3 ms·

>most people are also capable of knowing when they’re not getting the whole story. Most people are conformists. >Only around a quarter of Palestinians approve

by yyyk 3y ago

>most people are also capable of knowing when they’re not getting the whole story. Most people are conformists. >Only around a quarter of Palestinians approved of Hamas before the war. But a lot more approved of violence and terrorism, and they did prefer Hamas over alternatives (that's why no election for 17 years - because everyone knew Hamas would win). Basically, there's nothing Israel can do that will compare with the main driver in Gaza: Hamas control of media and education or ability to just conscript. If there was nothing Hamas could use as propaganda, they'd just invent something. You can't compare the ability to recruit of a terror organization to that of pseduo-state. The state will always win. The state has a tax base, police, media, ways to make one conform. The terror org always needs to compete with the local power and that makes it way more difficult.

acdha 3y ago
> But a lot more approved of violence and terrorism, and they did prefer Hamas over alternatives (that's why no election for 17 years - because everyone knew Hamas would win). That makes no sense: why prevent an election you’re going to win? Palestinians don’t like the way Israel treats them, with no small amount of past incidents to base that on, but that doesn’t mean that Hamas is the only option. > Basically, there's nothing Israel can do that will compare with the main driver in Gaza: Hamas control of media and education or ability to just conscript This is just propaganda designed to absolve the Israeli right-wing of decades of bad decisions. If the Israeli government had done anything to help Palestinians have viable jobs or elections, for example, then the Hamas leaders would have had to justify their positions rather than blaming all of their problems on Israel. The underlying problem is that Netanyahu liked having Hamas as a justification for why they couldn’t allow Palestinians to have a state, and as a bogeyman to point to any time they needed political support. https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-to-hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-palestinians-divided-583082 https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-... https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-q...
- yyyk 3y ago
  >That makes no sense: why prevent an election you’re going to win? Because it is Abbas (PA President) who decides when there are elections and he was always going to lose badly? > If the Israeli government had done anything to help Palestinians have viable jobs or elections, for example, then the Hamas leaders would have had to justify their positions rather than blaming all of their problems on Israel. This doesn't answer to my argument, that Hamas has quasi-state resources, and no outside radicalization could compete with the radicalization they can create by simply controlling education. Anyway, your argument is that it's Israel's job to manage the country next door. That would make sense only in a non-two-state reality where Israel is legally responsible and controls the relevant areas. You can't run elections in areas you don't control. But Israel hasn't controlled the Strip since 2005... > The underlying problem is that Netanyahu liked having Hamas as a justification for why they couldn’t allow Palestinians to have a state, and as a bogeyman... Partially true. But consider the alternative was to wage a war like this one. For this reason, nearly all of the Israeli Left supported the same policy... How many people would have supported this war without radical Hamas aggressive to begin it?
  - acdha 3y ago
    > Anyway, your argument is that it's Israel's job to manage the country next door. That would make sense only in a non-two-state reality where Israel is legally responsible and controls the relevant areas. You can't run elections in areas you don't control. But Israel hasn't controlled the Strip since 2005... Israel had military and, far more critically, economic control. They could at any time have worked towards a two party system or one of the other proposals - except that the people in power were committed to not doing that. Just as Israel can’t solve this unilaterally, neither can anyone in Palestine. The Israeli right chose to prop Hamas up for years, but they could have tried to work with anyone else. What we’re seeing right now is what happens when two groups of corrupt hardliners see a profit in preventing compromise.
    - yyyk 3y ago
      >Israel had military and, far more critically, economic control. They could at any time have worked towards a two party system or one of the other proposals - except that the people in power were committed to not doing that. I don't understand what are you suggesting given that Israel didn't control the Strip (no military control), and that Hamas doesn't care for the economy? >The Israeli right chose to prop Hamas up for years True, but again remember the alternative was having a war like this one. Granted, cheaper than this one since Hamas was less powerful, but still a lot more deaths compared to what was the norm.

by yyyk 3y ago

acdha 3y ago

> But a lot more approved of violence and terrorism, and they did prefer Hamas over alternatives (that's why no election for 17 years - because everyone knew Hamas would win). That makes no sense: why prevent an election you’re going to win? Palestinians don’t like the way Israel treats them, with no small amount of past incidents to base that on, but that doesn’t mean that Hamas is the only option. > Basically, there's nothing Israel can do that will compare with the main driver in Gaza: Hamas control of media and education or ability to just conscript This is just propaganda designed to absolve the Israeli right-wing of decades of bad decisions. If the Israeli government had done anything to help Palestinians have viable jobs or elections, for example, then the Hamas leaders would have had to justify their positions rather than blaming all of their problems on Israel. The underlying problem is that Netanyahu liked having Hamas as a justification for why they couldn’t allow Palestinians to have a state, and as a bogeyman to point to any time they needed political support. https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-to-hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-palestinians-divided-583082 https://www.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/netanyahu-money-... https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/ https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up... https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-qatar-money-prop-up-hamas.html https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/10/world/middleeast/israel-q...

yyyk 3y ago
>That makes no sense: why prevent an election you’re going to win? Because it is Abbas (PA President) who decides when there are elections and he was always going to lose badly? > If the Israeli government had done anything to help Palestinians have viable jobs or elections, for example, then the Hamas leaders would have had to justify their positions rather than blaming all of their problems on Israel. This doesn't answer to my argument, that Hamas has quasi-state resources, and no outside radicalization could compete with the radicalization they can create by simply controlling education. Anyway, your argument is that it's Israel's job to manage the country next door. That would make sense only in a non-two-state reality where Israel is legally responsible and controls the relevant areas. You can't run elections in areas you don't control. But Israel hasn't controlled the Strip since 2005... > The underlying problem is that Netanyahu liked having Hamas as a justification for why they couldn’t allow Palestinians to have a state, and as a bogeyman... Partially true. But consider the alternative was to wage a war like this one. For this reason, nearly all of the Israeli Left supported the same policy... How many people would have supported this war without radical Hamas aggressive to begin it?
- acdha 3y ago
  > Anyway, your argument is that it's Israel's job to manage the country next door. That would make sense only in a non-two-state reality where Israel is legally responsible and controls the relevant areas. You can't run elections in areas you don't control. But Israel hasn't controlled the Strip since 2005... Israel had military and, far more critically, economic control. They could at any time have worked towards a two party system or one of the other proposals - except that the people in power were committed to not doing that. Just as Israel can’t solve this unilaterally, neither can anyone in Palestine. The Israeli right chose to prop Hamas up for years, but they could have tried to work with anyone else. What we’re seeing right now is what happens when two groups of corrupt hardliners see a profit in preventing compromise.
  - yyyk 3y ago
    >Israel had military and, far more critically, economic control. They could at any time have worked towards a two party system or one of the other proposals - except that the people in power were committed to not doing that. I don't understand what are you suggesting given that Israel didn't control the Strip (no military control), and that Hamas doesn't care for the economy? >The Israeli right chose to prop Hamas up for years True, but again remember the alternative was having a war like this one. Granted, cheaper than this one since Hamas was less powerful, but still a lot more deaths compared to what was the norm.