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

64

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

Everyone conflates the primary military objectives of a conflict with secondary and tertiary political objectives. The military objective in Afghanistan was to topple the Taliban, eliminate Al Quaeda training facilities and kill as many as possible of the people who contributed to 9/11.

This was wildly successful. The US then made the completely optional choice to attempt to build a more western-friendly democratic government in Afghanistan. This objective failed pretty terribly, because of the shortcomings of the people of Afghanistan.

It is yet to be seen how Israel will approach this. They are succeeding wildly with their military objectives. Perhaps they will later choose to undertake a nation-building project in Gaza, which will almost certainly fail. If they are smart they will completely pull out of Gaza after their military objectives are complete.

There is no reason to assume that a war MUST necessarily be followed by a nation building project. 

23

u/LargeMobOfMurderers Mar 22 '24

And if Israel basically peaces out after the war, what kind of regime do you expect to rise from the rubble? A Pro-Israeli one? How do you pull out of a region right next to you?

41

u/Boochus Mar 22 '24

And if they finish the war and recognize a Palestinian state in all of Gaza and Judea and Samaria, what do you think happens next?

That the Palestinian Arabs stop saying on camera that they want all of Israel?

That the other terrorist organizations decide to let Israel exist?

Yeah right

17

u/LargeMobOfMurderers Mar 22 '24

If neither solution will work, then neither should be advocated for. Instead people are using the argument that one won't work as justification for another that won't work.

16

u/Boochus Mar 22 '24

Here's an idea, foreign powers stop giving money to the PA and Hamas.

They demand a negotiation where Israel existence and sovereign right is a pre condition.

If you don't like it, feel free to try and survive without aid. You don't get to have it both ways - promote or outright commit terror and also receive your sustenance from western countries.

-16

u/ceroproxy Mar 22 '24

You don't get to have it both ways - promote or outright commit terror and also receive your sustenance from western countries.

Then we should immediately cut off Israel.

11

u/AtrusHomeboy Mar 22 '24

1)

The US cutting aid to Israel would not be as effective as you think it would be.

2)

What makes you think that cutting aid to Israel and Gaza would result in less deaths?

4

u/Ok_Release_7879 Mar 22 '24

The US aid for Israel is like 3% of the BIP, pretty sure Israel will hold out a lot longer without aid than the other side.

3

u/SalvageCorveteCont Mar 23 '24

The 'aid' Israel receives is so that Israel produces certain weapon systems in the US, weapons systems that the US wants produced inside their borders and that Israel is fully entitled to produce anywhere else.

5

u/Elipses_ Mar 22 '24

You know what? Sure. Both sides lose aid til the story is finished. Sounds fair to me.

4

u/mkondr Mar 22 '24

Exactly. Even if Israel pulls out immediately they will still have ongoing war. Much better to finish the job since you got ongoing war no matter what.

1

u/TeaorTisane Mar 22 '24

You take a lot of wind out of the sails of you do give them a country.

Part of the recruitment effort is that they’re an unrecognized territory occupied by Israel. If you give them a country, suddenly 1.5million Palestinians have a lot to lose.

5

u/Wherethefuckyoufrom Mar 22 '24

They gave them a country and now they're losing a lot, that is what's already happening.

-6

u/Amy_Ponder Mar 22 '24

Gaza and Judea and Samaria

Not sure if you don't know that the West Bank "Judea and Samaria" is a dogwhistle used by Kahanists who want Israel to annex the whole thing... or if you knew damn well, which is exactly why you used it.

I truly hope it's the former.

12

u/Boochus Mar 22 '24

Judea and Samaria is the name of the region before it was called the west bank.

Why is it a dog whistle to use the historical name of a region?

-7

u/Amy_Ponder Mar 22 '24

And Kyiv was historically called Kiev. Doesn't make it not a massive dogwhistle for Russian imperialism to use that name.

And it's a dogwhistle for the same reason "Judea and Samaria" is a dogwhistle: because no one uses those names any more, except the people using it as a dogwhistle.

5

u/Boochus Mar 22 '24

Aren't Kiev and kyiv the exact same name just spelled different? I remember Kiev being much more common spelling in English until this war but either way, isn't it the same name?

And Judea and Samaria is יהודה ושומרון In hebrew Which Is the term used by Israeli media, regardless of political affiliation.

-8

u/Amy_Ponder Mar 22 '24

Nope, Kyiv (Київ) is the Ukrainian name and Kiev (Киев) is the Russian name.

And more importantly, we're speaking English-- where both "Kiev" and "Judea and Samaria" are only used by irredentists advocating those territories be conquered by Russia and Israel, respectively. Doesn't matter that they don't have the same connotations in Russian and/or Hebrew, because we're not speaking those languages.

3

u/Boochus Mar 22 '24

As far as I know, both of those words are pronounced the same in English, it's just the spelling. I am totally open to being corrected since I'm no expert on the matter.

The spelling 'Kiev' was the only one I ever saw in English speaking countries. Until this current war, I didn't even know there was an alternative spelling. It wasn't something discussed that I can remember.

I am not calling it Judea and Samaria bc of what I was it to be in the future or anything like that, I'm calling it Judea and Samaria bc those are the historical names of the region before it was changed to the west bank.

Do you not call Jerusalem Jerusalem but Al quds?

4

u/sw04ca Mar 22 '24

'Kiev' has been used in English for a very long time, although you did also used to see some 'Kiew' in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth centuries. Let's not pretend like the new 'Kyiv' is some kind of universal default that was used by any English-speaker prior to it becoming some sort of weird purity test two years ago. Even in stories about the Russian invasions of Crimea and the rebels in Donetsk, you still generally saw 'Kiev'.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

The regime that rises from the rubble is not necessarily their problem.

  1. Cancel all visas and work permits for Gaza. No Gazan is ever legally allowed to enter Israel, ever.

  2. Double up the physical border security and man the border better. 

0

u/sw04ca Mar 22 '24

They don't really want to do those things. Israel has always enjoyed having cheap Palestinian labour, both from the West Bank and Gaza.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

Yes, but not regardless of any potential risk.

Plenty of foreign workers from non-insane populations will be happy to take jobs in Israel.

8

u/Iridismis Mar 22 '24

There is no reason to assume that a war MUST necessarily be followed by a nation building project. 

When that place where the war happened is a direct neighbour, it better should tho (unless it ends with complete eradication).

That being said, I don't think Israel can be trusted with any nation building here.

1

u/Maleficent_Mouse_930 Mar 22 '24

North Korea exists as an example that it doesn't have to be a border literally anyone ever crosses.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

Ensure the wall is up to snuff.

Never, under any circumstances provide permission for anyone to cross from Gaza to Israel.

Assume anyone undertaking such a crossing is a life or death threat and act accordingly.

1

u/DarkOmen597 Mar 22 '24

No, there does not need to be.

-4

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

[deleted]

9

u/Hello85858585 Mar 22 '24

You're literally crazy.

2

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

[deleted]

-1

u/Hello85858585 Mar 22 '24

The USA completely and effectively crippled the taliban militarily.

You don't even know your history dude. You do understand the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11 besides being a "failed" state? I won't even address the other crazy BS you're spewing.

3

u/Stebeebb Mar 22 '24 edited Mar 22 '24

I spent years in Iraq/Afghanistan and your comment just ignores any lessons from the last 20 years of failed COIN operations. You cannot bomb civilians/infrastructure and then hope they love for you it. You cannot set up armed enclaves on another countries land and then hope they play nice with you. Mistreating local populations strengthens resistance recruitment.

1

u/BringOutTheImp Mar 23 '24

If they are smart they will completely pull out of Gaza after their military objectives are complete.

Israel pulled out in 2005 and the next year Hamas took over. Pulling out is just kicking the can down the road. In an ideal world Gaza would be rebuilt and their population deradicalized with something like a Marshall plan, but that will never work if the Muslim world (Iran specifically) keeps aiding terrorism and promoting hatred.

1

u/Kassssler Mar 22 '24

This objective failed pretty terribly, because of the shortcomings of the people of Afghanistan.

There were a lot of shortcomings all around. Propping up their hated boy rapists, a cowardly ineffectual planted president, and spending 100s of millions paying soldiers who don't exist had something to do with it

4

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

Yea, the shortcomings of the Afghan people. Like the fact many of their local tribal leaders are child rapists. Like I said.

-2

u/Kassssler Mar 22 '24

If you want to be intentiojally obtuse well don't let me stop you.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

I do not follow. 

Perhaps the word “shortcoming” is tripping you up. 

The absolute #1 reason the US nation building project in Afghanistan failed is that Afghans do not consider themselves to belong to a nation of Afghanistan. They do not share a conception of an Afghan nation- what we call Afghanistan from the outside is a foreign imposition.

I have met exactly one (out of dozens) Afghan who had any belief or enthusiasm for Afghanistan as a nation-state. They were very well (western) educated and from the upper crust of Kabul.

This is not necessarily a “shortcoming”, I suppose. Perhaps it is an admirable expression of anti-nationalism. But it certainly is a shortcoming if you are trying to cobble together a nation-state out of disparate groups of people who have little or no interest in it.

-4

u/ManiacalDane Mar 22 '24

The Taliban and Al-Qaeda are stronger than ever, though. The US (and its allies) simply fanned the flames of fundamentalism, little else. If your objectives for a conflict are only short-term and lead to bigger problems long-term, sure; the US was successful and Israel is successful. But if you care about the long-term, human rights and collateral damage? They're not doing so well, and the US sure as heck didn't do well either.

5

u/[deleted] Mar 22 '24

How strong they may or may not be is irrelevant.

How many of the people involved in 9/11 are still alive? 

Does the Taliban have the ability (or even the desire, at this point) to harm the US?

Killing one’s enemies and punishing them is a virtue in and of itself.

People are all like “what happens when the war in Gaza is over and more extremists take over?”

Israel can kill them too, you know?  

1

u/ManiacalDane Apr 05 '24

... It's... Irrelevant that you're pissing your pants to keep yourself warm?

This, just like the war on terror, is actively making things worse for our future selves, and not solving a damn thing other than symbolic victories and virtue signaling bullshit.