6 ms·

> Netanyahu’s and his party kept Hamas alive That's some bullshit right here. Nothing like that happened.

by smsm42 3y ago

ang_cire 3y ago
No, it's a well-known fact. Netanyahu has lobbied within Likud to support Hamas as a way to prevent the PA from making inroads in Gaza (which is seen by most in the West as the only way for a Palestinian state to occur, since Hamas is classified as a terrorist organization). Basically, keep the terrorists running Gaza, and no one will make a serious effort to pressure Israel into recognizing or allowing Palestinian statehood. Here's a Times of Israel article about it: 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...
- smsm42 3y ago
  What this article describes is that Netanyahu treated Hamas as de-facto government of Gaza - and cooperated with them in certain things. This is, btw, exactly what Israel has been accused of not doing - e.g. not letting Gazans work, not letting them receive goods and money, etc. But in reality, Netanyahu has been doing all that - under the mistaken impression that Hamas can be, eventually, converted from purely military genocidal terrorist group to kind of hostile, but manageable government of Gaza. This wasn't done because he liked Hamas, but because there's no other option in Gaza, and the alternatives would be very costly and politically untenable - you can't blockade million-sized territory for long before "international community" cries out, and you can't re-occupy it. All that changed on Oct 7, of course, where this policy has proven to be a colossal failure - and that's what Netanyahu and others who pushed this policy will have to answer for, after the war has ended. But none of this makes the claim that Netanyahu actually preferred Hamas as a partner any of a fact - he had a choice, either cooperate with Hamas, ignore them or destroy them. All the world screamed at him "cooperate immediately!". He cooperated. This turned to be a catastrophically mistaken choice. But ironically, now everybody screams at him "how dared you to cooperate! It's all your fault now!". Not that he had much choice - if he chose anything else before Oct 7, what occurred would also probably be listed as his fault, because how dared he not to cooperate? If only he cooperated, nothing like that would happen!
  - ang_cire 3y ago
    This is all just talking out your bum. > But in reality, Netanyahu has been doing all that - under the mistaken impression that Hamas can be, eventually, converted from purely military genocidal terrorist group to kind of hostile, but manageable government of Gaza. That is literally the opposite of what Netanyahu himself said. He told Likud directly that propping up Hamas in Gaza was good for Israel because Hamas would never be accepted as a legitimate government, and that would prevent 2-state talks from ever seeing progress. Stop making up b.s. just to excuse Israel's fault in this.
    - smsm42 3y ago
      Israel's fault in what? I wonder what you mean by "Israel's fault" - i.e. what Israel should have done and didn't? Netanyahu said a lot of things over the years - including, yes, that Hamas is not going to be accepted as legit government by the world (though I'm not sure it's true) - but in his actions, he was treating it as de-facto government, even if not legitimately accepted formally. Actual political reality is a bit more complex than one slogan. And part of this reality has been that Israeli government tolerated Hamas - and it's significant abuses - because they thought it's a manageable evil and the alternatives were worse. This is a far cry with "keeping Hamas alive" - it's "not destroying Hamas because it's too hard and politically untenable, so we should make the best of what we have". If you think that there was some way for Netanyahu to magically make Hamas go away and he didn't because he like it - that's what I'd talk "talking out your bum" - nothing of the sort was ever possible. You can see what it actually takes to do this right now - and this only became politically possible after October 7. And even now the final destruction of Hamas is not assured at all - Biden admin, for example, works very hard to somehow avoid it (without saying it publicly of course), and they may yet get their with and Hamas will be spared - to repeat the same again for another 20 years.
intended 3y ago
It is somewhat rare when our intuition is found wrong, however this is one of those times. The fact that a known hawk supported their ostensible enemy, is a weird situation. However- https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-20/ty-article-opinion/.premium/a-brief-history-of-the-netanyahu-hamas-alliance/0000018b-47d9-d242-abef-57ff1be90000 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-20/ty-article-op... https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/netanyahu-israel-gaza-hamas-1.7010035 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/netanyahu-israel-gaza-hamas... > A year later, Netanyahu was further embarrassed when photos of suitcases full of cash going to Hamas became public. Liberman finally resigned in protest over Netanyahu's Hamas policy which, he said, marked "the first time Israel is funding terrorism against itself." By the looks of it, this was going on for years. But I am more interested in understanding if this had any impact on you? Do you still think this is BS? Are you cautiously looking for more evidence? Is the evidence sufficient to have changed your position? If so how?
- smsm42 3y ago
  These articles are quoting one of Netanyahu's fiercest opponents - the guy that right now says they need to wage campaign destabilize the government to topple him - as if these were established facts. And, btw, one of the architects of the completely failed "peace process", who let's say has a bit of an agenda to push here. Yes, Israel had to cooperate to some measure with Hamas as the de-facto government of Gaza, absent any other and absent any desire to re-occupy Gaza. That included, yes, sending them goods and money, or allowing the money to be sent by other parties (note that Israel still is charged with making Gaza "open-air prison" simultaneously, because nothing has to make sense anymore). Because if Israel didn't do that, the whole world would cry out "Israel is blockading and starving Gaza" - there would be no way to pay the salaries of any civil servants (and not like there's much thriving business, except for contraband and drug trade, that can sustain Gaza economy) and deliver any goods. So yes, Israel was allowing money and goods to come to Gaza, and sometimes supplying them, because the only alternative was either to remove all the population there, or let them starve, or re-occupy them - and neither of these options were attractive. This is very far cry from "Netanyahu kept Hamas alive" - that's bullshit framing, Hamas was very much alive by itself, there wasn't a choice of not keeping them alive short of starving the whole population of Gaza or killing all the Hamas members. The former wasn't acceptable, and the latter is what Hamas eventually forced to happen, but Israel was hoping not to go there. Now when it's forced to go there, everybody is crying "how dare you!". Truly, damned if you do, damned if you don't. > Do you still think this is BS? Absolutely, it's complete and utter BS, and it's not news for me either - I know about the history of it much more than you'd ever hope to learn from occasionally reading a terribly biased article or quickly googling for a hot take. I lived there, I witnessed all the history of it happen, and I have read tons of materials about it for decades. What for you is a deep and profound revelation, for me is something that I knew for years, and unlike you, I know the full picture, I also know the context of it, the reasons for it and the consequences of it. That's why I say the idea that Netanyahu dreamed of Hamas never going away is complete and utter bullshit. Netanyahu and his policies leave a lot open to criticism, but this thing is on "doctors cause disease because that's how they get paid" level of conspiracy bullshit. > Is the evidence sufficient to have changed your position? If so how? There's no realistic "evidence" possible to change my position in such a question, because it goes contrary to decades of knowledge and context that I learned and witnessed. That would have to be evidence on the level that the whole Middle East history for the last 50 years has been some kind of staged conspiracy aimed at deceiving me, Truman-show style. It's on the level of proving with evidence that the Moon is actually made of Swiss cheese and you can get to it by jumping really hard, and that's actually how Swiss cheese is made - by going to the Moon and mining it there. If you can provide such evidence, go ahead, but I'm pretty sure no such evidence exists or can exist, because I don't see how it's existence is possible given what I know about the world around us. Maybe I am just crazy and we all live in simulation and anything is possible, but that's not likely. Much more likely is that some folks have read some biased bullshit - produced in part by people with very clear agenda - and decided they now know everything about the question.

> Netanyahu’s and his party kept Hamas alive That's some bullshit right here. Nothing like that happened.

by smsm42 3y ago

> Netanyahu’s and his party kept Hamas alive That's some bullshit right here. Nothing like that happened.

No, it's a well-known fact. Netanyahu has lobbied within Likud to support Hamas as a way to prevent the PA from making inroads in Gaza (which is seen by most in the West as the only way for a Palestinian state to occur, since Hamas is classified as a terrorist organization). Basically, keep the terrorists running Gaza, and no one will make a serious effort to pressure Israel into recognizing or allowing Palestinian statehood. Here's a Times of Israel article about it: 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...

smsm42 3y ago
What this article describes is that Netanyahu treated Hamas as de-facto government of Gaza - and cooperated with them in certain things. This is, btw, exactly what Israel has been accused of not doing - e.g. not letting Gazans work, not letting them receive goods and money, etc. But in reality, Netanyahu has been doing all that - under the mistaken impression that Hamas can be, eventually, converted from purely military genocidal terrorist group to kind of hostile, but manageable government of Gaza. This wasn't done because he liked Hamas, but because there's no other option in Gaza, and the alternatives would be very costly and politically untenable - you can't blockade million-sized territory for long before "international community" cries out, and you can't re-occupy it. All that changed on Oct 7, of course, where this policy has proven to be a colossal failure - and that's what Netanyahu and others who pushed this policy will have to answer for, after the war has ended. But none of this makes the claim that Netanyahu actually preferred Hamas as a partner any of a fact - he had a choice, either cooperate with Hamas, ignore them or destroy them. All the world screamed at him "cooperate immediately!". He cooperated. This turned to be a catastrophically mistaken choice. But ironically, now everybody screams at him "how dared you to cooperate! It's all your fault now!". Not that he had much choice - if he chose anything else before Oct 7, what occurred would also probably be listed as his fault, because how dared he not to cooperate? If only he cooperated, nothing like that would happen!
- ang_cire 3y ago
  This is all just talking out your bum. > But in reality, Netanyahu has been doing all that - under the mistaken impression that Hamas can be, eventually, converted from purely military genocidal terrorist group to kind of hostile, but manageable government of Gaza. That is literally the opposite of what Netanyahu himself said. He told Likud directly that propping up Hamas in Gaza was good for Israel because Hamas would never be accepted as a legitimate government, and that would prevent 2-state talks from ever seeing progress. Stop making up b.s. just to excuse Israel's fault in this.
  - smsm42 3y ago
    Israel's fault in what? I wonder what you mean by "Israel's fault" - i.e. what Israel should have done and didn't? Netanyahu said a lot of things over the years - including, yes, that Hamas is not going to be accepted as legit government by the world (though I'm not sure it's true) - but in his actions, he was treating it as de-facto government, even if not legitimately accepted formally. Actual political reality is a bit more complex than one slogan. And part of this reality has been that Israeli government tolerated Hamas - and it's significant abuses - because they thought it's a manageable evil and the alternatives were worse. This is a far cry with "keeping Hamas alive" - it's "not destroying Hamas because it's too hard and politically untenable, so we should make the best of what we have". If you think that there was some way for Netanyahu to magically make Hamas go away and he didn't because he like it - that's what I'd talk "talking out your bum" - nothing of the sort was ever possible. You can see what it actually takes to do this right now - and this only became politically possible after October 7. And even now the final destruction of Hamas is not assured at all - Biden admin, for example, works very hard to somehow avoid it (without saying it publicly of course), and they may yet get their with and Hamas will be spared - to repeat the same again for another 20 years.

intended 3y ago

It is somewhat rare when our intuition is found wrong, however this is one of those times. The fact that a known hawk supported their ostensible enemy, is a weird situation. However- https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-20/ty-article-opinion/.premium/a-brief-history-of-the-netanyahu-hamas-alliance/0000018b-47d9-d242-abef-57ff1be90000 https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-20/ty-article-op... https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/netanyahu-israel-gaza-hamas-1.7010035 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/netanyahu-israel-gaza-hamas... > A year later, Netanyahu was further embarrassed when photos of suitcases full of cash going to Hamas became public. Liberman finally resigned in protest over Netanyahu's Hamas policy which, he said, marked "the first time Israel is funding terrorism against itself." By the looks of it, this was going on for years. But I am more interested in understanding if this had any impact on you? Do you still think this is BS? Are you cautiously looking for more evidence? Is the evidence sufficient to have changed your position? If so how?

smsm42 3y ago
These articles are quoting one of Netanyahu's fiercest opponents - the guy that right now says they need to wage campaign destabilize the government to topple him - as if these were established facts. And, btw, one of the architects of the completely failed "peace process", who let's say has a bit of an agenda to push here. Yes, Israel had to cooperate to some measure with Hamas as the de-facto government of Gaza, absent any other and absent any desire to re-occupy Gaza. That included, yes, sending them goods and money, or allowing the money to be sent by other parties (note that Israel still is charged with making Gaza "open-air prison" simultaneously, because nothing has to make sense anymore). Because if Israel didn't do that, the whole world would cry out "Israel is blockading and starving Gaza" - there would be no way to pay the salaries of any civil servants (and not like there's much thriving business, except for contraband and drug trade, that can sustain Gaza economy) and deliver any goods. So yes, Israel was allowing money and goods to come to Gaza, and sometimes supplying them, because the only alternative was either to remove all the population there, or let them starve, or re-occupy them - and neither of these options were attractive. This is very far cry from "Netanyahu kept Hamas alive" - that's bullshit framing, Hamas was very much alive by itself, there wasn't a choice of not keeping them alive short of starving the whole population of Gaza or killing all the Hamas members. The former wasn't acceptable, and the latter is what Hamas eventually forced to happen, but Israel was hoping not to go there. Now when it's forced to go there, everybody is crying "how dare you!". Truly, damned if you do, damned if you don't. > Do you still think this is BS? Absolutely, it's complete and utter BS, and it's not news for me either - I know about the history of it much more than you'd ever hope to learn from occasionally reading a terribly biased article or quickly googling for a hot take. I lived there, I witnessed all the history of it happen, and I have read tons of materials about it for decades. What for you is a deep and profound revelation, for me is something that I knew for years, and unlike you, I know the full picture, I also know the context of it, the reasons for it and the consequences of it. That's why I say the idea that Netanyahu dreamed of Hamas never going away is complete and utter bullshit. Netanyahu and his policies leave a lot open to criticism, but this thing is on "doctors cause disease because that's how they get paid" level of conspiracy bullshit. > Is the evidence sufficient to have changed your position? If so how? There's no realistic "evidence" possible to change my position in such a question, because it goes contrary to decades of knowledge and context that I learned and witnessed. That would have to be evidence on the level that the whole Middle East history for the last 50 years has been some kind of staged conspiracy aimed at deceiving me, Truman-show style. It's on the level of proving with evidence that the Moon is actually made of Swiss cheese and you can get to it by jumping really hard, and that's actually how Swiss cheese is made - by going to the Moon and mining it there. If you can provide such evidence, go ahead, but I'm pretty sure no such evidence exists or can exist, because I don't see how it's existence is possible given what I know about the world around us. Maybe I am just crazy and we all live in simulation and anything is possible, but that's not likely. Much more likely is that some folks have read some biased bullshit - produced in part by people with very clear agenda - and decided they now know everything about the question.