4 ms·

It's bogus to compare french resistance to Hamas. French resistants had no intention of destroying Germany or killing all germans. If anything, the german milit

It's bogus to compare french resistance to Hamas. French resistants had no intention of destroying Germany or killing all germans. If anything, the german military were the one committing a genocide (albeit not against the french I can give you that). All politicians leaders of Palestinian people have eventually refused a 2-states solution. Israël does recognize a few groups as valid diplomatic partners but not Hamas, who is in charge right now. And yes that will lead to a lot of harsh suffering for Palestinian people, partly/mostly because of the way Hamas has handled things. Note that I'm not downplaying what Israël has done in the region so far, and I'm not giving them excuses ; they do what they think is best for their security, rightfully or wrongfully, given that their neighbour is lead by a terrorist group. I'm not sure how I would react as a civilian or a leader of either country and I would certainly not advise anything to anyone. But clearly Hamas is the agressor just like Russia is the agressor in Ukraine (and both have intention of destroying not only the state but also the people).

bigfudge 3y ago
I agree in part. But my question was basically this: when Hamas is eliminated and less extreme groups come to power, but are still committed to armed struggle … how should they proceed? Would it be legitimate to use guerilla tactics like the French resistance?
- bionsystem 3y ago
  I have no idea. I guess Palestinians need something like the next Arafat, who actually commits to a 2-states solution. Or whatever leading group that is non-terrorist and that Israël feels safe negotiating with (there are a few). I feel that would be the best solution for most people involved. That is, if and when Hamas is eradicated, which is a big if. A war with Iran isn't out of the question. Thing is Hamas represents like 35% of votes ? It's both a lot and very little. Maybe 10% of those 35% would actually be ok to take an assault weapon and resist. Meaning the vast majority would probably be ok to negotiate even a mediocre deal but owning their land and borders ? Can we even make a forecast like this ? Edit : Bottom line, Palestinians will obviously and sadly be in a terrible position to negotiate, if and when that happens...
  - bigfudge 3y ago
    The problem Israel has is that negotiating with some people they select to make a deal won’t make other people think it’s right and accept it. You need far fewer than 10% if a population to cause havoc for decades to come. I’m not condoning it, but the reality is that unless settlements are moved and Israel takes some bitter medicine this will reoccur in 10 years time when the next round of radicalised people come of age. Remember, Netanyahu had been actively using Hamas as a way to divide the Palestinians and make 2 state solution less likely. the approach of Israel over the past 20 years doesn’t make the attacks right or justify them, but it made them more likely because it has humiliated a large enough population living very close to them and left them with no other effective options beyond nonviolent resistance. I wish they had chosen that, but it’s easier to say than live with.

bigfudge 3y ago

I agree in part. But my question was basically this: when Hamas is eliminated and less extreme groups come to power, but are still committed to armed struggle … how should they proceed? Would it be legitimate to use guerilla tactics like the French resistance?

bionsystem 3y ago
I have no idea. I guess Palestinians need something like the next Arafat, who actually commits to a 2-states solution. Or whatever leading group that is non-terrorist and that Israël feels safe negotiating with (there are a few). I feel that would be the best solution for most people involved. That is, if and when Hamas is eradicated, which is a big if. A war with Iran isn't out of the question. Thing is Hamas represents like 35% of votes ? It's both a lot and very little. Maybe 10% of those 35% would actually be ok to take an assault weapon and resist. Meaning the vast majority would probably be ok to negotiate even a mediocre deal but owning their land and borders ? Can we even make a forecast like this ? Edit : Bottom line, Palestinians will obviously and sadly be in a terrible position to negotiate, if and when that happens...
- bigfudge 3y ago
  The problem Israel has is that negotiating with some people they select to make a deal won’t make other people think it’s right and accept it. You need far fewer than 10% if a population to cause havoc for decades to come. I’m not condoning it, but the reality is that unless settlements are moved and Israel takes some bitter medicine this will reoccur in 10 years time when the next round of radicalised people come of age. Remember, Netanyahu had been actively using Hamas as a way to divide the Palestinians and make 2 state solution less likely. the approach of Israel over the past 20 years doesn’t make the attacks right or justify them, but it made them more likely because it has humiliated a large enough population living very close to them and left them with no other effective options beyond nonviolent resistance. I wish they had chosen that, but it’s easier to say than live with.