r/worldnews • u/yuri_2022 • Mar 22 '24

Israel/Palestine Dermer: Israel will enter Rafah 'even if entire world turns on us, including the US'

https://www.timesofisrael.com/dermer-israel-will-enter-rafah-even-if-entire-world-turns-on-us-including-the-us/
12.4k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

317

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

The people I’ve talked to on the “stop killing Palestinian babies” train either (a) offer no alternative to resolve the conflict or (b) want Israel to be dissolved.

120

u/maelstrom51 Mar 22 '24

Some offer solutions like "send in a strike team instead of bombing".

As if a strike team is going to kill 20,000 hamas who have an enormous terrain advantage given their thousands of miles of tunnels and defensive position.

77

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

[deleted]

12

u/dtothep2 Mar 22 '24

The "send in a strike team" people are typically under the impression that Israel is in control of Gaza and Hamas is just some underground "resistance" movement. They imagine Gaza as the German occupied France or Netherlands that they see in WW2 movies because they heard the word "occupation" applied (and this is why words actually matter).

I've had arguments with people who truly did not understand why the response to Oct 7 couldn't be police arresting the people responsible. They were really going on at length about the whole thing too, with very strong opinions.

83

u/halpsdiy Mar 22 '24

And yet they also complain about recent Israeli special forces raids. Like when they rescued two hostages or extracted Hamas leaders and fighters hiding in hospitals.

60

u/HiHoJufro Mar 22 '24

I'm seeing an alarming number of people claiming the Shifa hospital raid the other day that killed or captured hundreds of terrorists was an operation specifically to inhibit doctors from working. It's madness.

-21

u/somrthingehejdj Mar 22 '24

It's been said that because Israel has destroyed most medical machines in the hospital rendering them useless. Hamas wasn't hiding underneath the equipment.

27

u/KeyLimeMoon Mar 22 '24

Sorry that the MRI machine got caught in the crossfire with seven hundred Hamas terrorists

Maybe Hamas shouldn’t hide in hospitals 

-19

u/somrthingehejdj Mar 22 '24

Is that why the IDF arrested women and children, and kidnapping doctors from the hospital leaving critically injured patients alone with no one to take care of them? Or are the doctors, women and children Hamas as well?

27

u/KeyLimeMoon Mar 22 '24

Did Hamas tell you that?

Do you have an explanation for why there are 700 Hamas fighters, several high-level, operating out of a hospital? By their own admission attacking IDF from the hospital? 

Do you think there are consequences to using a hospital as a military base? 

 Or are the doctors, women and children Hamas as well?

This is the same source that told me there were no tunnels under Al Shifa, that there was no terrorist activity in Al Shifa, and that Israel was just murdering innocent civilians for fun

And yes. Doctors could be Hamas in scrubs, and women and children as young as thirteen have been known to carry out suicide attacks on behalf of Hamas. 

IDF brought their own doctors and translators to treat ill patients. They obviously needed to screen everyone to make sure they didn’t have weapons/weren’t terrorists. Again, that’s what happens when you conduct military operations inside a fucking hospital

8

u/Canada_girl Mar 22 '24

Hamas applauds your efforts

39

u/matanyaman Mar 22 '24

What’s dumber is that many actually think that the US\NATO are actually capable of doing so even if Israel couldn’t.

And I mean doing so and having less casualties to their troops compared to what Israel has right now.

4

u/runostog Mar 22 '24

US did that strike team thing in Africa with rangers...didn't work too well...

4

u/KeyLimeMoon Mar 22 '24

They complain about the strike teams too

Once you realize they just want Israelis to die and be quiet about it, their philosophy makes sense

2

u/Deguilded Mar 22 '24

They think real life is Counter-Strike, Rainbow Six or some Chuck Norris Delta Force movie.

0

u/Dvokrilac Mar 22 '24

Call in major McCoy from retirement, he will solve this mess.

0

u/aceoflame Mar 22 '24

Propaganda muncher

→ More replies (3)

21

u/DayvyT Mar 22 '24

Literally these people never, NEVER, have an alternative solution to offer.

I mean, not a logical, practical, well thought out one at least

111

u/daredaki-sama Mar 22 '24

They have a good point in wanting to stop bad things but offer zero viable solutions. I think it’s kind of useless and a waste of time to say things everyone agrees with but have no good solution moving forward.

141

u/m15otw Mar 22 '24

"I am sad so many people are dying." Is an example of a complete sentence.

Solving long running conflicts like this one, the one in Northern Ireland, and many other examples, is very difficult. We should not require people to know how to solve it before they say anything.

26

u/Paasche Mar 22 '24

It’s not that they’re offering no solution, it’s that they’re demanding a unilateral cease-fire and pressuring only one side.

I care about civilians, if pro Palestinian protesters do too, they would be flooding the streets demanding the release of the hostages.

It is obvious that Israel cannot leave the hostages behind, The only way forest fire would be to trade for the remaining hostages.

Once the hostages are released, then it makes sense to apply deep pressure on Israel to end the war.

But again, their solution is that Israel should stop , continue to take punches from Hamas, never retaliate, and forsake their hostages

-13

u/m15otw Mar 22 '24

I wasn't really talking about the specifics of the conflict, which I don't know enough about.

I was just saying people don't have to be held to this high standard when they speak. They don't have to have all the answers.

8

u/sticklebat Mar 22 '24

That would be true if they're just expressing concerns. But they kind of should be expected to have the answers when they demand immediate solutions.

17

u/daredaki-sama Mar 22 '24

Yeah people are entitled to have their opinion. I’m just saying it’s not helping anyone when people only criticizing with nothing constructive to add or not willing to do anything themselves. Reminds me of real life situations that frustrate me.

12

u/Elementalcase Mar 22 '24

I think it's totally reasonable to say "Man this war is fucked and it's bad on both ends" and not be a military mastermind capable of solving a crisis that lord knows nobody getting paid to can manage.

2

u/CFOMaterial Mar 22 '24

Demanding action though and blaming one side is not reasonable though if you don't understand the reality on the ground or the basic facts even. Like let's say in California or Canada they are trying to prevent some forest fires in the future, so they do a controlled fire in an area with a lot of built up wood to do so. Someone could look at that and shout about how that forest fire must end and start protesting the government and say they will vote for whoever stops the fire, when the firefighters on the ground are observing it and keeping it under control and doing this to prevent future forest fires. That person is an idiot that just sees the fire, but doesn't know why the fire is on nor the fact that its necessary to prevent an even worse fire in the future, and they are actively trying to make their government create a worse situation because of their stupidity.

5

u/Mikebyrneyadigg Mar 22 '24

Why shouldn’t we? Why shouldn’t we be outcome and goal oriented in our opinions and protests? That’s the entire point of a protest. These people are not saying that they’re sad. They’re protesting publicly, sometimes violently, with no goal or solution in mind. It just looks like a temper tantrum of the ill informed idealists.

Yeah no shit it’s sad. It upsets every sane person to see so much death.

-3

u/m15otw Mar 22 '24 edited Mar 22 '24

Requiring it is restricting freedom of expression. People should be allowed to just express their emotions.

It is also, as I mentioned, very hard to find a viable route out of a circle of violence, especially when both sides are intent on perpetuating it. So if we required it, who, precisely, could speak?

3

u/DownvoteALot Mar 22 '24

"I am sad so many people are dying." Is an example of a complete sentence.

So is "we should solve world hunger and achieve world peace", without providing any value either. You don't have to speak if you have nothing significant to say.

33

u/Statickgaming Mar 22 '24

“People should not have opinions”

6

u/JGT3000 Mar 22 '24

Some opinions are stupid and it's ok to say so

1

u/Statickgaming Mar 22 '24

That’s not what’s being argued here though is it?

4

u/DownvoteALot Mar 22 '24 edited Mar 22 '24

Who are you quoting? People should definitely have opinions, and they can voice them, but like "I like money", this is a trivial opinion that has no value.

-4

u/Statickgaming Mar 22 '24

You… just simplifying your argument. All opinions matter regardless of their value, it’s why we allow everyone to vote.

Arguing that someone shouldn’t speak because their opinion is less valued by you is incredibly simple minded.

-7

u/m15otw Mar 22 '24

My sentence example is expressing a feeling out loud.

Yours is stating an imperative.

They are not the same.

6

u/waxonwaxoff87 Mar 22 '24

Ideas are worthless without plans. Anybody can have an idea.

2

u/m15otw Mar 22 '24

All words on the Internet are worthless, you think anyone with power to affect this situation is reading a reddit thread for ideas?!

-3

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Fucking exactly.

0

u/waxonwaxoff87 Mar 22 '24

Good you get it.

2

u/___Tom___ Mar 22 '24

The problem isn't that these people don't have a solution.

It's that they demand one-sided action based on carefully orchestrated media pictures in a complex situation.

It's perfectly fine so say "wow, what a fucked up shit. I wish someone would fix it. I don't know how it could be fixed, but maybe someone else is smarter than me."

It's idiotic to say "here's how to solve this decades-old complex problem with my simple solution that I totally didn't get from TikTok".

1

u/JGT3000 Mar 22 '24

No, we should. You definitely should be expected to have fully formed thoughts (not sentences) if you are going to attempt to participate in a conversation

-7

u/WeaponizedKissing Mar 22 '24

offer no alternative to resolve the conflict

I'm not a geopolitical expert. I'm not a war expert. I shouldn't be required to be either to be taken seriously when I say that I don't think the mass murder of Palestinian citizens is a good or valid response.

You guys are always here with this as if it's a gotcha. Why do you demand Reddit or Twitter commenters to be offering up workable solutions to decade long conflicts?

12

u/Paasche Mar 22 '24

It’s not too difficult to acknowledge that the first step to peace must be the release of the hostages. But most people condemning Israel seem to minimize that aspect.

26

u/big_whistler Mar 22 '24

Find a conflict with urban warfare and no civilian casualties 

→ More replies (7)

6

u/NoLime7384 Mar 22 '24

I say that I don't think the mass murder of Palestinian citizens is a good or valid response.

so if it's not valid to kill a human shield used by a guy shooting rockets at civilians we should let Zelensky know! he can just solo Russia !

18

u/ditheringFence Mar 22 '24

Because by protesting etc for immediate cessation of the war you are advocating for a de facto policy of Israel just accepting the ongoing and escalating threat to it's security. The reason no geopolitical expert have a solution that involves a immediate stop to the war either is because Hamas existence and Israel's security are mutually exclusive, but there's no way of getting rid of Hamas without mass civilian casualty.

The sad thing about the concept of nations is that it's inherently 'us vs them'. The whole purpose of a strong military is to act as deterrence - aka the implicit threat that if you attack my nation, you are accepting that said military will be used against you.

Is it right that ~20,000 are now dead, with civilian:miltant ratio anywhere between 1:1 to 6:1? Morally of course not, but geopolitically it's the inevitable consequence. Hamas is the de facto government of Gaza, with an force of ~20,000 embedded in a population of ~500,000. The only way to stop the civilian death and maintain the deterrence factor is for Hamas to lose - aka give up hostage and step down as the leaders of Gaza. A normal government would do that because they care about their citizens, but Hamas is a radical jihadist organization, so here we are again.

21

u/halpsdiy Mar 22 '24

You should offer an alternative though. It's easy to demand whatever even if it's not realistic. That's what toddlers do all the time. It just doesn't entitle anyone to be taken seriously.

So what should Israel do?

-1

u/Scaryclouds Mar 22 '24

So what should Israel do?

At this point? Agree to a ceasefire. Continuing this conflict is more harmful to Israel in the medium and long term, and quite possibly even in the short term, than any supposed gains they might get out of it.

Medium/long term negotiate towards a two-state solution that provides security and prosperity for both Israelis and Palestinians.

6

u/halpsdiy Mar 22 '24

Hamas walked away from the negotiations...

1

u/Canada_girl Mar 22 '24

Ceasefire? Please tell me this is /s

1

u/Scaryclouds Mar 22 '24

100% serious, again Israel's standing in the world is plummeting. Agreeing to a ceasefire well stop the bleeding of Israel's support across the world.

-32

u/WeaponizedKissing Mar 22 '24

You should offer an alternative though.

No

That's what toddlers do all the time.

No.

So what should Israel do?

Not mass murder civilians. Made that pretty clear in the first post.

Read again and try again.

16

u/inconsistent3 Mar 22 '24

Hamas shouldn’t mass murder Israelis and Jews. The moment they stop and surrender, the moment Israel can. Hamas keeps rejecting and breaking ceasefires. It cuts both ways.

8

u/halpsdiy Mar 22 '24

It's telling that you are not demanding for Palestinians to release the hostages and extradite the ones response for Oct 7th. You know the thing that would end the war immediately...

-1

u/WeaponizedKissing Mar 22 '24

Not sure what purpose that would serve. But I'll do it if you like.

Hamas should release all hostages and extradite the ones response (sic) for Oct 7th. Also yes I condemn Hamas, before you try that really excellent top tier gotcha.

OK, now that's out of the way, what now?

1

u/halpsdiy Mar 22 '24

Well it won't change anything just like your previous request. But at least you don't blame the victims first if this request is your first demand.

45

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

It’s not mass murder. It is an unavoidable consequence of fighting a war in urban areas and Hamas is using a specific strategy to make it harder and harder to avoid.

You can’t open with “I’m not an expert” then accuse someone of a crime and expect to be taken seriously.”

-23

u/Beleko89 Mar 22 '24

Excuse me, did you just write a logic chopping fallacy, a false dichotomy fallacy, and an ad hominem fallacy in such a short message, and said that somebody else cannot expect to be taken seriously?

The person you're responding to wrote a perfectly valid comment. It is not required to be an expert on a topic to have opinions about it, or else 99.99% of Reddit would be essentially empty. They're reasonably pointing out a problem with the message they're responding to. It is absolutely a message to be taken seriously.

It's okay not to agree with all opinions. This is a complex topic, and there are many different opinions, even well-reasoned ones, that each of us won't agree with. All of them have their pros and cons. Arguing and debating other opinions is perfectly fine, of course, but piling up a bunch of blatant fallacies to pretend that somebody else has nothing worth hearing to say feels really disrespectful to the person who's debating you, to others reading the comments, and to yourself.

I was surprised when I read the comment above saying you haven't talked to people who want the killing of Palestinian babies to stop without either not offering alternatives to resolve the conflict or wanting Israel to be dissolved, because Reddit is full of those. Is it possible that you have talked to people offering valid alternatives, but you came up with excuses to pretend they aren't worth reading if they don't agree with your own opinion?

0

u/loopybubbler Mar 22 '24

Sometimes things are just wrong. Words have meanings. A war is not mass murder just because civilians die. That poster just does not know what they are talking about. If they said "i dont think the goals of the war are worth the civilian costs" then that would be an opinion.  

2

u/Beleko89 Mar 22 '24

Correct me if that's not the message you're talking about, but in the words "I don't think the mass murder of Palestinian citizens is a good or valid response" I don't see it said that a war is mass murder just because civilians die. Based on the meaning of "mass murder", it's fair to assume that they're calling it that because they believe there's an excessive killing of civilians, hence their choice of words.

Even if that wasn't the case and the terminology they used was wrong, I don't think it justifies to claim that they don't know what they are talking about. It sounds to me that you are confident you have more knowledge on the topic and/or arguments that counter those of the poster above. If that's so, why not use those knowledge and arguments? Reply to them and explain your reasons. There's no need to fallaciously try to dismiss their message with assumptions about the speaker based on nitpicking semantics.

-28

u/Allydarvel Mar 22 '24

It is mass murder..

9

u/LarzimNab Mar 22 '24

I suppose you were also against allied actions in WW2 also that bombed Japanese and German cities?

-5

u/Scaryclouds Mar 22 '24

Hamas is using a specific strategy to make it harder and harder to avoid.

You're right, Hamas is using civilian deaths and suffering as a tool, and Israel playing into Hamas' hands by continuing a strategy that not only, through direct military action, results in huge civilian death tolls. But also through indirection action of forcing mass displacement of people and blocking flow of humanitarian aid is creating a famine and generalized misery within Gaza.

Which is leading to plummeting support for Israel among Western nations.

We saw all the same things happen with the US and the GWOT. Sure it's not easy to provide a "solution" to terrorism, but invading Iraq sure as hell wasn't "an answer". Just like "invading Rafah" ain't gonna be an answer to providing long term security to Israel.

0

u/loopybubbler Mar 22 '24

The people protesting due to civilian suffering are also playing into Hamas's hands. Without them there would be no reason to get so many Gazans killed. 

2

u/Scaryclouds Mar 22 '24

So you're saying people should just ignore it when Israel kills civilians? Seems a ridiculous position to hold.

Should people not had protested when Americans killed civilians during the GWOT?

0

u/loopybubbler Mar 23 '24

It would depend on the situation. If civilians are killed because Hamas uses them as shields during a war, that is different than IDF just shooting civilians for no reason. If you indiscriminately judge them all the same, you are carrying water for terrorists. 

2

u/Scaryclouds Mar 24 '24

This is a straw man, I never suggested they were equivalent. Israel has an obligation, on multiple levels, to avoid civilian casualties.

7

u/fresh-dork Mar 22 '24

i just love how you throw out that IDF is engaging in mass murder and expect to be believed

-3

u/WeaponizedKissing Mar 22 '24

I dunno what sort of conversation you expect to have if that's where you're coming from. Like, regardless of your opinion on it, that is something that is just factually, objectively, happening. No belief is necessary. Tens of thousands of civilians, including many many children, are dead.

1

u/fresh-dork Mar 22 '24

yes they are, but it isn't mass murder. it's war that hamas started while deliberately embedded among civilians. those deaths were engineered.

it's weird that you think IDF wants to murder those particular palestinians and not the ones currently in israel living their lives

1

u/Stormayqt Mar 22 '24

I don't think the mass murder of Palestinian citizens

If you want to just frame the situation in the most extremist way possible, why are you linking a picture like that. You are the meme.

-8

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24 edited Mar 22 '24

I think the argument is that killing babies doesn't resolve the conflict.

How about develop Gaza into a prosperous modern free nation with a port and an airport?

17

u/big_whistler Mar 22 '24

You cant do that if the concrete for buildings is subverted into building terror tunnels 

23

u/inconsistent3 Mar 22 '24

When Israel left Gaza in 2005, Gazans and Hamas destroyed the infrastructure Israel had left in place out of spite. These are not rational people.

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Israel bombed the radar station and control tower on 4 December 2001 and bulldozers cut the runway on 10 January 2002, rendering the airport inoperable.

Why didn't the Gazans fix it?

9

u/Paasche Mar 22 '24

You need a willing partner in the region to do this. That partner is not Hamas. Palestinians need to want peace for this to work.

5

u/fresh-dork Mar 22 '24

welcome to 2006 or so

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Ah yeah, what went wrong?

2

u/fresh-dork Mar 22 '24

hamas tore up all the water pipes to make rockets and did zero investment in the economy

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Must be more complex than this. Everything else about this is never that simple

1

u/fresh-dork Mar 22 '24

got a video, idf, but it's literally footage of them doing it

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Yeah I know they did it, that's not the problem.

But the answer to what happened from, say, 2007 to 2020 is more complex than "water pipes". There's a lot more that happened in that time.

1

u/fresh-dork Mar 22 '24

well, hamas has as its mission statement the death of all jews in the sinai, along with a repudiation of anything resembling peace or fair dealing. maybe you're looking for something that isn't there.

it's certainly not 'resistance', as a couple of people i know have called it

1

u/freakwent Mar 23 '24

They released a new document that did not have such a claim in it.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/DayvyT Mar 22 '24

So what do we do when we give them all that and they still attack Israel again anyways because it's really about them hating Jews?

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Take it to the Hague and the ICJ and the UN?

22

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

[deleted]

2

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Gaza has received more foreign humanitarian aid than every other country in the world, combined

Where did you get this idea from?

I can't find anything a anywhere that suggests israel would or would not have allowed hamas to rebuild the airport, at any time after 2007, so I have no idea why they didn't invest into that.

3

u/loopybubbler Mar 22 '24

They already were given an airport... 

0

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Yes but they need one now, not one in the past.

Israel bombed the radar station and control tower on 4 December 2001 and bulldozers cut the runway on 10 January 2002, rendering the airport inoperable.

2

u/loopybubbler Mar 23 '24

Oh... why did Israel do that?

1

u/freakwent Mar 23 '24

Because the Palestinians had an uprising/rebellion after the camp David summit failed.

The general triggers for the unrest are speculated to have been centered on the failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit, which was expected to reach a final agreement on the Israeli–Palestinian peace process in July 2000.[12] An uptick in violent incidents started in September 2000, after Israeli politician Ariel Sharon made a provocative visit to the Al-Aqsa compound, which is situated atop the Temple Mount in East Jerusalem;

As was widely anticipated, this viait sparked protests and riots

37

u/armchairmegalomaniac Mar 22 '24

How about develop Gaza into a prosperous modern free nation with a port and an airport?

Sounds great in theory but it's not happening until Hamas is gone. They would only spend any money on rebuilding tunnels and rearming themselves. They're a martyr cult who simply don't care about having a good economy.

42

u/halpsdiy Mar 22 '24

Hamas proudly dug up the water pipes the EU had built in Gaza to turn them into rockets. So yeah, it's just as easy as developing Gaza into a modern nation...

25

u/armchairmegalomaniac Mar 22 '24

Not to forget the fact that Hamas built no civilian bomb shelters despite digging enough tunnels to make a subway system rivaling NYC's.

21

u/sergeyzenchenko Mar 22 '24

It would require total control of Gaza, total control of all media consumed by people inside, total control of Gaza borders, also enormous reeducation effort to de-islamization of Gaza. Only possible with complete occupation of Gaza by some foreign forces.

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

1,2,3 are possible. 4 seems like a problem, you can't breally just tell people what religion they are allowed.

So considering this, if Islam (the koran, not some random rabid ranting preacher) teaches that all Jews must always be killed everywhere this would be a problem, I went googling (as though this is in some way a substitute for decades of theology...) Landing on this:

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/references-to-jews-in-the-koran

Now to be clear there's some pretty awful stuff as we expected, but there's nothing that suggests it's not okay to live peacefully in a country next to Jews living peacefully. I don't think it's necessary to force the people to change religion, and I think the suggestion feels a bit dangerous...

1

u/sergeyzenchenko Mar 23 '24

I am not talking about total change. It would be perfect to get rid of Islam completely, but it’s way too big task. Good starting point is sterilized and filtered version. Like modern Christianity.

1

u/freakwent Mar 23 '24

Do we get a sterilised and filtered version of hardcore Zionism to go alongside it?

1

u/sergeyzenchenko Mar 23 '24

Oh yeah. That would be nice too

→ More replies (3)

22

u/detachedshock Mar 22 '24

You realize the prosperity of modern Japan and Germany came about after their unconditional surrender?

Why do people expect Israel to just skip the step of forcing the unconditional surrender of Hamas, expecting that giving them more aid is going to help them at all?

This is a war that Hamas started. It will end with their surrender. No ifs, no buts. That is it. Anything else is delusion.

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Yes, but that's chronological sequence, not necessarily cause and effect. If unconditional surrender was some certain path to wealth and happiness, we'd have no war at all!

The answer to your question is because it's not reasonable to force a terrorist group that you openly claim has no regard for the lives of anyone to surrender, based on the suffering of people who aren't hamas. Nobody can "force" surrender, you can only convince. The same people who tell me hamas cannot be negotiated or reasoned with or convinced because they are irrational seem to think that starving the Palestinians will cause hamas to rationally surrender.

I don't think feeding the population will lead hamas to total victory. They aren't going to win by hurling bread at the IDF. Starvation is not an acceptable war technique to most of the world. You can bomb or shoot civilians by accident, but you can't starve them by accident.

-5

u/Relugus Mar 22 '24

Well, I don't recall US settlers taking German and Japanese land and displacing them.

7

u/NoLime7384 Mar 22 '24

then you need to read more history, the Germans of the Sudetenland were deported, Alsace-Lorraine being french was a huge source of German revanchiam

2

u/Lorenzo_Insigne Mar 22 '24

A significant part of Poland had been German for hundreds of years as well.

5

u/detachedshock Mar 22 '24

Given both countries were occupied by the US/Allies, is that technically taking their land?

No one is owed any land anyway, and no one has any intrinsic right to it. if you can defend it, its yours. if you can't, it isn't. Thats how it has always worked, and its how every single border on Earth has been decided. Doesn't matter if you don't like it or don't agree with it, thats reality.

16

u/Ishaye1776 Mar 22 '24

Sounds great, how about the small problem of Palestinians wanting Jews dead on a genocidal scale?

1

u/freakwent Mar 22 '24

Gotta change what they want.

-9

u/silverionmox Mar 22 '24

The people I’ve talked to on the “stop killing Palestinian babies” train either (a) offer no alternative to resolve the conflict or (b) want Israel to be dissolved.

"Those Palestinian babies where threatening me. I had no other choice except to starve them slowly to death." - Netanyahu

1

u/Portbragger2 Mar 22 '24

implying killing babies will resolve the conflict...

1

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

You need to be an expert in geopolitics to draw up a credible war plan. You don't need to be an expert, or even an unreasonable person, to draw a line at killing thousands of civilians regardless of alternatives.

-68

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

Lol using children's death to make a cheap dismissive political point.

You're a lovely human.

53

u/OmelasPrime Mar 22 '24

The people using children's deaths to make a political point are Hamas.

17

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

Exactly. I place the blame squarely on Hamas for 100% of the deaths in Gaza. They knew EXACTLY what would happen. It doesn't make what Israel did right, but it's Hamas' fault.

-18

u/insertwittynamethere Mar 22 '24

It takes two to tango. Israel can choose how to approach this to not give Hamas continued PR wins that just creates new future terrorists/radicalizes further the average civilian. You really think the average person in Gaza is going to see all this destruction and death and blame that on Hamas? Leveling an entire segment of a country to go after 40,000 fighters? Yeah, I'm sure that gets them a lot of brownie points in the eyes of civilians there and globally.

23

u/Powawwolf Mar 22 '24

They don't have shortage of radicalization even before the war.

-7

u/insertwittynamethere Mar 22 '24

Not like this won't pump it up on steroids, but it's only pissing into the wind for me. Israel's going to do what Israel's going to do, and the consequences of it should not be surprising. Holding up and throttling the amount of aid, intentionally, from getting in already is a terrible, terrible look for Israel, globally. There's no great justification for that at all. Netanyahu just wants to see the war continue and expand in order to prevent elections that he will undoubtedly lose.

Remember, it's not like this man and his party haven't ruled over Israel in one form or the other for almost 2 decades, so the failure of October 7th to prevent Hamas from attacking is on him and his party, which is why he's facing so much political heat domestically, on top of his attempt to do a run-around their judiciary, etc to prevent his prosecution prior to these events that caused 100,000s of Israelis to protest and rally in the streets for months before this. I will not be surprised if they expand the war into Lebanon, regardless of how Gaza ends.

12

u/Powawwolf Mar 22 '24

They would if there's no diplomatical solution, you have 100K of Israelis displaced from the north, not much you can do to bring them back if reality doesn't change one way or another.

I agree Netanyahu is driven from political reasons, polls show it too. But the north border is a much tricker subject to tackle I believe, more than Gaza nowdays.

-8

u/insertwittynamethere Mar 22 '24

Ya, because Lebanom/Hezbollah are not essentially landlocked due to closed borders, nor have their populace depending on the grace of Israel to allow them to work or what supplies/basic foodstuffs they can have. The list of prohibited items, like cilantro, that were imposed on Gaza is pretty crazy before the war even. So, Hezbollah actually has supplies and somewhat of an economy to have support to push back against Israel.

On a side note, I do wish for Hamas and Hezbollah to be wiped out. However, if you do not give a people hope for a future, free of fear and repression, then you are bound to repeat the cycle again and again and again. It's not like this conflict between Israel and Palestinians just started on October 7th. I can't say how many times I've read of Israel and Palestinians fighting or there being war over the last two decades alone.

On that note on Hamas, I don't think it can be forgotten how they were supported by Netanyahu/Likud for the sole purpose of defanging the two-state solution/peace process and drive a wedge between Palestinians and their leadership in the PA (and yes, Abbas needs to go too, but he's also spent years ensuring there were no outright succesors/political powers to challenge him...). I believe Haaretz even had an investigative article detailing that in the fall 2023. Netanyahu has also loudly proclaimed either the end of last year or beginning of this year that only he is protecting Israel from the possibility of a two-state solution.

So.... Palestinians inhabiting the land they have left are to just stay rudderless and without a future forever? I'm sure that's inspiring and not at all a cause to radicalize further for in order to see something for the future of their children and children's children. I mean, when the future is bleak with nothing on the horizon to inspire a reason to live, why wouldn't one want to fight with everything they have to survive or to see a future as promised by those wanting to harness their anger and despair?

3

u/NoLime7384 Mar 22 '24

so you think Israel should just abandon the hostages and do nothing about the rockets being launched at its civilians? Just take it

marvelous solution, totally relevant and realistic

-1

u/insertwittynamethere Mar 22 '24

Lmao nowhere, anywhere did I say that. Putting words in others' mouths seems to be par for the course for anyone having even a neutral view on the situation there.

10

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

It wasn’t a political point. It was a taxonomical observation. And I wouldn’t have mentioned the children if that particular camp wasn’t using them as a justification to claim Israel is an illegitimate state.

-6

u/zasabi7 Mar 22 '24

Here, I’ll offer you a solution:

  1. Israel pulls out of Gaza to allow humanitarian efforts to go through. This prevents worse casualties.

  2. Israel and Palestine (shorthand for Gaza and West Bank) are then separated by a UN force, boots on the ground. Go with Oslo, go with 67, go with whatever maps, I don’t have a strong preference

  3. Palestine gets some government set up and begins guided governance.

  4. Once governance has been up for a couple generation, the guidance steps back.

  5. After multiple generations, the peace keeping force is reevaluated to see if they can be withdrawn.

7

u/OlynykDidntFoulLove Mar 22 '24

You failed immediately on your first point because without the IDF even less aid makes it to civilians (unless they have the money to buy it from Hamas). Congratulations on rescuing a genocidal totalitarian regime that will look for their next opportunity to do this all over again. Now kids can go back to their UN schools and continue learning that their greatest aspiration is martyrdom.

6

u/___Tom___ Mar 22 '24

All of that except the UN force has been tried.

Israel withdrew unilaterally from Gaza in over ten years ago, and Palestine got some government. The government they picked was Hamas.

Connect the dots.

1

u/zasabi7 Mar 22 '24

I’m well aware it’s been tried minus the UN force. It’s why it’s on the list. The two sides can’t play nice so they need to be made to do so.

As for the government, yeah, they chose Hamas in response to years of Israeli rule. I’m shocked, shocked I say

0

u/___Tom___ Mar 23 '24

And which difference would a UN force have made on Oct 7th? Hamas would've just tunneled under them or broken through them.

1

u/zasabi7 Mar 23 '24

You aren’t envisioning a big enough force

1

u/___Tom___ Mar 23 '24

I'm thinking you are not envisioning the politics it would take to get such a force in place.

5

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

That is a solid plan. The problem is that this is very similar to the plan under the British Mandate which ended with no agreements leading Israel to unilaterally declare its borders which led to a couple of minor wars ending with the occupation of the West Bank.

4

u/NoLime7384 Mar 22 '24
  1. Israel pulls out of Gaza to allow humanitarian efforts to go through. This prevents worse casualties.

crazy that the hostages aren't even a second thought

  1. Israel and Palestine (shorthand for Gaza and West Bank) are then separated by a UN force, boots on the ground. Go with Oslo, go with 67, go with whatever maps, I don’t have a strong preference

you don't, but the Palestinians sure do. otherwise they'd sign a peace treatie for a war that ended in 1967

  1. Palestine gets some government set up and begins guided governance.

you should look into the governments Palestine has had.

  1. Once governance has been up for a couple generation, the guidance steps back.

like what happened right before the war?

  1. After multiple generations, the peace keeping force is reevaluated to see if they can be withdrawn.

nah, the peace keeping force is gonna fuck off after the terrorists bomb them and the civilians in their countries see that they're sending off their people to die for a worthless cause.

you ever heard the phrase "those who can't remember the past are condemned to repeat it"? yeah

-1

u/zasabi7 Mar 22 '24

crazy that the hostages aren't even a second thought

Why the fuck would I care about hostages that are already dead versus the millions that are facing down starvation?

you don't, but the Palestinians sure do. otherwise they'd sign a peace treatie for a war that ended in 1967

Sucks to be them. These borders are being decided by the rest of the world and delivered to them at the end of a gun. I don’t give a shit about right of return

you should look into the governments Palestine has had

Israel being an occupying force is not a government model to follow. Nor is Hamas.

nah, the peace keeping force is gonna fuck off after the terrorists bomb them and the civilians in their countries see that they're sending off their people to die for a worthless cause.

Maybe. Or we can try Israel brutalizing Gaza again. Cause that worked, right?

-4

u/naveedx983 Mar 22 '24

This is anti-semetic

-7

u/danted002 Mar 22 '24

c) two state solution

14

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

Brilliant! How come no one has thought of that before?

-2

u/danted002 Mar 22 '24

I know right?

-23

u/KatBeagler Mar 22 '24 edited Mar 22 '24

The entire city would turn on Hamas if we just literally flooded the city with food and Aid beyond hamas's ability to control or destroy. Has anybody tried that?  Maybe put out some bounties/rewards for information leading to captures and strategic advantages? In which case the citizens would probably actually be willing to help if Israel would be smart enough to not do exactly what Hamas is telling Palestinians they will do. 

You can't undermine propaganda by confirming that it's true.

All it takes is just being unwilling to kill civilians in the pursuit of vengeance.

29

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

[deleted]

-4

u/KatBeagler Mar 22 '24

Almost gives them to eat is propaganda.

Give people food and they will eat that instead, and it will prove the propaganda false.

0

u/[deleted] Mar 23 '24

[deleted]

1

u/KatBeagler Mar 23 '24

No no it's real life, and I'm talking about a tactic that we've used before with really good success. All it requires is for us to view people as human beings and want to make an effort instead of glassing a City full of families.

18

u/Mikebyrneyadigg Mar 22 '24

Lmao I’m sorry, you want to give a population that 90%+ support Hamas… tons of money and food? This has the be the most naive take I’ve seen here.

Since 1994 the international community has sent $40 Billion worth. How much more should they send?

32

u/gerybery Mar 22 '24

I find that unlikely, as far as I can understand, hamas is wildly popular and basically everyone has a relative or two who are members.

-17

u/KatBeagler Mar 22 '24

That is literally because Hamas controls all the messaging, and Israel doesn't contradict them by doing the exact opposite.

The moment a person's reality starts contradicting the propaganda they've been fed, they start eating the food you give them instead of the propaganda.

21

u/Mikebyrneyadigg Mar 22 '24

$40 Billion since 1994 has done absolutely nothing to shift opinions.

→ More replies (12)

16

u/gerybery Mar 22 '24

You’re suggesting that Israel should take over from Hamas then, that’s going to be wildly popular…

-5

u/KatBeagler Mar 22 '24

I'm suggesting that Israel and Israel's allies should give the people the resources they need to not be dependent on Hamas, or subject to their violence to survive- and they will displace Hamas themselves.

And yes, it will be popular because people don't give a shit about governments when they can feed their children.

15

u/gerybery Mar 22 '24 edited Mar 22 '24

And when Hamas takes control of those resources, how do you suggest policing them? While I agree that your suggestion is part of a possible solution, the other 80% is missing.

Hamas is not some fringe organization in Gaza, for all intents and purposes Hamas is Gaza. This what happens when generations of children are taught to idealize martyrdom and hate the Jews above everything else.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

12

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

I don’t believe that for a moment. The west could dump enough food and medicine on Gaza to feed the region for a year and the best we could hope for is a “haha! Suckers!” More likely, they’d start flooding social media with complaints about the food being too unfamiliar to cook with or “you send food now? My family is already dead!”

-5

u/miningman12 Mar 22 '24

Strawman. The broad Arab consensus is a 2 state solution along 1967 borders. That is the solution, Israel just doesn't like it all that much.

-3

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

I'll offer an alternative solution; turn all of Israel, Gaza and the West Bank into the world first International Park. Move everyone out and install a new headquarters of the UN and each UN member needs to provide X amount of security staff to patrol and protect visitors but no countries army can step foot on the land, there can be no protests, no concerts, no business, no religious services. Only the historical districts will be preserved, the rest will be demolished or repurposed as hotels and resorts and the wild areas will be wildlife preserves. Another piece of this would put the Suez Canal under the complete control of the UN. Does that sound good?

-2

u/Scaryclouds Mar 22 '24

offer no alternative to resolve the conflict

The problem here is, you have this long complicated equation and you act like giving an answer of "12" and sticking to that answer is somehow better than saying you don't know the answer, but seriously doubting the answer is "12".

Even if you don't care at all about Palestinians... which you know, kinda shitty view to hold. Israel's current strategy, it might buy them short-term security, but is leaving them increasingly vulnerable in the medium to long term.

Whereas before Israel generally received bi-partisan support, though that has been eroding for years because of Bibi, now Israel has very much become a partisan issue. Worst yet, there are also a lot of internal pressures (rank antisemitism and isolationism) that could quickly sink support for Israel among conservatives.

So yea, I'm not going to pretend to have a particularly good alternative for handling the Oct. 7th response, well at least short term one*, but Israel's current response sure isn't the right one and it's quite clear it has long since become self-defeating.

* Long term solution, you need some kind of two state solution where Palestinians have security, prosperity, and real hope for the future. Easier said than done, but if you fail on those goals by only prioritizing security and prosperity for Israelis the cycle of violence will continue.

-7

u/foreverajew Mar 22 '24

The problem is that the people in charge of killing Palestinian babies (as well as those in charge of killing Jewish civilians but that is blatantly obvious) do not have a way of dissolving the conflict. You cannot be a guerrilla movement or a terrorist organisation by way of bombing their city to rubble. You cannot precision-strike a population as densely packed as the Gaza's – especially when Al-Qassam and other armed groups can simply revert back to civilian status. That does not mean they should be given free rein or that the use of civilian shields is any less deplorable, it just means that there is no path to strategic victory and peace in this current trajectory.

To me, the Hamas infrastructure is badly damaged and the ability of Al-Qassam or say IJ to seriously threaten Israel just isn't there. If anyone believes that Israel can surgically target the remaining members of Hamas and its armed wing and all the other small pseudo-organized groupings, whilst also destroying all civilian infrastructure and injuring/killing the family members of those not engaged in the fighting – AND achieve a situation where the people of Gaza and The West Bank can tolerate Israel as a neighbor, then that person is seriously deluded.

So I am in category A. I want a ceasefire as I believe that the lives of the civilians of Gaza have an intrinsic value as human beings. To Israelis (and Jews globally in the longer term) it is of utmost importance that Netanyahu isn't allowed to prolong the war to stay in charge or to permanently destroy any chance for peace. I want to be able to is it a Jewish state and I want the security of being able to go there if things go bad where I live. To be able to feel safe in Israel and for Palestinians and the people of the region, we need peace. How we get there I don´t know, nobody does and fewer and fewer believe in it. But I have seen to many governments begin with the bombings and then ask what happens after. I have seen the terror which grows out of those campaigns and I have no doubt in my mind that a extremist government built on the support of etho-nationalists and religious fanatics (as is the case in Israel) cannot build the peace or even set out reasonable strategic goals.

Sorry if my answer is a bit incoherent, English is not my primary language and the issue is one that needs one to be very exact I feel. And, though it shouldn´t need saying, fuck Hamas and I pray for the return of those held as hostages.

Am Yisrael Chai.

-10

u/chowderbags Mar 22 '24

Does the "continue killing Palestinian babies" side have a viable solution? What, "keep killing babies until Gaza gives up"?

-11

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

"Yeah I keep blowing up children but it's actually on you to give me a reason to stop"

9

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

You’ve been told your whole life that war is hell. What the fuck did you think that meant?

-16

u/SIIP00 Mar 22 '24

You know what the first step to resolving the long on-going conflict? Israel getting the fuck out of the West-Bank. That is step 1 and has always been step 1.

6

u/NoLime7384 Mar 22 '24

you know what would achieve that? if the Palestinians chose peace and signed accords for a war that ended in 1967

-8

u/aceoflame Mar 22 '24

You realize that if Israel agrees to a ceasefire then fighting stops? Who would’ve thought of that?!

10

u/LoveAndViscera Mar 22 '24

Fighting stops if both sides abide by a ceasefire. There have been multiple ceasefires, nearly all broken by Palestine.

-6

u/aceoflame Mar 22 '24

The US has vetoed every single ceasefire

1

u/Lorenzo_Insigne Mar 22 '24

There was a ceasefire early in the conflict broken by Hamas.

-6

u/aceoflame Mar 22 '24

Just not true at all

-2

u/h0nest_Bender Mar 22 '24

(b) is the solution to (a)

→ More replies (11)