New War In Israel / Gaza

[Nivsch]

@Raze And what do you think made PLO to stop the terror and start co-operate with Israel? The war Israel started in 2002 against hamas in the West Bank that lasts couple of years.

Then now you just suggest the soldiers out of Gaza and hamas to re-arm and everything to go back to how it was in oct 6th?

[zurew]

@Yousif - see what @Raze did there? He actually made points and he directly engaged with the question that was asked to you.

 

Once you grow out of your non-dual-rambling-wannabe-guru phase, maybe you will be capable to do that to, but until then - I will stop engaging with you, because its a total waste of everyones time.

[Raze]

6 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

@Raze And what do you think made PLO to stop the terror and start co-operate with Israel? The war Israel started in 2002 against hamas in the West Bank that lasts couple of years.

Then now you just suggest the soldiers out of Gaza and hamas to re-arm and everything to go back to how it was in oct 6th?

1. Why would Gazans ever agree to give up violence if after the PLO did they get treated like that? Hamas is even more popular in the West Bank now than in Gaza, there is a risk of the West Bank turning into a larger Gaza if this continue this way.

A major factor in giving up military actions was the Oslo accords which gave hope for a state, this has been crushed.
 

2. Most military analysts and even officials in Israel’s government don’t believe Israel can defeat Hamas militarily, even if they do the amount of orphans created and the anger generated towards is Israel in Iran, Egypt, and Jordan will just result in the creation of a new violent faction as it’s creating the same conditions that caused the creation of Hamas. A large recruitment pool frustrated by occupation, and foreign backers motivated to smuggle them arms.

Edited February 17 by Raze

[Vrubel]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

What does it say about your government if even with their best intentions they are not more accurate than terrorists?

On 16/02/2024 at 0:00 PM, Leo Gura said:

The civilian to combatant ratio on Oct 7th was something like 2:1.

Irrelevant, Hamas would gladly commit a Holocaust, obviously at some point, they had to confront soldiers. 

[Nivsch]

@Raze 1. PLO has been treated good by Israel. I dont understand what you mean.

Oslo agreement made the terror much worse by the way, and also the following agreements in the 90's were great and gave a lot of hope to the Palestinians.

What was their answer to that? 2nd Intifada.

2. Iran is the main israel's enemy. What are you talking about? Their regime (not the Iranians) wants to erase Israel from the map regardless of what Israel does or doesnt.

Edited February 17 by Nivsch

[Vrubel]

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

There is an ancient Chinese saying:

Don't use cannon to kill mosquito.

Hamas are no mosquitoes, rockets vs Iron Dome are mosquitoes but not 7.10. A better analogy would be a tumor that has to be painfully removed. 
 

4 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Rats must be managed, not eliminated.

That was the entire strategy before 7/10. There was the deadly assumption that Hamas would get attached to their wealth and governing Gaza, in other words, become rational players. After 7/10 they have to be removed for starkly obvious reasons. 

Every innocent killed is one too many if he was truly innocent. But what is the alternative? It's also silly how people see Hamas as some kind of child with no responsibility. This is true in the sense they are unable to hold responsibility but then that is gaslighted fully onto Israel which is a form of perversion equivalent of putting the blame on Britain for starting WW2. 

Edited February 17 by Vrubel

[Nivsch]

@Raze Israel isn't suppose to leave part of hamas active just like that US and Europe would not be satisfied if ISIS was stay active in some areas. The hypocrite game of making it all a problem Israel created is beyond laughable.

There are many more component to this ancient hate including religious, theologious that would expressed anyway in a form of hamas and terror too even if Israel did everything right.

Edited February 17 by Nivsch

[Yousif]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

@Yousif - see what @Raze did there? He actually made points and he directly engaged with the question that was asked to you.

 

Once you grow out of your non-dual-rambling-wannabe-guru phase, maybe you will be capable to do that to, but until then - I will stop engaging with you, because its a total waste of everyones time.

Just rename murder and call it “ virtue signaling “ that should make it okay now. 

I’m gonna stop gaslighting, you have got enough on your conscience and mind to deal with. 
 

 

[Raze]

1 hour ago, Nivsch said:

@Raze Israel isn't suppose to leave part of hamas active just like that US and Europe would not be satisfied if ISIS was stay active in some areas. The hypocrite game of making it all a problem Israel created is beyond laughable.

There are many more component to this ancient hate including religious, theologious that would expressed anyway in a form of hamas and terror too even if Israel did everything right.

1. Except they have yet to provide a realistic plan to militarily defeat Hamas, so this is justifying endless war. How many more dead children will it be worth? Should it just be indefinite until the goal is achieved? If it requires killing a million children to end Hamas should they do it?

2. ISIS was created as a result of US military actions declaring they need to not allow other extremist groups to remain active. There clearly isn’t a scenario where you indefinitely blockade and commit violence towards a population and it stops being violent. Nothing would stop another group like Hamas from forming when the acts to stop Hamas create the exact same conditions that created Hamas in the first place.

3. putting aside whoever created it, Israel is right now not making the situation better. Any objective look at the historical record shows a clear pattern of violence creating violence. Israel’s current actions will just create more violence.

4. The situation can’t be blamed on religious and old ideological reasons entirely because it has escalated. At one point the population was so passive Israel ruled the West Bank with a small force. But constant violence resulting in violence used to justify further violence and sabotaging any hope for the future made things worse and worse.

Edited February 17 by Raze

[Thought Art]

 

[Nivsch]

@Raze 

1. Absolutely not. From now on the operation is mainly in the ground and in hamas tunnels.

2. There is no blockade. They are an independent state .That called borders with marine and air restrictions. West Bank Palestinians are under PLO responsibility.

3-4. Yes both sides have responsibility to the worsening of the conflict.

Edited February 17 by Nivsch

[Raze]

5 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

@Raze 

2. There is no blockade. They are an independent state and so to the west bank. That called borders with marine and air restrictions.

https://www.state.gov/reports/2016-report-on-international-religious-freedom/israel-and-the-occupied-territories/israel-and-the-occupied-territories-the-occupied-territories/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip

[Nivsch]

@Raze Terror organization have to be restricted from marine and air ways.

[Leo Gura]

3 hours ago, Vrubel said:

Every innocent killed is one too many if he was truly innocent. But what is the alternative?

The alternative is very simple: not waging a war. Build up better defenses. You will need them anyway since more terrorists will be created by your actions.

[Raze]

27 minutes ago, Nivsch said:

@Raze Terror organization have to be restricted from marine and air ways.

But then why do they purposefully restrict calories to keep Gaza on the brink of collapse? 

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSBRE89G0NM/

They also restricted basic items

Quote

According to the "Failing Gaza"[who?], Amnesty International and other organizations reported that cement, glass, steel, bitumen, wood, paint, doors, plastic pipes, metal pipes, metal reinforcement rods, aggregate, generators, high voltage cables and wooden telegraph poles were "high priority reconstruction materials currently with no or highly limited entry into Gaza through official crossings."[178] A 2009 UN report by Kevin M. Cahill called the restrictions "Draconian", and said that reconstruction efforts were being undermined by Israel's refusal to permit the importation of steel, cement or glass, among other building materials, and its policy of restricted importation of lentils, pasta, tomato paste and juice, as well as batteries for hearing aids for deaf children. He said that despite the restrictions, UNRWA had been able to provide a basic food supply to over a million refugees in the Gaza Strip. He added that he "visited a food station where hundreds of displaced persons waited to collect their meager staples of rice, sugar, lentils and cooking oil. While this program may save people from starvation, it is a diet that does not prevent the highest level of anemia in the region, with alarming rates of childhood stunting due to inadequate nutrition."[179]

Quote

According to Gisha, items that have at various times been denied importation into Gaza in 2010 include ordinary consumer goods such as jam, candles, books, musical instruments, shampoo, A4 paper, and livestock such as chicken, donkeys, and cows.[220][221] The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs also lists wheelchairs, dry food items, crayons, stationery, and soccer balls as shipments that Israeli authorities have prevented from entering Gaza.[222][223][224] International aid group Mercy Corps said it was blocked from sending 90 tons of macaroni and other foodstuffs. After international pressure, Israeli authorities said that they were giving the shipment a green light.[89] Israel was also reported to have prevented aid groups from sending in other items, such as paper, art supplies, tomato paste and lentils.[225] Because of an Israeli ban on the importation of construction materials such as cement and steel, which could be used to build bunkers for military use by Hamas, the UN Relief and Works Agency started to build mud brick homes.[226] Aid agencies[who?] say that food waits on trucks and in warehouses, and many basic items are rejected by Israel as "luxuries" or are turned down for unexplained reasons[citation needed]. "Tin" cans are banned because the steel from which they are made might be used to build weaponry or structures by Hamas, making it hard for Gazan farmers to preserve their vegetables.[227] At one time the only fruit allowed was bananas, allegedly[who?] because the Israeli official owned a banana plantation.[228][unreliable source?]

Limitation system

In September 2007, the Israeli cabinet voted to tighten the restrictions on the Gaza strip. The cabinet decision stated, "the movement of goods into the Gaza Strip will be restricted; the supply of gas and electricity will be reduced; and restrictions will be imposed on the movement of people from the Strip and to it."[229]

In January 2010, the Israeli group Gisha took Israeli authorities to court, forcing them to reveal which goods were permitted and which goods weren't. The Israeli government replied that canned fruit, fruit juices and chocolate are blocked, while at the same time canned meat, canned tuna, mineral water, sesame paste, tea and coffee are allowed into the Gaza Strip.[230] Banned items also included coriander, shampoo and shoes.[229][231]

In October 2010, papers were released which revealed a system to maintain the minimum level of basic goods entering the Strip. It contained upper and lower warning lines, identifying surpluses and shortages of listed products in Gaza.[232]

In October 2012, an Israeli court forced Israel's Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) to release a document that detailed "red lines" for "food consumption in the Gaza strip" during the 2007 blockade. According to the COGAT, the document was a rough draft, and never actually implemented. He want on further to say that there was never even any discussion after the document had been drafted. The document calculates the minimum number of calories necessary to keep Gazans from malnutrition and avoid a humanitarian crisis. This number was converted to a number of daily truckloads, the number being decreased to account for food produced in Gaza, and further on the basis of "culture and experience" of the Gazans. This reduction, if implemented, would have resulted in an increase in sugar and a decrease in fruits, vegetables, milk, and meat.[229] Gisha, an Israeli human-rights group, said that in fact the number of truckloads allowed into Gaza was less than stipulated in the calculation. The UN said that if the policy was intended to cap food imports, it would go against humanitarian principles. The body responsible for the calculation said its intent was to ensure no shortages occur, not to cap food imports. Israeli officials now acknowledge the restrictions were partly meant to pressure Hamas by making the lives of Gazans difficult.[233]

Israel limits the amount of load the trucks may carry, ostensibly for security reasons. In the past, the total height of goods stacked on trucks was not allowed to exceed 1.2 meters. The Israeli authorities did, however, not explain why they did not use to its full potential the scanner, donated by the Dutch government and calibrated according to the military's specifications, which can scan at a height of 2 meters. In February 2016, the allowed height was increased to 1.5 meters.[234]

 

Hamas has made attempts at a political negotiations 

https://inkstickmedia.com/israel-rejected-peace-with-hamas-on-five-occasions/

but because Israel refused to negotiate they would fire rockets at them, then after Israel bombed a ceasefire would be negotiated and restrictions reduced.

 

This creates an environment that encourages Hamas to attack Israel as they benefited from it (bombings created orphans for them to recruit and reduced restrictions after a ceasefire was negotiated), and see no other option as Israel refuses to engage with a political solution. 
 

Netanyahu and other Likud officials were already leaked as purposefully doing this to avoid a two state solution and justify further expansion. This was the policy that lead to oct 7, and if it persists will lead to more violence.

Edited February 18 by Raze

[Nivsch]

13 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The alternative is very simple: not waging a war. Build up better defenses. You will need them anyway since more terrorists will be created by your actions.

The hostages won't be released without a life threat to hamas.

Edited February 18 by Nivsch

[Nivsch]

@Raze hamas fires rockets since the year 2000 when the 2nd Intifada started. I will read the restriction details you added before I relate to them too.

Edited February 18 by Nivsch

[Vrubel]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The alternative is very simple: not waging a war. Build up better defenses. You will need them anyway since more terrorists will be created by your actions.

I think Hamas can be genuinely removed from power. It doesn't matter how many terrorists the misery of war will produce amongst the Arabs there. If they are unable to hold power and organize themselves they will be unable to do much damage. 

Ideally, Gaza will be policed by a coalition of moderate Arab countries, I am also not against the "pathway to two-state solution" in exchange for normalization with Saudi. But it must include rock-solid ironclad security guarantees for Israel otherwise it's no use. Also, it must not be seen as a concession due to 7.10. So Hamas/Iran must not benefit from it at all.

[hundreth]

 

14 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

The alternative is very simple: not waging a war. Build up better defenses. You will need them anyway since more terrorists will be created by your actions.

Believe it or not, Israel's response is an effective defensive deterrent. No one in the region expected such a strong response to Hamas' actions, bordering on unhinged. From a strictly defensive perspective, no one wants to attack a crazy Israel.

On the other hand, they've destroyed much of their international reputation, and this could have broader consequences for them.

[MAHAVATAR_-_BABAJI]

3 minutes ago, hundreth said:

 

Believe it or not, Israel's response is an effective defensive deterrent. No one in the region expected such a strong response to Hamas' actions, bordering on unhinged. From a strictly defensive perspective, no one wants to attack a crazy Israel.

On the other hand, they've destroyed much of their international reputation, and this could have broader consequences for them.

The U.S would have done much worse if we were invased by Hamas. It's crazy how everyone is against Israel. Seems like a strong bias...

Edited February 18 by MAHAVATAR_-_BABAJI