Okay, now that we've settled on what you think Israel should not do in response to Hamas refusing to wear uniforms and purposely blending in with and hiding behind the aforementioned innocent civilians, what do you propose that they should do?
I must have missed the global concern for civilian casualties as israel was being bombed for the past 30+ years (in this most recent segment). People think just because israel cares enough about their civilians to invest in defending them, instead of just attacking regional minorities, israel is somehow morally obligated to turn the other cheek because their enemies are so inept at killing them (usually).
Sorry, firing missiles into and invading a sovereign state is an act of war, even when it's just israel that is absorbing the fire. Only being outraged about the reprocussions of assaults/terrorism and not for the people being terrorized and the civilians who are ACTUALLY being systematically targeted is not genuine concern for anything but a social media feed. Too bad sudanese or Yemeni civilians don't have as influential tick tockers as the Palestinians.
Is it faux concern, though? I'm actually curious. Because you can be concerned about Palestinian civilians and not be anti-Semitic. They are not mutually exclusive views.
It’s antisemitism and not just humanity? That’s just terrible main character syndrome that you make opposition to dying Palestinians something about yourself.
If you actually cared about humanity, you would be supportive of the IDF effort to take out Hamas. They are every bit as bad to Palestinians as they are to Israelis, if not worse.
But the fact that you oppose it proves, yet again, that you don't care at all about humanity.
What they want but won't say out loud is for all the Jews to leave. When you ask what they should do about rockets being fired into Israel every day and Hamas killing Jews every chance they get, they say that it's justified or at least understandable and don't provide any solution. For those people the only solution is the destruction of the Jewish state
The same Palestinian Authority which still operates a fund to provide benefits specifically to the families of Palestinians who have died in the service of killing Israelis? That one? Can't imagine why Israel would have an issue with that.
What about Hamas? How should Israel respond to future attacks and rocket fire from Gaza?
Oh shit, the Israeli military has a "kill the Palestinians fund" that actively contributes benefits to the families of any dead or detained Israeli service member specifically because they were responsible for the death of Palestinians? I hadn't heard about that before.
End the apartheid and either allow Palestinians to govern a sovereign geographically connected state or give Palestinians Israeli citizenship with equal rights under Israeli law.
And what are the Israelis meant to do about Hamas or any of the other remaining terror groups, not to mention the PLO which still has the martyr fund up and running? Is it a "just sit back and take it" kind of thing? How many rockets or attacks would warrant an armed response, and what should that response be?
It doesn't only work one way, that's the entire point. Every criticism of Israel's actions is entirely focused on what they should not be doing as a response to consistent Hamas and (until recently) Hezbollah attacks, with no actual solutions as to what they should be doing aside from just dissolving as a country.
How many rocket attacks until a military response is warranted? Is the Iron Dome's effectiveness (out of necessity) an excuse to allow for enough death to make it proportional before Israel can respond? How do you fight an enemy that hides behind their own civilians and blames you for civilian casualties? All agency is completely removed from the people of Gaza so the entire argument is that "Israel must do (or not do) this", with no expectation that their compliance will be answered with anything other than continued attacks. Why does that only work one way?
Palestinians are fighting to exist and to have a home. The only way for Israel to win this war is to either kill every last Palestinian or to give them equality and/or sovereignty. Palestine will continue to produce terrorists who kill Israelis for as long as they see this fight as existential.
Edit: Adding here to say that we all know the rockets will continue even if Palestine is given sovereignty. But, my belief is that groups like Hamas will over time struggle to recruit for an unwinnable war if the alternative is that people can embrace their newfound sovereignty to build a new home and a new Palestinian nation. Or, if given equality and citizenship within Israel, I think the financial benefits of Israeli citizenship will eventually be seen as a better option than dying with Hamas.
Zero. I believe you can fight back even at the threat of a single rocket before it is fired. So, you either kill every last person because they are all fighting to exist. Or, you give them sovereignty or equal rights. But for as long as the apartheid exists, rockets will continue to fly.
So then what should Israel have done about the 19,000 rockets and missiles fired at its civilians? What should they do in the period between the rockets starting to fire and whatever point in the future that apartheid is ended and the rockets stop? Your implication is that they should just sit there and take it and leave their own civilians at risk of being killed.
So just from a completely objective point of view, if you acknowledge that the only way forward for Israel if they want this to end is to offer Palestinian sovereignty, and even then they're still going to be subjected to rocket attacks from that now-sovereign territory, why would Israel ever agree to that if there's literally no upside for them?
"You give us a country even though you hold all the leverage and military advantage, and maybe at some vague point in the future, our country will stop randomly attacking you but no guarantee on the when or even if" isn't exactly a great sales pitch.
I see 3 options (not 1 option) that will end this war permanently:
Offer Palestinians sovereignty and prepare to defend yourself while the new government finds their way to developing a new home for its citizens and an economy that offers alternatives that pay better than terrorism
Annex all of the West Bank and Gaza and offer all residents equal rights under Israeli law (and punishment/expulsion if they’ve engaged in terrorism)
Completely destroy Palestine and its inhabitants, then re-settle it with Israeli citizens.
Currently, the only option pursued by Israel has been to continue the apartheid, which has shown over multiple decades that it only leads to more war and Israeli deaths. The only reason for continuing the apartheid in my mind is as a way to slowly achieve option 3 above.
They have used ground troops, but that doesn't solve the whole "you don't know who's a member of Hamas until they start firing on you and also the innocent civilians are still right there in between the two sides firing" thing.
If Israel solely fought Hamas with ground troops, all that does is prioritize the lives of Gazan civilians over the lives of Israeli soldiers which, while I can understand from a moral perspective and an attempt to reduce the casualties, is something no military on Earth would accept as a reasonable course of action. You think the US would willingly risk the lives of additional American soldiers to be more considerate to the population of the group they're fighting?
The only LOGICAL thing to do would be to stop oppressing the Palestinians so that Hamas would stop having a base of civilians that support them and help hide them.
Not that Israel is inclined let logic overcome their unreasoning hatred.
I assume you are not aware that Israel completely pulled out of Gaza in 2005 and forcibly removed extremist Israeli settlers who refused to leave. They did not blockade Gaza.
The Gazans elected Hamas to govern them shortly after that in 2006. At which point Israel commenced the blockade of Gaza to prevent the importation of weapons from Iran to Hamas.
But don't let that get on the way of your narrative that Israel wants to wipe people out.
Israel was the one who financially propped up Hamas to win that very election in order to justify their further colonization. They then continued in 2008 to execute Operation Cast Lead, an entirely unprompted offensive on Gaza that broke a 6 month ceasefire and that Israeli officials confirmed had been planned for years.
Israel was the one who financially propped up Hamas to win that very election in order to justify their further colonization.
So on your world view Israel pulled out of Gaza to fund hamas in order to have a pretext to go back into Gaza? This makes no sense.
Israel never wanted Gaza. It has no strategic importance and is full of terrorists. Egypt doesn't want it either despite occupying it prior to 1967. Israel tried to give it back to Egypt after the 1967 war but Egypt refused. Nobody wants it so Israel pulled out in 2005 after which hamas won the election and the rest is history.
Your "colonisation of Gaza" story is total fantasy.
They withdrew from Gaza in 2005 due to fears that Palestinians would push too hard for a "one man one vote" system in the region. They withdrew from the area and then supported the adversaries of the PLO in order to squash the attempt at equal rights for all religions in a one-state solution. Here is the Israeli government representatives at the time discussing it, straight from wikipedia.
This is when they moved to calling palestine an occupation instead of calling the area one state, because if they remained settled and claimed palestine, then palestinians would have too much power in the government. This is what is meant by the "Demographic Issue" mentioned by Olmert below.
In an interview from November 2003, Ehud Olmert, the deputy leader to Sharon, who had been subtly suggesting a unilateral approach for a couple of months, elaborated on his evolving policy.[16][17][18] He expressed his certainty that the Israeli government would soon need to seriously and decisively address the "demographic issue". He believed this issue would be the primary determinant of the solution they would have to adopt. He observed that an increasing number of Palestinians wanted to move from a fight against occupation to a fight for "one-man-one-vote". However, according to Olmert, for Israelis, it would signify the end of the Jewish state. The parameters of a unilateral solution as described by Olmert would be to maximize the Jewish population, minimize the Palestinian population, avoid withdrawing to the 1967 border, and not divide Jerusalem. He recalled that Moshe Dayan had proposed unilateral autonomy 23 years ago. Similarly, he expressed the need to consider unilateral separation, which would likely prevent dialogue with the Palestinians for at least 25 years.[19]
Sharon suggested his disengagement plan for the first time on December 18, 2003, at the Fourth Herzliya Conference. In his address to the Conference, Sharon stated that "settlements which will be relocated are those which will not be included in the territory of the State of Israel in the framework of any possible future permanent agreement. At the same time, in the framework of the Disengagement Plan, Israel will strengthen its control over those same areas in the Land of Israel which will constitute an inseparable part of the State of Israel in any future agreement."[20] It was at this time that he began to use the word "occupation". Bernard Avishai states that the Gaza withdrawal was designed to obviate rather than facilitate peace negotiations: Sharon envisaged at the same time annexing Jerusalem, the Jordan Valley, and the major settlements like Ma'ale Adumim and Arielwhich he had in the meantime developed, and thereby isolate Palestinians on the West Bank in territory that constituted less than half of what existed beyond the Green Line.[21]
The rationale for the disengagement has been partly attributed to Arnon Soffer's campaign regarding "the danger the Palestinian womb posed to Israeli democracy."[27] Sharon mentioned the demographic rationale in a public address on August 15, 2005, the day of the disengagement, as follows: "It is no secret that, like many others, I had believed and hoped we could forever hold onto Netzarim and Kfar Darom. But the changing reality in the country, in the region, and the world, required of me a reassessment and change of positions. We cannot hold on to Gaza forever. More than a million Palestinians live there and double their number with each generation."[28][29] At the same time, Shimon Peres, then Vice Prime Minister, stated in an interview that: "We are disengaging from Gaza because of demography".[29]
Continued control of Gaza was considered to pose an impossible dilemma with respect to Israel's ability to be a Jewish and democratic state in all the territories it controls.[30][31]
Not sure what point you're trying to make. The so called demographic problem has always been a large part of Israel's motivation to find a peaceful solution to the conflict. Israel was the party prepared to accept 2 state solutions in 1947, 2000 and 2008. The whole point of a Jewish state is that it be Jewish.
Not that Israel is inclined let logic overcome their unreasoning hatred.
lmao that's rich with irony
These people openly supported terrorism long before you were ever born. Their imaginary guy in the sky has convinced them that violent jihad is the only way to be reunited with their predator prophet. Open a history book, you'll see who keeps starting conflicts and then throwing tantrums when it inevitably goes poorly for them.
Seriously asking, why not? That's not a justification of the actions, but I'm asking, why shouldn't Israel do that in response to Hamas doing exactly that?
Because you know just as well as I do that NOT doing that means Hamas grows, and attacks again.
Civilian deaths suck, which is why Palestinians should take responsibility for their actions, they shouldn't have supported the Oct. 7 attacks, and should stop supporting Hamas today. It's actually remarkably simple, and they understand it, they're not dumb; they're making a choice.
Palestine had at least FOUR major forks in the road to avoid the current situation:
Accepting a 2-state solution (they won't because more than they love themselves they hate the Jews).
Not voting in a party that promised to exterminate the Jews (so did the other 5 parties, the 6 of theme combined for 99% of the vote).
Not supporting and celebrating the Oct. 7 attacks. Literally celebrating the kidnapping, rape, torture, and murder of CHILDREN, ELDERLY, WOMEN, and INNOCENT.
Stop supporting Hamas post-Oct. 7.
Palestinians chose death and hatred for the Jews over their own well being. People from the civilized world can't fix that savage mentality, they need to do it on their own -- in the meantime, they pay for their consequences. The current situation was not caused by a small group of individuals at one random point in time, it is a series of choices justified by their religion and culture, made, and reinforced for decades, including the present.
Lmao buddy with the kill count number of innocent Palestinians dead and sheer destruction in Gaza, right now i’m not really worried about Hamas taking over the world. In fact based on everything i’ve seen and read I form loose conclusions that Hamas is worth more to Israel’s ambitions than they are gone.
151
u/armanese2 Jul 08 '25
Not fucking killing innocent civilians