3 ms·

> > Hamas is a cancer on the Palestinian people. > > You are seeing a cause, I'm seeing a symptom. Nonsense. There were two major Palestinian terrorist organ

> > Hamas is a cancer on the Palestinian people. > > You are seeing a cause, I'm seeing a symptom. Nonsense. There were two major Palestinian terrorist organizations. The PLO was the older and back in the day the more violent of the two. It was able to get over its aggression and come to a peace settlement with Israel who also put everything behind it. The Hamas blew up busses, cafes etc. Killed MANY civilians in suicide bombings and destroyed that peace. They were always an evil fanatical organization that doesn't care about their own peoples well being in favor of an extremist insane goal. > > Killing civilians while aiming at the Hamas is never "right". > > Not only is it not right: it strengthens Hamas and will result in more anti-Israel sentiment in the rest of the world. "Look at what you made me do" doesn't work on that level. On that I agree. I think Israel should better communicate how it is trying to avoid civilian casualties in this process. But yes, this is just terrible. > But for that to happen Israel too will need to make concessions and as long as both sides only think in terms of violence this will simply not stop. 100%. That's why I'm thankful for Biden. He was blamed for being too much "pro Israel" by idiots who don't understand his savvy. He was really hated in Israel who mostly loved Trump up until 3 weeks ago. This flipped overnight. Now he has deep control over the government and can use it both for humane aid and to guide the exit plan after. He understands the nuances deeply and is navigating them very well. It's still a pretty hard task. Eliminating the Hamas is hard. Eliminating the idea of the Hamas is impossible. Making it unpopular is a difficult but probably attainable goal.

jacquesm 3y ago
Terrorism is - historically and in the present - almost always a symptom of a political movement that has radicalized possibly as an outgrowth of a population under occupation or backed into a corner. That's why to me it is a symptom. As for the rest, we are mostly in agreement, I think the latter bit is the key but for that Israel would have to back off of certain policies and they would have to be able to accept that some fragment of Hamas / and or terrorist factions funded by other countries around it will cause some degree of damage. There is some analogy with 'force protection' here, if you focus too much on protecting your own side at the expense of your status with respect to human rights on the side of your opponent you more or less automatically breed terrorists. Leaving hundreds of thousands of youths with the image of an enemy next door has to result in a terrorist organization. More so if you occasionally kill a bunch of them and/or remove their kinsfolk from land that they've lived on their whole lives.
- invalidname 3y ago
  > Terrorism is - historically and in the present - almost always a symptom of a political movement that has radicalized possibly as an outgrowth of a population under occupation or backed into a corner. > > That's why to me it is a symptom. A symptom would be a fight for freedom. The Hamas is a symptom of religious extremism first and foremost. The PLOs terrorist period is indeed a symptom of Israels bad policies.
- junofan 3y ago
  We’re talking about a “political movement” elected on an anti-corruption platform that dismantled elections and siphons every dollar of economic aid it can. Let’s call it what it is: a military organization willing to violate international law in exchange for cash. Political movements don’t launch coordinated air, land, and sea attacks or build extensive tunnel networks. As with their anti-corruption campaign, their demonstrated strategic imperative is transparently not in service of the stated political objective.

jacquesm 3y ago

Terrorism is - historically and in the present - almost always a symptom of a political movement that has radicalized possibly as an outgrowth of a population under occupation or backed into a corner. That's why to me it is a symptom. As for the rest, we are mostly in agreement, I think the latter bit is the key but for that Israel would have to back off of certain policies and they would have to be able to accept that some fragment of Hamas / and or terrorist factions funded by other countries around it will cause some degree of damage. There is some analogy with 'force protection' here, if you focus too much on protecting your own side at the expense of your status with respect to human rights on the side of your opponent you more or less automatically breed terrorists. Leaving hundreds of thousands of youths with the image of an enemy next door has to result in a terrorist organization. More so if you occasionally kill a bunch of them and/or remove their kinsfolk from land that they've lived on their whole lives.

invalidname 3y ago
> Terrorism is - historically and in the present - almost always a symptom of a political movement that has radicalized possibly as an outgrowth of a population under occupation or backed into a corner. > > That's why to me it is a symptom. A symptom would be a fight for freedom. The Hamas is a symptom of religious extremism first and foremost. The PLOs terrorist period is indeed a symptom of Israels bad policies.
junofan 3y ago
We’re talking about a “political movement” elected on an anti-corruption platform that dismantled elections and siphons every dollar of economic aid it can. Let’s call it what it is: a military organization willing to violate international law in exchange for cash. Political movements don’t launch coordinated air, land, and sea attacks or build extensive tunnel networks. As with their anti-corruption campaign, their demonstrated strategic imperative is transparently not in service of the stated political objective.