3 ms·

>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 go

by 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.
  - acdha 3y ago
    > 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 Gaza Strip has been under blockade for decades and the West Bank for half a century. There are border crossings with Egypt and Jordan, but those require Israeli approval. Palestinian workers are excluded from most of the economy except where they provide cheap labor to Israeli businesses. Meanwhile, Israeli settlers have illegally taken Palestinian farmland and, in conjunction with the military, sabotaged Palestinian farms’ water supplies and done things like chop down orchards which take decades to recover. > True, but again remember the alternative was having a war like this one. Or making peace, supporting more democratic groups in Palestine, etc. Again, my point isn't that Israel is the only bad actor here but rather that the path they've chosen seems almost designed to ensure conflict continues by removing so many of the options for the average Palestinian and giving them as many reasons to hate Israel as possible. Every night-time raid, every person abducted off the street and mistreated, every business destroyed builds a grudge. Every opportunity to build personal accomplishments or wealth removed ensure that those grudges are likely to lead to a violent outcome or support for people who are doing that violence. I don't think war is inevitable in general but I don't see any way this trajectory doesn't lead to more of it.
    - yyyk 3y ago
      I think we have a very different definition of 'blockade'. West Bank isn't blockaded by any normal definition. Gaza had some import limits, as it turned out not enough. Its beyond Israeli capability to 'support democratic groups' and peace simply wasn't on table (neither side's maximum is close to the other's minimum). This leaves security actions, and in general your idea is to blame every Palestinian/Arab intransigence on Israeli actions, and that's repeatedly belied by experience (e.g. the current war is exactly where Israel has been trying to avoid all these).

by yyyk 3y ago

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.
- acdha 3y ago
  > 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 Gaza Strip has been under blockade for decades and the West Bank for half a century. There are border crossings with Egypt and Jordan, but those require Israeli approval. Palestinian workers are excluded from most of the economy except where they provide cheap labor to Israeli businesses. Meanwhile, Israeli settlers have illegally taken Palestinian farmland and, in conjunction with the military, sabotaged Palestinian farms’ water supplies and done things like chop down orchards which take decades to recover. > True, but again remember the alternative was having a war like this one. Or making peace, supporting more democratic groups in Palestine, etc. Again, my point isn't that Israel is the only bad actor here but rather that the path they've chosen seems almost designed to ensure conflict continues by removing so many of the options for the average Palestinian and giving them as many reasons to hate Israel as possible. Every night-time raid, every person abducted off the street and mistreated, every business destroyed builds a grudge. Every opportunity to build personal accomplishments or wealth removed ensure that those grudges are likely to lead to a violent outcome or support for people who are doing that violence. I don't think war is inevitable in general but I don't see any way this trajectory doesn't lead to more of it.
  - yyyk 3y ago
    I think we have a very different definition of 'blockade'. West Bank isn't blockaded by any normal definition. Gaza had some import limits, as it turned out not enough. Its beyond Israeli capability to 'support democratic groups' and peace simply wasn't on table (neither side's maximum is close to the other's minimum). This leaves security actions, and in general your idea is to blame every Palestinian/Arab intransigence on Israeli actions, and that's repeatedly belied by experience (e.g. the current war is exactly where Israel has been trying to avoid all these).