6 ms·

This is dishonest. Try again, please. Why was "access to the rest of the world", by which I guess you mean the Egypt-Israeli blockade, put in place? When?

FireBeyond 2y ago
You "guess"? For someone who thinks the rest of us are so ignorant on this... Gaza's (only) Airport, which had its radar station and control tower bombed in 2001, and its runways cut up by IDF bulldozers in 2002. Gaza's port has been intermittently blockaded by the Israeli Navy since 2005, and permanently since 2007. > Exit and entry into Gaza by sea or air is prohibited. There are only three crossings in and out of Gaza, two of them controlled by Israel and one by Egypt. Israel heavily regulates Palestinians' movement through Erez, with applications considered only for a small number of laborers (less than 5% of the number considered in 2000) and for limited medical and humanitarian reasons.[6] Israel's military cooperation with Egypt and its control of the population registry (through which it controls who can obtain the necessary travel documents) gives it influence over movement through Rafah. Certainly sounds like "access to the rest of the world" is being prohibited.
- rendall 2y ago
  Just for shiggles? No particular reason? Keep going. In response to Palestinians doing .... what?
  - FireBeyond 2y ago
    I think you mean "In response to Hamas, funded in part by the Likud administration, because the PLA was being increasingly seen as conciliatory and willing to seek diplomacy (who knows why, tiredness of conflict, Arafat growing more philosophical in his late life), which caused awkward questions of "if they are willing to negotiate, why isn't Israel?"." Hamas was propped up by the hard right wing because they made a more visible enemy. So, if Hamas is dedicated to "exterminating Jews" as you say, then why would Israel give them funding and support against the PLA? Hamas is ~38,000 of 2.5M people. And thanks to those embargoes and blockades, they're the only ones who are really armed in Palestine.
    - rendall 2y ago
      You're contorting the answer in order not to answer. The blockade was put in place in response to what, when? 2005, unilateral withdrawal from Gaza 2006, Gazans peacefully went about their lives, setting up - and minding their own - businesses, made trade contacts, geared up a booming tourist industry...? No. That's not what happened, is it. I'm sure you can find a way to blame Israel for Palestinian choices, but that helps no one. 2007, blockade, out of the blue with no rhyme or reason. Just to flex, and watch the world burn. If you care about peace, you won't do these weird contortions to explain Israel's actions. As with Hamas, Israel explains the reasons for its actions very clearly but largely boils down to "leave us alone or FAFO".
      - FireBeyond 2y ago
        There's no contortion, there's blinders. The PLO had ordered its military/paramilitary to not antagonize Israel, and they weren't. That was one of the keys to sitting at the negotiation table. And there had been a few false starts. Israel, in response to those false starts, entirely reasonably, left the table. But then there was a period of reasonable calm. Palestinians are not attacking Israel - this isn't a war. Hamas continued to have a militant and extremist position, which included attacking Israel. ^ There, answering your question, acknowledging that Hamas had and continues to attack Israel. Now answer mine: Why did Israel fund and prop up Hamas rather than the PLO who was working towards a peaceable situation? Like you said, Hamas are attacking Israel. But the Likud administration sent them money and supported them. Why?
        rendall 2y ago
        This guy says that Israel supported PLO in an attempted, but failed coup against Hamas: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40273500 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40273500 Seems contradictory. Which is it? And I ask again: there were no reasonable security concerns behind the blockade according to you? Just for evil funsies?
        FireBeyond 2y ago
lazyasciiart 2y ago
There’s … a literal wall. Good question, when did that appear?
- rendall 2y ago
  Again, why was a wall built? In response to what? Did you know that Finland is building a wall on her border with Russia? In response to what, would you guess? Is one of these walls ok but the other not? If not, why not? A wall is the most passive thing one can do to protect one's national borders, and yet, somehow you present it as yet another example of Israeli evil. Why Palestinians should have the right to stroll onto Israeli grounds anytime they please remains unexplained. There certainly is a theme here of imputing malevolence even to Israel's most mild, passive response to actual violence by Palestinians. Are you infuriated by the Iron Dome as well?

FireBeyond 2y ago

You "guess"? For someone who thinks the rest of us are so ignorant on this... Gaza's (only) Airport, which had its radar station and control tower bombed in 2001, and its runways cut up by IDF bulldozers in 2002. Gaza's port has been intermittently blockaded by the Israeli Navy since 2005, and permanently since 2007. > Exit and entry into Gaza by sea or air is prohibited. There are only three crossings in and out of Gaza, two of them controlled by Israel and one by Egypt. Israel heavily regulates Palestinians' movement through Erez, with applications considered only for a small number of laborers (less than 5% of the number considered in 2000) and for limited medical and humanitarian reasons.[6] Israel's military cooperation with Egypt and its control of the population registry (through which it controls who can obtain the necessary travel documents) gives it influence over movement through Rafah. Certainly sounds like "access to the rest of the world" is being prohibited.

rendall 2y ago
Just for shiggles? No particular reason? Keep going. In response to Palestinians doing .... what?
- FireBeyond 2y ago
  I think you mean "In response to Hamas, funded in part by the Likud administration, because the PLA was being increasingly seen as conciliatory and willing to seek diplomacy (who knows why, tiredness of conflict, Arafat growing more philosophical in his late life), which caused awkward questions of "if they are willing to negotiate, why isn't Israel?"." Hamas was propped up by the hard right wing because they made a more visible enemy. So, if Hamas is dedicated to "exterminating Jews" as you say, then why would Israel give them funding and support against the PLA? Hamas is ~38,000 of 2.5M people. And thanks to those embargoes and blockades, they're the only ones who are really armed in Palestine.
  - rendall 2y ago
    You're contorting the answer in order not to answer. The blockade was put in place in response to what, when? 2005, unilateral withdrawal from Gaza 2006, Gazans peacefully went about their lives, setting up - and minding their own - businesses, made trade contacts, geared up a booming tourist industry...? No. That's not what happened, is it. I'm sure you can find a way to blame Israel for Palestinian choices, but that helps no one. 2007, blockade, out of the blue with no rhyme or reason. Just to flex, and watch the world burn. If you care about peace, you won't do these weird contortions to explain Israel's actions. As with Hamas, Israel explains the reasons for its actions very clearly but largely boils down to "leave us alone or FAFO".
    - FireBeyond 2y ago
      There's no contortion, there's blinders. The PLO had ordered its military/paramilitary to not antagonize Israel, and they weren't. That was one of the keys to sitting at the negotiation table. And there had been a few false starts. Israel, in response to those false starts, entirely reasonably, left the table. But then there was a period of reasonable calm. Palestinians are not attacking Israel - this isn't a war. Hamas continued to have a militant and extremist position, which included attacking Israel. ^ There, answering your question, acknowledging that Hamas had and continues to attack Israel. Now answer mine: Why did Israel fund and prop up Hamas rather than the PLO who was working towards a peaceable situation? Like you said, Hamas are attacking Israel. But the Likud administration sent them money and supported them. Why?
      - rendall 2y ago
        This guy says that Israel supported PLO in an attempted, but failed coup against Hamas: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40273500 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40273500 Seems contradictory. Which is it? And I ask again: there were no reasonable security concerns behind the blockade according to you? Just for evil funsies?
        FireBeyond 2y ago

lazyasciiart 2y ago

There’s … a literal wall. Good question, when did that appear?

rendall 2y ago
Again, why was a wall built? In response to what? Did you know that Finland is building a wall on her border with Russia? In response to what, would you guess? Is one of these walls ok but the other not? If not, why not? A wall is the most passive thing one can do to protect one's national borders, and yet, somehow you present it as yet another example of Israeli evil. Why Palestinians should have the right to stroll onto Israeli grounds anytime they please remains unexplained. There certainly is a theme here of imputing malevolence even to Israel's most mild, passive response to actual violence by Palestinians. Are you infuriated by the Iron Dome as well?