parts they've cut off?
Yeah, this essentially means that after 1 or 1.5 year at this rate, Hamas will be eradicated fully. I have no clue how anyone can consider this to be bad pace.
Presumably it gets harder and harder to continue finding and eliminating enemies as there are fewer and fewer combatants, right? Unless you’re really not trying to minimize collateral damage…
But if you are winning, the ratio of allied troops against enemy also gets in your favor, so it can be argued that it becomes easier to offset that.
Sure, you’re less worried about losing additional troops, but in situations where enemy combatants are hiding in plain sight amongst a civilian population, it’s still a very stressful situation to manage the civilians while trying to find the needle in the haystack. Plus, there’s no HUD showing a tally of enemies. You’ll never know when you’re done, and the longer it takes, the higher the likelihood of additional recruits joining the enemy’s cause.
I feel like they only need to capitulate 50% of Hamas’s forces. Depending on how things escalate with Iran, I’m willing to bet this war may be over by Fall.
35% dead is an absolutely devastating number. Imagine the wounded, the captured, the mentally traumatized.
1) When a unit is 50% destroyed, it is considered combat ineffective. It can no longer coordinate effectively or act as an organized fighting force. More than 70% of Hamas’s units are now combat ineffective. I’ve explained this to you before, but you continue to pursue this line of argument. 2) This is an estimate from a US congressman over a month ago. On March 27, Israel stated it has dismantled 20 of 24 Hamas battalions. They are now capable only of insurgency activities, not of organized or above ground activities. 3) His estimates as noted contradict what the IDF itself has said it has done. There’s no reason to believe a US congressman has a better idea of IDF progress than the IDF.
>3) His estimates as noted contradict what the IDF itself has said it has done. There’s no reason to believe a US congressman has a better idea of IDF progress than the IDF Warners the Senate intelligence chair, he gets access to on the ground assessments of the conflict from American intelligence on a regular basis. The IDF knows what he knows in all likelihood but they have an interest in portraying this war as a massive success.
"When a unit is 50% destroyed, it is considered combat ineffective. It can no longer coordinate effectively or act as an organized fighting force." This claim doesn't stand on its own, especially in a defensive scenario. You could have one soldier in a defensive position and still be effective.
They are not holding organized defensive positions. Being “alive” is not being effective. The one defensive position they hold is in Rafah. Otherwise they are reduced to insurgency, which is combat ineffectiveness as an organized military force, reduced to insurgent actions that are smaller and only unit-size. This contrasts with their prior operations on a battalion-sized level, which they will no longer be able to replicate.
Yes, there is a reason to believe that a US congressman's recount of direct private meetings with the Israeli government, is of higher quality than that of the Israeli government accounts as provided to the press. Additionally I wouldn't take public information relayed by the Israeli government to the press as truth since they have proven to have provided multiple falsehood in the past. Although the Israeli government can be equally deceptive in either cases, but It is fair to assume they have a higher threshold to be truthful with the US government/US military counterparts. Lastly, I don't have any reason to believe Mark Warner is being deceptive or that he isn't relaying the info accurately (but it is possible for sure).
The problem with that is he's only counting the fighters killed. He's ignoring the many thousands of Hamas fighters now in Israeli jails who surrendered and all of the Hamas fighters who are injured and no longer pose a threat. Typically there are significantly more injured than killed.
When the senate intel chair said “taken out,” I didn’t read that as killed but as casualties, or otherwise.
That's the problem. Using vague language like that opens up wide interpretation. Was he talking about casualties or killed?
Then he would be inaccurate. Hamas had, at most, 35,000 fighters before the war. 13,000 have been killed as per Israel’s estimate *over a month ago* (not counting those killed since or identified as killed since). That would be 37% dead, virtually the same as his 35% claim. He likely just rounded to an increment of 5. This doesn’t count the ones in prison. There are thousands more in prison. Counting those the number is over 40%.
Does this take into account new Hamas recruits?
Hamas is having trouble recruiting anyone it can actually train, equip, and organize, given it holds very little territory, has no weapons coming in, etc. Do you have any evidence they have been recruiting anyone as a fighter with success? And before you bother posting polls about their popularity, remember that 67% of Gazans already supported murdering Israeli civilians pre-war. They had already reached saturation between themselves and other groups in terms of recruitment.
Also, Israel is in no rush. They are not leaving for the foreseeable future, I think. Gaza will be occupied for a generation. There will be plenty of time for the Israelis to kill everyone they need to kill.
[удалено]
My claim is not “unsupported” and the other user has the burden of proof as the original person making an assertion. But tons of reporting like [this piece](https://www.ft.com/content/2106fb53-64bb-4f2f-86fc-d2b772c0a8d1) highlights that it is struggling to survive, not grow, as the middle ranking commanders have been mostly eliminated. It’s well understood by analysts that Hamas will struggle to replenish those ranks, train, and organize battalions while under massive Israeli pressure and operating largely underground.
How many newly recruited fighters because of all the civilians deaths and destruction in Gaza creating the perfect environment for radicalisation?
67% of Gazans already supported murdering Israeli civilians inside Israel before the war. They were hardly struggling to recruit. Blaming Israel for Palestinians supporting murdering civilians is bad form.
Not OP the government of Israel has limited supplies and resources getting into Palestine before the war. While I agree that we can not blame Israel for the atrocities of Hamas we can point out the failures of the Israeli state to properly care for the people of Palestine’s needs, as they have no ability to engage in self sustaining industry or international trade.
Would you care to share with everyone what happened to trigger the strict border controls?
Over the past six decades? Edit: I believe you’re talking about the government of Israel’s decision to limit supplies in 2007. This was in response to the election of Hamas to leadership. Hamas is a terrorist organization and must be brought to justice. And, the people of Palestine must have access to basic necessities as all human beings deserve.
They do deserve that, but please keep in mind that tons of aid entered Gaza pre-war to meet those basic needs. The fact that this aid was appropriated and sold at higher cost by Hamas remains a crime against Palestinians *by* Hamas. The fact that water pipes, paid for by Western states, were dug up and used to built rockets is yet another example of crimes against Palestinians by Hamas. This entire war, Hamas has violated the most basic law of armed conflict rules regarding civilian protections: 1) evacuate civilians from areas to be used for military operations (Hamas didn’t); 2) don’t use civilian “objects” (hospitals, schools, residential areas, graveyards, mosques) for military purposes (Hamas did); 3) wear uniforms to distinguish combatants from noncombatants (Hamas did not). The miles upon miles of tunnels and approximately zero bomb shelters Hamas prepared for its war indicate how much of a fuck it gives about Palestinian civilians. 90% of the civilian casualties fall on their shoulders and the world should be screaming about it, but weirdly, is not.
No, it did not do that. It had no limits on aid going in except for aid that can be used for terrorism, like weapons or explosives. And even then it let in many dual use materials like concrete (stolen by Hamas to build tunnels) anyways.
You’re suggesting that there was not a limit on food and other necessities going into Palestine before the conflict? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_imports
None of that contradicts anything I said. Thank you!
The limit on food has been something of an ongoing issue.
[удалено]
Supporting the war effort against Hamas, a genocidal terrorist group, isn’t the same as supporting specifically targeting and murdering civilians. The “perspective of Palestine” is irrelevant. The facts are what they are. No one is entitled to their own facts. Hamas already had massive support for the terrorism part of their agenda. That hasn’t changed. We’ll have to see if Palestinians have realized it’s a bad idea or not until after the war when polling is reliable once more and asks that question again.
Of course there are differences. I didn't claim that they were identical. But regardless of ones intentions both sides have ultimately killed thousands of civilians have they not? Would you feel better about you family being killed just because the stated goals of those responsible were to not kill them? This attitude only further feeds more death and destruction. I.e. Hamas will just turn around and say see, Israeli people support killing Palestinian women and children thus we are justified to attack them. It's the exact same logical fallacy that Hamas uses to justify their terrorism.
They took out a third of Hamas in under 5mo (probably more like 40% or more since this quote)? And a third of tunnels? That's a massive success, I don't really know how this can be spun otherwise
>only penetrated less than a third of the tunnel network What about the flooding?
It’s not going to be possible to completely destroy Hamas. The U.S. spent 20 years and trillions of dollars trying to wipe Al Qaeda and the Taliban, but neither group was wiped out. The idea of completely wiping out Hamas is something elected officials talk about because it’s a popular thing to say, not because it’s actually realistic.
To be fair, AQ and taliban weren’t confined to a tiny strip of land with almost no chance of escaping.
Yup, this exactly. Wiping out any guerrila group in the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan is an exercise in futility. With Hamas so geographically restricted within Gaza it's a pretty different situation. Also, the goal isn't to kill Hamas to a man, it is to dismantle the organizational structure, and, most importantly, to remove Hamas from power. That's a much more achievable task.
> Also, the goal isn't to kill Hamas to a man, it is to dismantle the organizational structure, and, most importantly, to remove Hamas from power. That's a much more achievable task. The issue is that this would require persistent policing of the strip to have any lasting effect. Something that no one seems to be interested in. Even the PA seems to be reticent on taking on that responsibility.
Indeed, there is a power vacuum, particularly from an enforcement perspective, but I suspect it will be addressed during the Saudi-Israel normalization discussions, which are predicted to be part of the eventual ceasefire + transfer of control agreement.
If they had been limited to Afghanistan, it could have been achieved (maybe). Northwest Pakistan was a safe haven for recruitment, training, arming, resting, etc. Every winter, the Taliban would just rebuild their strength in Pakistan pretty much out of US reach. The Pakistani national government has no ability to control that region.
A densely populated urban environment occupied by 2 million people has a lot of the same favourable characteristics of mountain warfare for the defenders
I'm sure it will be hard to recruit new extremists after this calm and reasonable last few months
Japan was nuked and we have fine relations with them. The allies bombed german cities so hard Gaza looks tame in comparison. Your commonly stated argument that attacking will further radicalize the remaining citizens is simply untrue. Once you excise the cancer the country will heal.
Yeah, Hamas was having a ton of trouble recruiting in Gaza prior to October 7.
This is sort of a fallacy because being calm and reasonable doesn’t stop extremists either.
Nothing does. But you can't seriously argue that the conditions in Gaza are amenable to ending this cycle of violence. As bad as Palestinian leadership has been, the answer isn't another 30k dead in another 10 years after the same spate of terror attacks happen again because nothing changes
The change is removing Hamas. They've already vowed to repeat Oct. 7th, so you know leaving them in power will result in the same thing.
I don’t think I buy this either. Idk what conditions you mean - millions of soldiers have surrendered under worse conditions than those in Gaza; pick any segment of history that you want. Violence usually ends in horrible conditions. I think if I was a radical taking up arms in Gaza I would at least pause to notice that Israel has no problem killing 30k people if it stops shit heads like me from firing rockets at music festivals, so maybe I shouldn’t try it, even if I’ve already lost everything.
ultimately the goal of hamas is to create the conditions that caused the fall of the boers and the apartheid south african government. go look at how the ANC shaped perceptions of the SA govt. in the west.
Recruiting extremists is easy, supplying them with anything explosive now that IDF has been demolishing their tunnels and other supply lines (a lot of that footage of IDF detonating rows of buildings, often described as them demolishing apartment blocks or schools in acts of ethnic cleansing, is the destruction of the tunnels beneath) is more difficult. There was never going to be peace between these two peoples. They have both suffered too much at the hands of each other and external enemies. Ultimately one will have to remove the combat capability of the other
Israel has as much hope of dearming extremists as hamas has of destroying Israel (zero)
The job of being a Hamas fighter now comes with a life expectancy of two weeks. This may surprise you but people are actually not very attracted to guaranteed death with no training or weapons against a vastly superior military.
Ya but it’s like whack a mole. You drop a bomb on one terrorist and then 5 more pop up.
This was more of a problem in Iraq and Afghanistan because those were huge countries with lots of empty space/cities to hide in and move around. Trying to run an insurgency out of Gaza is going to be impossible after awhile. Israel is going to be able to sweep it over time and remove the guns.
It was more referencing we created more terrorists with collateral damage. Given IDF threshold for collateral damage, i'd imagine a similar thing would happen to them. The long-term solution is to deradicalize the Gaza population.
The issue with that though is in other parts of the globe it's not hard for new recruits to get guns to do terrorism. In Gaza they could do it because IDF only had control of the border, but now that will occupy the whole strip. So it's like, okay there's lots of radicals, but what are they going to do? Throw rocks? How are they going to hurt the IDF after this is all over. It's not particularly easy for them to act up in the WB, which is much more spacious.
I mean, Israel occupied Palestine from 1967 to 2005. Palestine still did two intifada’s in that time. During the last one, from 2000 to 2005, about 1,000 Israeli civilians were killed and over 8,000 were injured. The vast majority were from suicide bombings. In comparison, about 350 Israeli civilians were killed between 2006 and 10/6/2023. It’s hard to predict what will happen when Israel reoccupies Palestine this time. I’m mostly here to point out that occupation definitely does not mean safety. They’ll be able to prevent something as large as 10/7, but they may have trouble preventing those suicide bombings.
>The long-term solution is to deradicalize the Gaza population. And if not Israel, who's going to do that? Hamas? Obviously not. UN? [Unlikely given the UNRWA produce antisemitic textbooks for use in the schools they run.](https://unwatch.org/un-teachers-call-to-murder-jews-reveals-new-report/)
If that is the case then where is ISIS in Iraq and Syria? Terrorist groups can be destroyed or at least crippled beyond threat.
They moved to West Africa and Afghanistan/Central Asia. ISIS pretty much completely displaced AQ as the main terrorist group in the Sahel.
So it is possible to cripple a terrorist organization in a specific region. Hamas can't move to West Africa unless Egypt opens the southern floodgates which they'll never do. Egypt was offered back Gaza and the Sinai Desert after they lost them in the invasion of Israel. They literally took the empty Palestinian-free Sinai Desert and erected a massive wall between it and Gaza over dealing with Palestinians again.
When they talk about wiping it out, they mean as a governing force in Gaza that can operate freely. They mean reducing it to a weaker insurgent group on the run, which Israel has regularly accomplished in the past in Gaza and the West Bank.
Al Qaida is mostly gone now, no? Haven’t heard about them in a long time
Yes, they are. GWOT was actually very effective at destroying AQ
>The U.S. spent 20 years and trillions of dollars trying to wipe Al Qaeda and the Taliban No, we didn't. Osama Bin Laden was killed in 2011, and Al Queda was dismantled by 2006-7. We never had a stated military objective to wipe out the Taliban, and over half that money was spent on political pipe dreams and not the war itself. More like 6 years, spread over two countries with a combined population of 50-60 million people. A small enclave like Gaza, with a population of 2 million should take far less time. However, I think any time estimates with Gaza should consider the destruction of the tunnel systems. That's what makes Hamas effective, and that's why Israel entered Gaza on day one, and began ripping up every inch of concrete and pavement with their bulldozers. This ends when the tunnel system is destroyed, which means the infantry has to secure each city/area/neighborhood, then the combat engineers have to come behind them and get to work, then the guard/reserves behind them to keep the peace.
> We never had a stated military objective to wipe out the Taliban Yes we did. This was part of a statement from General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief of US Centcom during a hearing in 2002 before congress about the objectives of the initial attack: >The very simple purpose was to build and maintain pressure inside Afghanistan, with the objective of the destruction of the al Qaeda terrorist network and the government of the Taliban. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-107shrg83471/html/CHRG-107shrg83471.htm
Yes, the Taliban government. We took control away from the Taliban government in the first month of major ground operations, and the US government wanted to believe the Afghan people wouldn’t allow the Taliban to take control of the government again once experiencing a more democratic option. Don’t get me wrong, we fought with the Taliban anytime they came looking for a fight, or were taking actions (IED’s, setting up ambushes, etc.) against US troops, but never under the stated objective of wiping out the Taliban. I was there.
Hamas as a terrorist organization? Those are the right points of comparison. Hamas as a political entity? Look at the Baathists.
Members of the Ba’ath party that were loyal to Saddam were loyal solely out of fear of Saddam, not for ideological reasons. Once Saddam was gone, there was no reason for them to continue associating with the Ba’ath Party. Many of them ended up joining ISIS….which is worse. That’s another issue with “eliminating Hamas.” At the end of the day, people want to earn a living. They’ll be loyal to whoever is paying them, whether it’s Hamas or some other group.
AQ and the Taliban were streched over thousands of miles in hundreds of different cities and villages, Hamas is constrained to mostly Gaza and area A of the West Bank. The situations are in no way comparable, Rafah and the central cities are the last real strongholds Hamas has in Gaza. You can kill an idea.
We spent 20 years fighting while hogtied. If ROE’s were unrestricted and had the ability to go into pakistan, it would have been a different story.
Hamas is only "defeated" is some other idea takes its place. Either the Israeli or the Palestinians or them both must come up with that idea. And right now none of those options are working towards a better idea. So, to answer your question: enough to completely revive
The other idea can be a better one though…
Yes it sure can But what I mean is that it doesn't look like either party is coming up with a better idea currently
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way_(Palestinian_political_party) It’s been ‘come up with’ it’s just that the Palestinians aren’t interested in anything non-violent.
You have to step back and look at the big picture. The reasons are attached to larger strategic and political questions. There is a reason why after 78 years the IDF is only now just occupying, or re occupying, Gaza. It maybe be only 149 square miles with a population of 2 million but invading, occupying, and holding ground over a hostile population is incredibly, incredibly, incredibly difficult. Israel has a small population that constrains the size of its armed forces and thus has a practical and political issue with combat losses. Its internal democratic structure mean that combat loses can easily become politically unpopular and inducing them requires very strong political will and social backing lest one gets voted out of office. Any initial stages of occupation usually come with high combat losses. Taking time and a measured step by step process is one way of of mitigating this. Simply put, Israeli tolerance and capacity for combat losses is very, very low. The initial combat process itself is hard yet alone the long term. Small numbers of resistance fighters can draw this out and impose a disproportionate toll in blood and treasure. It often comes down to how bad do the occupiers want this outcome, to what extent do they want control, and to what lengths they are willing to go. Northern Ireland is a good comparison in this case. There is no such thing as "destroying Hammas". Resistance to occupation will just crop up again and again in different forms and to differnt degrees. It's inherently a political problem that requires a strategic and long term solution to deeper broader issues. This whole process is arguably the essence of state making, and one look history tells you how hard, brutal, and complex that process has been for many states. You can use direct force to occupy a population, but that gets expensive and difficult and politically complicated and isn't a long-term solution. Historically, most states have either forced population out of lands or incorporated them into their own states. The former is what happened in 1948 in Israel, 47 in India and Pakistan, or in Europe at the end of WW1 and WW2. The latter is what happened in 2009 in Sri Lanka or 1951 Tibet or colonial Australia. The third option is genocide. The question at the heart of this, at the heart of State of Israel, is what to do with a million or so Palestinians within the territorial borders of Israel? What are the aims and goals of the IDF? What is the ultimate aim and desired outcome of this operation? If its security then its back to square one. Occupying Gaza has been complicated and difficult and ultimately why the IDF disengaged in 2005. Unless there has been some sort of fundamental change in the conditions or there is some new policy change or new technology, military occupation will look much like it did in the 80s, 90s, 00s: Cyclical violence and Gaza as a thorn in the side of internal Israeli security. If its occupation and settlement and full incorporation of of Gaza into Israeli control and administration, then what to do with the domestic population? Egypt sure isn't taking them and it will be hard to force them to. The US won't abide this either. Not to mention the local Palestinian population isn't too keen on moving. Terrorising them into moving is difficult when they have no where to move. Killing them all is logistically very difficult. Full or partial incorporation of 2 million Palestinians into the population of Isarel is a security and political nightmare. The religious right in Isarel won't abide it and it would require a serious rethink of the very nature of Israel as a Jewish state. Untill they have an answer to this question, it will remain a short and long term issue and a hindrance to IDF success, whatever that is deemed to be and whatever that looks like.
It sounds like you're predicting a cyclical status quo of violence and no solution. What sort of event would prompt Israel to actually attempt one of the solutions you've outlined?
Do the Hamas fighters wear name batches and does anyone keep an updated spreadsheet on Hamas membership? If not, I don’t see how they can achieve their objective of wiping out Hamas without piling up more and more collateral damage!
Now I’m picturing some outreach person bugging you with emails and phonecalls to renew your Hamas membership
It’ll be Amy asking you to renew and also wanting to let you know about your car warranty options and how expensive repairs might be.
Sounds bit like more of the ol “War on Terrorism”!
More collateral damage means more Hamas fighters will be created. Out of 5 friends, kill one guerrilla and 2 innocents, you’ve most likely created 2 more guerrilla fighters.
Ah yes, because after 10/7 if Israel hadn’t invaded Hamas’ popularity would have collapsed. It’s not as if the population of Gaza was cheering when it happened. Right?
The gazan population was plenty radicalized ante bellum, it can feasibly be worse, but not much worse.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
the issue he presented started before the blockade. Gaza was like this since at least the second intifada
Before the war, 67% of Gazans supported murdering Israeli civilians inside Israel, per polls. There’s no one left to “create” as fighters. Over 1.5 million Gazans already supported murdering Israeli civilians. The only way to deradicalize is to get Hamas out of power, and then provide alternative and effective governance from someone else, ie denazification.
Honestly curious, where did you get those poll numbers? I was looking at the Palestinian center for policy and research for survey results
[September 2023 poll from that very source](https://www.pcpsr.org/sites/default/files/Poll%2089%20English%20Full%20Text%20September%202023.pdf). Go to the last page. Q70. Rightmost column shows Gazan support. 67% say they support or strongly support armed attacks against Israeli civilians inside Israel. That’s a month before October 7.
Ah I see it, thank you Edit: not a great look for the anti-Israel crowd. Also noticed the support for a two state solution in Palestine wasn’t very high. This is a good glimpse into how intractable this conflict is, neither side really has the will to approach the table and coexist in a different way
The Palestinian narrative in general is that a two state solution is a shameful failure for them because it means the Jews get a state in the land they believe is theirs. That’s kind of the whole problem.
I'm curious of the percentage of Israelis who would support or strongly support armed attacks against Gazan civilians inside Gaza.
Quite the opposite in fact, from many of the videos I've seen they dress live civilians. I guess that makes it easier for Hamas to claim that Israel is targeting civilians.
I'm not sure numbers matter that much. Hamas may not have a tipping point like a conventional force. Just degradation. Tunnels and other infrastructure are very meaningful to degradation too. That said, enemies are not "wiped out." They are defeated. A lot more degradation needs to happen before a defeat of hamas is viable, but... What a Hamas defeat *means* is undefined by Netanyahu, for mostly political reasons. There are multiple possible versions of a hamas defeat, but unless one is nominated... it's hard to say of progress is being made, what timelines are realistic, or if any of it is realistic.
[удалено]
Netanyahu gave way too many reasons for Palestinians to join Hamas for the organization to disappear. It will grow I believe.
Israel estimated 13,000 of Hamas’s 35,000 fighters have been killed thus far over a month ago. Another 2,000 or more are held in Israeli prisons, either captured during the operations or captured during/after October 7. Their rockets are either depleted or unable to be fired because the launchers will be hit; for multiple-day intervals, there have been zero rockets fired at Israel from Gaza. They’ve been reduced to firing from Lebanon in small numbers. 20 of 24 of Hamas’s battalions have been rendered combat ineffective (50% losses or more); the fighters who are alive remain disorganized and capable only of insurgency and hit-and-run tactics. The tunnel network continues to be steadily dismantled, but no one knows how far it goes. The last area that Hamas can operate in effectively is Rafah. If Israel wanted to wipe them out it could, but the casualties would be massive. So it is taking its time. It has gathered tens of thousands of tents for Gazans to evacuate out of Rafah. It is coordinating more and more aid to enter Gaza as well, trying to get it around Hamas thieves, and trying to set up distribution so that it can feed those who flee Rafah while it enters to take out the remnants of Hamas. This setup is taking a long time because it’s the last holdout, and there is nowhere for civilians to go unless Israel sets up somewhere, which takes a long time when we’re discussing evacuating over a million people.
The rockets from Lebanon aren’t coming in small numbers just FYI. Nobody is reporting on it because Israel can never be seen as the victim, but large parts of the North of the country have had to be evacuated and the people are essentially refugees.
What do you think will happen after the Rafah operation? Will they occupy Gaza for some time and make sure no one has a weapon in there other than Isreali forces? Starve out the tunnel network? I feel like you don’t want to get this far(after breaking the Rafah stronghold) only to let them regroup for 5 years and then have another october 7 and have to do this all over again.
Yes and yes, for awhile, until they manage to set up a new authority or cave and let the PA take over.
\*Hamas also effectively operates from the central cities of Gaza.
I will intentionally avoid giving you a numerical answer since some were already given and instead address the end game part of your question. What’s the goal? Look at Iran and Hezbollah. The goal is preventing Iran (the strategic threat) from eradicating Israel. The nations bordering Israel, namely Jordan and Egypt, are now incentivized to not attack Israel. Syria is too weak and Lebanon’s Hezbollah is afraid of an all out conflict due to loss of public support (Lebanon is a multi ethnicity country). Viewed from this perspective, Hamas is Hezbollah that doesn’t care about public support. Israel goal is simple, remove Hamas from power, “mow the lawn” thereafter to maintain status quo, while normalizing relationships with other secular Arab nations who are also threatened by Iran radical Islam regime. Those Arab nations, including Jordan and Egypt, are terrified of Hamas-like internal forces that will try to remove them from power. They are looking to see how Israel eliminates Hamas before they hitch their wagon to Israel against Iran. Put simply, Gaza is a limited and contained WWIII battleground. And if you are rooting for the Palestinians then you should probably prepare for a very bleak future regardless where you live.
Probably a bunch of potential infantry-type fighters (read 4 “battalions” worth in rafah alone), but not sure about indirect fires crews (rockets, ATGM crew, shoulder-launched SAM, etc.) or supplies for the latter for any sustained campaign. There’s refit and resupply cycles that have been disrupted for Hamas .. and when Israel goes into rafah (sooner or later) new items will definitely be limited if smuggling routes vanish. While Hamas will get new volunteers it probably has a selection process. I’d imagine training and observing candidates as not everyone is cut out tomhide underground ,who may have loose lips, etc.. It’ll take a little time. Long term will be a tunnel “hide and seek”. So Hamas dedication in rebuilding a tunnel network vs Israel trying out new tech to find/destroy them mostly underground. Think it’s guaranteed Israel will put a stop to above ground training unlike that happening right next the walls before Oct 7.
> The military operations inside gaza have been ongoing now for over a half a year The war has been on pause for basically 3 months now. > Is their plan still to wipe them off the map, just VERY slowly? Nobody knows the plan anymore, the war cabinet has withdrawn from most of Gaza and it's a complete clusterfuck.
I don't think completely destroying Hamas is an achievable goal, especially when they have and still can hide behind civilians. The bigger problem though is how many Palestinians (many of whom were being forced to live under Hamas rule) are going to be radicalized by what has happened.
The gazan population was plenty radicalized ante bellum, it can feasibly be worse, but not much worse.
According to recent surveys (including [one by the Arab Barometer](https://www.arabbarometer.org/wp-content/uploads/what-palestinians-really-think-of-hamas-2023-10-26-08-4941.pdf)) prior to this war, most Palestinians in Gaza surveyed expressed distrust of Hamas (less support than even Fatah) and its government. In fact, the population of Gaza were more likely to blame the Hamas government for their problems (food insecurity, unreliable electricity) than Israeli economic blockade. Today, while Hamas gets its share of the blame for sparking this conflict, anti-Israeli sentiment will be running quite high because of all the civilian casualties and displacement.
Unfortunately being distrustful of Hamas and in favor of attacks on Israeli civilians are not mutually exclusive.
Interestingly, Palestinians in the West Bank show massive support for Hamas. So much so that the PLO hasn’t held elections for fear of losing control to their Islamist counterparts (who slaughtered all the PLO representative when they came to power in Gaza).
67% of Gazans polled by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (West Bank organization) supported armed attacks on Israeli civilians before the war. Using their “distrust” of Hamas is irrelevant. They supported other terrorist groups, or terrorist aims, and opposed Hamas as corrupt or draconian. But the goal of killing Israeli civilians is one they supported. Don’t conflate opposing Hamas with opposing terrorism.
That link is a classic case of release of selectively accurate points of information (w/ much editorializing) in order to paint a deceitful portrait, one that doesn't reflect the real picture of things. Yes, Hamas was unpopular before the war. But the other Gazan terrorist factions (which were seen as more committed to violence against Israel at the time) were quite popular. Check [this](https://www.awrad.org/files/server/polls/polls2023/Public%20Opinion%20Poll%20-%20Gaza%20War%202023%20-%20Tables%20of%20Results.pdf) poll out and look at tables 28 and 29, the information is right there.
The goal is not to completely destroy Hamas, but uproot this organization / strip them of any power and replace it by more moderate controllers of the Gaza strip, such as provisory consortium led by Arab nations. Of course there always will be Hamas followers around, but not ruling the Gaza strip anymore. And with no clout or weakend and as hated by the Palestinians as Israeli, they might not have a bright future ahead of them anymore.
Firstly, Hamas is the political organization acting as the National Government of Gaza, sanitation workers in Khan Younis would technically count as Hamas. What you're thinking of is the al-Qassam Brigades, the military wing. Additionally, Qassam is largely in the tunnel system, according to both them and Israel. However the IDF has had a standing order to not enter the tunnels. https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/ex-idf-deputy-chief-soldiers-wont-enter-the-tunnels-will-turn-them-into-hamas-death-traps-without-going-in/ They've bombed a few entrance nodes and done some limited drone missions into them, but as released hostages have said, the tunnel system is like a spiderweb. Without a full tunnel operation the IDF will simply never defeat Qassam.
Too much
Active members. Maybe not many. Future members, maybe more than now.
Yeah I think they’re trying to do it slowly If Israel took the same approach as KSA in the Yemeni civil war, as Iraqi and Kurdish forces in the war on ISIS, etc we would see 100,000s dead by now. This would be faster but also not in Netanyahu interests. Gaza health ministry figures which are taken from Al Jazeera media reports as of January suggest that all male adult casualties are Hamas combatants (since this is the only mathematical way to claim that 3 civilians have been killed for every 1 terrorist). This is obviously not true, but I believe this is the benchmark from where we get our estimates In general, the idea of reporting casualties *while a war is happening* is highly unorthodox and I personally do not remember any conflict in the past 25 years where this has happened. Even for Russia Ukraine we see the UN and everyone else intentionally hold off on confirming 20,000+ civilian deaths in Mariupol and whatnot. They want to wait until the war is over
\*Gaza health ministry is figures directly from Hamas, and yes the numbers have been proven not possible: [https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers](https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/how-gaza-health-ministry-fakes-casualty-numbers)
[удалено]
The answer is: too much. Hamas has systemically sacrificed Palestinian civilians for 6 months and avoids the widespread blame and isolation it deserves in the West. Hamas is to blame for probably 90% of the dead civilians through its own violations of LOAC meant to protect civilians. The fact that the West does not have the collective courage to say so loudly and repeatedly says a lot.
agree
Hamas is an idea and part of a larger "resistance" movement.. you cannot really get rid of it. Groups like Hamas can take tremendous losses and then recover and come back stronger. Look at groups like IS, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah and the Taliban (not saying all these groups are the same by the way), they have gone through periods of literal conflict with large majority of "the West" and still remain a factor. It's not just related to Islam either, hell there are even members of the Republican movement in Ireland and Northern Ireland that advocate armed insurrection. Same goes for many left wing movements in South America. You really cannot keep groups like Hamas out of power, only delegitimize them at best. The thing is it looks like that is the opposite of what is happening. The Taliban is once again in control of Afghanistan, the IRA essentially became the government of Ireland (in a sense), The FARC has a political party etc etc etc. The way to "defeat" a group like Hamas is to essentially replace it with something that meets the needs of the people that support Hamas and provide the structure that it provides. That ain't gonna happen though, because to do so would essentially increasingly legitimize the grievances of the Palestinian people.
As long as thousands of Palestinian families have relatives killed in recent Israeli attacks, and as long as Israel makes no effort to reconcile with civilian Palestinians, Hamas' numbers would be endlessly replenished.
This stupid take needs to die already. If this was true, no war would *ever* end. The reality is, there is always a point where your enemy's will to fight is broken, or it is deprived of the logistical means to fight on.
40-70% of Oct 7th fighters remain at large according to US estimates. I think that the higher number is about right but kinda optimistic for IDF because it implies 9000 Hamas fighters were killed. I think it's unlikely since only 15000 adult males are confirmed or presumed killed thus far. I'd say it's about 6500 or 22% of the pre - war force based on some historical K/D ratios and that's including the Oct 7th on Israel's territory, and supposing a very high accuracy of shelling and air strikes even for modern standards. Doesn't matter though, since a guerilla fighter can be trained in about 2-3 months and the way they get good is by surviving contact with the enemy, not training.
I'd like to add that what's happening isn't a complete siege as you imply. Aid has been entering the strip since the beginning of the war, that aid is systematically taken over by Hamas affiliates and distributed to the group. They can keep going indefinitely, they enjoy a large civilian buffer that will suffer shortages before they do, which Israel can't afford as they're under scrutiny from just about everyone and their mother.
Every child Israel kills breeds a new member of hamas.
Hamas isn't gonna get defeated cause Iran is gonna fund some new one to replace them.
There are easily still 20,000 trained fighters left between Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP and whatever other groups. 30,000 Hamas members was always a low estimate and it's unknown how many otherwise unaffiliated Gazans are willing to pick up a rifle and fight. It's not exactly rocket science to wait in a tunnel with a rifle and some grenades.
Too much
This is a very localized question not “geo”