probablyaCat

My solution is to remove Hamas from any authority. Let them be replaced with a more reasonable authority (Fatah was supposed to have a united government with them but Hamas wouldn't actually do it). Stabilize and secure my country. And then try to help rebuild Gaza and negotiate firm borders with Palestine.

Now there are definitely people in the Israeli government who don't believe it can and/or should happen. I know the history of Likud and Begin. I'm aware of the ideas of Revisionist Zionism and Jabotinsky (not really a fan btw). It's safe to say that if I had been around at the time I definitely would've been with the lefty socialist Jews, not with the right wingers. Although even Bibi signed on to Oslo iirc.

I understand that the situation is fucked. But when you are in a fucked situation, you have to deal with it given the constraints of it being fucked. I understand some people on both sides may have bad intentions. But Hamas is platformed as opposed to peace. With Israel, that situation is not the same. Just as the Gaetz doesn't represent the entire US government, neither does ben Gvir. Israel is a developed state with a secular government and the majority are not out to take over all of Palestine.

Honestly the big difference in opinion here lies in the fact that a lot of people here who are against Israel and screaming genocide really just don't say what they actually think. That they think Jews have no right to be in Israel and that they should pick up and leave. They know nothing about the history of the region and they just parrot the same shit.

Where did I say anything about them having carte blanche to oppress? Where did I say their oppression gave them any rights? I didn't. I said that why9 was disgusting for what they said and explained why.

And no. I do not think Hamas is only in power due to things Israel has done. Beyond existing. The Muslim brotherhood existed before Israel. They have spring up in most countries that have a major Muslim population as Islamic extremists. They want a unified Muslim state under Sharia law. Even if Israel did not exist, Hamas would likely still exist in the region in some form telling the ruling powers they aren't Islamic enough. And killing people. Gay people. Women who want to have equal rights. Atheists. People who decide they don't want to be Muslim. World leaders who sign peace treaties.

Yeah it's pretty accepted now that the harsh punishments post WWI created the perfect environment for ww2. But it is also accepted that appeasement to Germany to prevent ww2 was a really bad idea as well. Parallels only go so far. I was not drawing a parallel in my above comment. I was explaining how very different the Holocaust was from the Palestinian territories.

Umm violence ended pretty much every war. Civil war and slavery and all that (in the U.S.). WW2 (that ending was real violent). Non-violence is definitely preferable, but it isn't always an option.

If you think that is an adequate description of the history of the area then your problem is clearly a total lack of education or research on the topic.

First, we need a starting point. At what point in history should we consider the people living in the region as indigenous? Concerning the open air prison, that's mostly used in reference to Gaza. So did Israel put them there or are they indigenous? Also, they have a border with Egypt too. Why is that border not working out?

I'm not naive. I am fully aware that the entire region has a very complicated history. One that you can't distill into a couple of lazy catch phrases. And there is a mix of good and bad things for everyone involved. You say Israel treats then as second class. Have you ever read the Hamas charter? Especially the pre 2017 charter. See what it says about women, Jews, religion. See what it implies about LGBT rights.

You call me naive. But, ask yourself, what history do you know of the region. And what are things you're just parroting?

I'm an idiot. For knowing that the plan was to leave Gaza entirely, then leave the West bank with some settlements being dismantled and some to be dealt with in future negotiations. But the catastrophe that was the Gaza withdrawal halted that plan entirely.

And third holiest site in Islam. But the temple mount which Jews are kept from visiting most of the time, is the holiest site in Judaism. Which is why I said don't pretend it is only al aqsa.

I'm clearly a supporter of Israel. But I try to understand multiple sides. Doesn't mean I have to think every side is right. Concerning the temple mount and al aqsa, I would prefer both groups get along and share. I don't like Bibi and loathe ben Gvir. And while I absolutely do think continuing ahead with a withdrawal plan for west bank would've made Israel less safe, I do wish they hadn't increased settlements.

How am I being pedantic, and I've responded to almost everyone who actually said what they would do.

Yeah. Mostly it is contract work. Orgasm Uber, if you will.

First a response then I'll answer your question. Read up on the camp David accords with Clinton. The Israelis were offering like 91% of the land back the green line and trying to find some middle ground concerning Jerusalem. But especially read up about the 2004-05 withdrawal from Gaza. They did with Gaza what you are suggesting with the west bank. And it become a breeding ground for terrorist attacks. Originally the plan was Gaza first, as an olive branch, then the west bank, then further peace negotiations to establish firm borders. But the outcome with Gaza was horrific and all political capital was lost. And Hamas has stated it will not negotiate and will not accept peace deals negotiated by the PA. You cannot suggest things that have been tried and pretend that the past didn't happen and that things will just work out. Israel has been there, done that.

So acknowledging the real world history of the situation, if I was in charge, then the goal is to change the playing field. Israel did this with Gaza before with the wall they are oft criticized for building. And it stopped all the suicide bombings that had been happening. So I'd have two goals. An even more secure border, probably talking a dmz area, and to wipe out as many known Hamas officials as I possibly can. Their power structure must be so disrupted that they it will take extended time for any organization to happen. This allows for other people (probably Fatah would be the goal) to replace them. Make it clear that my country is going nowhere and that the other side needs a new plan if they want security. After doing these things, then and only then, do we go back to the negotiating table. Do I like these things? No. But again history and my responsibilities. History tells us this can work. General Sherman. WWII with Japan. Is it a guarantee to work? No. But the status quo definitely does not work. And my responsibility is first to provide security for the people in my country. I would certainly take notes from ww2 concerning the rebuilding efforts, but that also required unconditional surrender from the Japanese. So long as there was peace, my government would be first in line to offer assistance (which was an established thing between the PA and Israel... But Hamas changed that. In fact it was their main platforms and why they were elected).

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the same group of people who, on video, showed how they dig up pipes to use for rockets right?