6 ms·

Gaza began the war with a more powerful army than many European countries: more soldiers, more rockets, more war-fighting infrastructure. Gaza wasn't a particul

Gaza began the war with a more powerful army than many European countries: more soldiers, more rockets, more war-fighting infrastructure. Gaza wasn't a particularly poor place before the war, certainly not by the standards of the middle east. It had mansions and average salaries that, for some professions, were higher than average salaries in Israel. It was a net food exporter.

xg15 8mo ago
It was also fully blockaded by Israeli (and Egyptian) forces on all sides? Israel was in full control of what was going in an out of it.
- richardfeynman 8mo ago
  I don't see how that's relevant to the earlier claim, but even this claim of yours is a gross overstatement. There was a partial blockade, not a full blockade, and this partial blockade came after Palestinians launched the second intifada. Prior to the october 7 massacre, perpetrated by Hamas and gazan civilians, tens of thousands of gazans were able to travel out of gaza through egypt and israel, where many of them worked. nearly 75,000 truckloads of food and cargo went into gaza from israel in 2022. Gaza exported lots too.
  - xg15 8mo ago
    My point is that Israel had full control about exactly what Gaza was allowed to import and export (and frequently used those controls for collective punishment as well) I don't quite see how under those circumstances, they were able to build "a more powerful army than many European countries", unless you talk about Luxembourg or the Vatican. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip
    - youarentrightjr 8mo ago
      [flagged]
    - richardfeynman 8mo ago
      Yes, Israel and Egypt together controlled what Gaza was allowed to import and export - not as a form of collective punishment, but to ensure its own security. There's a huge difference between that and a "full blockade" (which is what Russia did to Mariupol early in the war), so precision matters. In terms of Hamas's army being more powerful than that of many European countries, I'll respond to that below. And the Wikipedia article you cite has been manipulated by a band of ideological editors and is not reliable, and has no value (inverse value?) as a citation.
      - xg15 8mo ago
        The article currently has 361 references. Also the accusation they use it in arbitrary means, for collective punishment is widely shared, not just here. Explain to me how continuously reducing the area permitted for fishing is necessary for Israel's security.
        xg15 8mo ago
        Also, why is there a quota system on food(!) at all? How does this aid security?
      - DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
        > not as a form of collective punishment, but to ensure its own security Top Israeli officials literally said that the purpose of the blockade was "to put Gaza on a diet."
  - DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
    Why do Israelis always claim the Palestinians launched the 2nd Intifada? The 2nd Intifada was sparked by Israeli massacres of Palestinian civilians.
    - richardfeynman 8mo ago
      Calling the Second Intifada "sparked by Israeli massacres" reverses the basic chronology and ignores Palestinian leaders' own admissions. 1) Marwan Barghouti (Fatah leader of the uprising in the West Bank) told The New Yorker in Jan 2001: "The explosion would have happened anyway... But Sharon provided a good excuse." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/01/29/arafats-gift https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/01/29/arafats-gift 2) UK Parliament Hansard (Apr 16, 2002) quotes the semi-official PA daily Al-Ayyam (Dec 6, 2000) reporting PA communications minister Imad al-Falouji: "the Palestinian authority had begun preparations for the outbreak of the current intifada... in accordance with instructions given by Chairman Arafat himself" and that it was not meant merely as a protest over Sharon's visit. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2002-04-16/debates/d696a1af-a3c2-4bbc-b541-f1b4e1eed6ea/TheMiddleEast https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2002-04-16/debates/d69... (search within the page for "Al-Ayyam" or "Al-Falouji") 3) Arafat's widow Suha said Arafat decided to launch it ("Because I am going to start an Intifada") on Dubai TV, per MEMRI translation, quoted by CFR: https://www.cfr.org/articles/arafat-and-second-intifada https://www.cfr.org/articles/arafat-and-second-intifada https://www.memri.org/tv/suha-arafat-widow-yasser-arafat-2000-intifada-was-premeditated-planned-arafat https://www.memri.org/tv/suha-arafat-widow-yasser-arafat-200... Also, this is not some uniquely Israeli talking point. Britannica describes the start as Palestinians erupting into violence after Sharon's Temple Mount visit: https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/The-second-intifada https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/The-second-intifada
      - DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
        The chronology is clear: 1. Ariel Sharon staged a deliberate provocation by storming the Temple Mount with hundreds of policemen. 2. Palestinians protested, and Israeli forces shot live ammunition at them, killing four Palestinian civilians. Within weeks, riots had broken out and Israel had killed dozens of Palestinian civilians. Israeli actions were the spark, not some planned Palestinian operation. The long-term cause of the 2nd Intifada was Israeli refusal to carry out the Oslo Accords in good faith. The Palestinians recognized Israel and agreed to give up the armed struggle for their freedom in exchange for a set process by which Israel would rapidly withdraw from the occupied territories and allow the creation of a Palestinian state. The Israelis repeatedly reneged on that throughout the 1990s, and by 2000, the Palestinians were completely disillusioned with the so-called "Peace Process."
youarentrightjr 8mo ago
> Gaza began the war with a more powerful army than many European countries What? You mean countries like Monaco and Liechtenstein? > more soldiers, more rockets Simply counting the # of soldiers or rockets is disingenuous when this is obviously an asymmetric war. It's clear that the method of combatant recognition employed by the IDF is flawed, given they're killing aid workers and people from the UN. Eg, here is Hamas' bread and butter rocket: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket There is more technology in a modern rifle round than in those rockets + launch systems (if you even dare call them that). > more war-fighting infrastructure Please explain what you mean by "war-fighting infrastructure ". > Gaza wasn't a particularly poor place before the war, certainly not by the standards of the middle east Depends on what you mean by "standards of the Middle East", but just compare Israel($52k) and Gaza ($3455) for 2023: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=IL&start=2022 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?location... https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=PS&start=2022 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?location... > It had mansions and average salaries that, for some professions, were higher than average salaries in Israel. "The wealthiest in a poor country have more money than the average in a developed country", means what exactly? How did you develop your understanding of this situation? And what are you trying to communicate here?
- richardfeynman 8mo ago
  I claimed Hamas had a larger and more powerful military than many European countries. This is a fact. > What? You mean countries like Monaco and Liechtenstein? No, my claim is much stronger. I mean Hamas's army was comparable to countries like Denmark (20k active soldiers), Finland, the Czech republic (27k active) and maybe even the Netherlands (40k active). Estimates of the size of Hamas's army pre October 7 range from 20k to 40k active combatants, with US intelligence estimates converging on 30k. This is looking just at fighters and excludes Hamas's political wing. > Simply counting the # of soldiers or rockets is disingenuous when this is obviously an asymmetric war. Counting things like soldiers and military arsenals is the standard way to evaluate military strength. And of course there is a force asymmetry, Israel is a global power and its air force is probably the second most effective in the world. That doesn't mean we shouldn't evaluate Gaza's military the way we would any other. > Please explain what you mean by "war-fighting infrastructure ". Well, for example, Hamas built the largest underground military tunnel system in the known world, a vast standing army numbering in the tens of thousands, gathered plenty of intelligence on Israel, militarized their population, and has a history of combat, for starters. But it goes way beyond this, and extends to the broad financial and military support they enjoyed from the IRGC. > "Depends on what you mean by "standards of the Middle East", but just compare Israel($52k) and Gaza ($3455) for 2023:" I'm not comparing it to Israel, which is a standout in the middle east, and among the most technologically developed countries in the world. I'm comparing it to other middle eastern countries. It wasn't exactly destitute, despite its murderous, anti-woman, anti-gay, and antiy-jew jihadi philosophy. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DE-xjBRKkPL/ https://www.instagram.com/reel/DE-xjBRKkPL/ > It's clear that the method of combatant recognition employed by the IDF is flawed, given they're killing aid workers and people from the UN. Have you considered that the some aid workers were also Hamas militants? Or that the UN, through UNRWA, employed Hamas militants? Many of the so-called aid-workers israel killed turned out to actually have been part of Hamas. There is unfortunately extensive evidence that UN employees participated in the 10/7 attacks and the subsequent fighting. And Hamas uses world central kitchen and other aid organization vehicles and infrastructure, so distinguishing is not easy in the first place. > How did you develop your understanding of this situation? And what are you trying to communicate here? I have developed my understanding of this situation from decades of study on this topic, and at least a thousand of hours of research over the past 2.5 years. In the span of 15 years, I've gone from leading so-called pro Palestine rallies to my current positions. What I am trying to communicate is that reality is more nuanced than many (including a younger version of me) like to think. Reality is nuanced, and at odds with the picture you paint.
DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
> Gaza began the war with a more powerful army than many European countries This is such an insane statement that you instantly disqualify everything else you say.
- richardfeynman 8mo ago
  It's hard to believe the earth is round, but it is. As I mentioned above, Hamas's army was comparable to countries like Denmark (20k active soldiers), Finland, the Czech republic (27k active) and maybe even the Netherlands (40k active). Estimates of the size of Hamas's army pre October 7 range from 20k to 40k active combatants, with US intelligence estimates converging on 30k. This is looking just at fighters and excludes Hamas's political wing. They also had tens of thousands of rockets.
  - ceejayoz 8mo ago
    I would gently suggest that the relative quality of the soldiers and their equipment is not something you can dismiss here. A handful of Delta Force in Mogadishu shot hundreds (at least) of armed assailants, for example. Hamas certainly doesn’t have the Leopard 2 tanks and F-35s Denmark has. Which is pretty important for the “more powerful” assessment.
    - richardfeynman 8mo ago
      Look, I'm obviously not saying that Hamas is stronger than all European countries in every metric, and I already did mention their lack of an air force. All I'm trying to say is that by some standard ways to judge military force (e.g., number of active soldiers) Hamas surprisingly is ahead, which gives lie to the idea that it's a small force. Your position has some nuance, which I appreciate, but another commenter in this very thread wrote "This is such an insane statement that you instantly disqualify everything else you say." It's obviously not an insane statement, given that we can debate things like the accuracy of their munitions and the lack of air power. the other commenter probably simply didn't know how many active soldiers Hamas had and how few some developed European countries have.

xg15 8mo ago

It was also fully blockaded by Israeli (and Egyptian) forces on all sides? Israel was in full control of what was going in an out of it.

richardfeynman 8mo ago
I don't see how that's relevant to the earlier claim, but even this claim of yours is a gross overstatement. There was a partial blockade, not a full blockade, and this partial blockade came after Palestinians launched the second intifada. Prior to the october 7 massacre, perpetrated by Hamas and gazan civilians, tens of thousands of gazans were able to travel out of gaza through egypt and israel, where many of them worked. nearly 75,000 truckloads of food and cargo went into gaza from israel in 2022. Gaza exported lots too.
- xg15 8mo ago
  My point is that Israel had full control about exactly what Gaza was allowed to import and export (and frequently used those controls for collective punishment as well) I don't quite see how under those circumstances, they were able to build "a more powerful army than many European countries", unless you talk about Luxembourg or the Vatican. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip
  - youarentrightjr 8mo ago
    [flagged]
  - richardfeynman 8mo ago
    Yes, Israel and Egypt together controlled what Gaza was allowed to import and export - not as a form of collective punishment, but to ensure its own security. There's a huge difference between that and a "full blockade" (which is what Russia did to Mariupol early in the war), so precision matters. In terms of Hamas's army being more powerful than that of many European countries, I'll respond to that below. And the Wikipedia article you cite has been manipulated by a band of ideological editors and is not reliable, and has no value (inverse value?) as a citation.
    - xg15 8mo ago
      The article currently has 361 references. Also the accusation they use it in arbitrary means, for collective punishment is widely shared, not just here. Explain to me how continuously reducing the area permitted for fishing is necessary for Israel's security.
      - xg15 8mo ago
        Also, why is there a quota system on food(!) at all? How does this aid security?
    - DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
      > not as a form of collective punishment, but to ensure its own security Top Israeli officials literally said that the purpose of the blockade was "to put Gaza on a diet."
- DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
  Why do Israelis always claim the Palestinians launched the 2nd Intifada? The 2nd Intifada was sparked by Israeli massacres of Palestinian civilians.
  - richardfeynman 8mo ago
    Calling the Second Intifada "sparked by Israeli massacres" reverses the basic chronology and ignores Palestinian leaders' own admissions. 1) Marwan Barghouti (Fatah leader of the uprising in the West Bank) told The New Yorker in Jan 2001: "The explosion would have happened anyway... But Sharon provided a good excuse." https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/01/29/arafats-gift https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2001/01/29/arafats-gift 2) UK Parliament Hansard (Apr 16, 2002) quotes the semi-official PA daily Al-Ayyam (Dec 6, 2000) reporting PA communications minister Imad al-Falouji: "the Palestinian authority had begun preparations for the outbreak of the current intifada... in accordance with instructions given by Chairman Arafat himself" and that it was not meant merely as a protest over Sharon's visit. https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2002-04-16/debates/d696a1af-a3c2-4bbc-b541-f1b4e1eed6ea/TheMiddleEast https://hansard.parliament.uk/commons/2002-04-16/debates/d69... (search within the page for "Al-Ayyam" or "Al-Falouji") 3) Arafat's widow Suha said Arafat decided to launch it ("Because I am going to start an Intifada") on Dubai TV, per MEMRI translation, quoted by CFR: https://www.cfr.org/articles/arafat-and-second-intifada https://www.cfr.org/articles/arafat-and-second-intifada https://www.memri.org/tv/suha-arafat-widow-yasser-arafat-2000-intifada-was-premeditated-planned-arafat https://www.memri.org/tv/suha-arafat-widow-yasser-arafat-200... Also, this is not some uniquely Israeli talking point. Britannica describes the start as Palestinians erupting into violence after Sharon's Temple Mount visit: https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/The-second-intifada https://www.britannica.com/place/Israel/The-second-intifada
    - DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago
      The chronology is clear: 1. Ariel Sharon staged a deliberate provocation by storming the Temple Mount with hundreds of policemen. 2. Palestinians protested, and Israeli forces shot live ammunition at them, killing four Palestinian civilians. Within weeks, riots had broken out and Israel had killed dozens of Palestinian civilians. Israeli actions were the spark, not some planned Palestinian operation. The long-term cause of the 2nd Intifada was Israeli refusal to carry out the Oslo Accords in good faith. The Palestinians recognized Israel and agreed to give up the armed struggle for their freedom in exchange for a set process by which Israel would rapidly withdraw from the occupied territories and allow the creation of a Palestinian state. The Israelis repeatedly reneged on that throughout the 1990s, and by 2000, the Palestinians were completely disillusioned with the so-called "Peace Process."

youarentrightjr 8mo ago

> Gaza began the war with a more powerful army than many European countries What? You mean countries like Monaco and Liechtenstein? > more soldiers, more rockets Simply counting the # of soldiers or rockets is disingenuous when this is obviously an asymmetric war. It's clear that the method of combatant recognition employed by the IDF is flawed, given they're killing aid workers and people from the UN. Eg, here is Hamas' bread and butter rocket: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qassam_rocket There is more technology in a modern rifle round than in those rockets + launch systems (if you even dare call them that). > more war-fighting infrastructure Please explain what you mean by "war-fighting infrastructure ". > Gaza wasn't a particularly poor place before the war, certainly not by the standards of the middle east Depends on what you mean by "standards of the Middle East", but just compare Israel($52k) and Gaza ($3455) for 2023: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=IL&start=2022 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?location... https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=PS&start=2022 https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?location... > It had mansions and average salaries that, for some professions, were higher than average salaries in Israel. "The wealthiest in a poor country have more money than the average in a developed country", means what exactly? How did you develop your understanding of this situation? And what are you trying to communicate here?

richardfeynman 8mo ago
I claimed Hamas had a larger and more powerful military than many European countries. This is a fact. > What? You mean countries like Monaco and Liechtenstein? No, my claim is much stronger. I mean Hamas's army was comparable to countries like Denmark (20k active soldiers), Finland, the Czech republic (27k active) and maybe even the Netherlands (40k active). Estimates of the size of Hamas's army pre October 7 range from 20k to 40k active combatants, with US intelligence estimates converging on 30k. This is looking just at fighters and excludes Hamas's political wing. > Simply counting the # of soldiers or rockets is disingenuous when this is obviously an asymmetric war. Counting things like soldiers and military arsenals is the standard way to evaluate military strength. And of course there is a force asymmetry, Israel is a global power and its air force is probably the second most effective in the world. That doesn't mean we shouldn't evaluate Gaza's military the way we would any other. > Please explain what you mean by "war-fighting infrastructure ". Well, for example, Hamas built the largest underground military tunnel system in the known world, a vast standing army numbering in the tens of thousands, gathered plenty of intelligence on Israel, militarized their population, and has a history of combat, for starters. But it goes way beyond this, and extends to the broad financial and military support they enjoyed from the IRGC. > "Depends on what you mean by "standards of the Middle East", but just compare Israel($52k) and Gaza ($3455) for 2023:" I'm not comparing it to Israel, which is a standout in the middle east, and among the most technologically developed countries in the world. I'm comparing it to other middle eastern countries. It wasn't exactly destitute, despite its murderous, anti-woman, anti-gay, and antiy-jew jihadi philosophy. https://www.instagram.com/reel/DE-xjBRKkPL/ https://www.instagram.com/reel/DE-xjBRKkPL/ > It's clear that the method of combatant recognition employed by the IDF is flawed, given they're killing aid workers and people from the UN. Have you considered that the some aid workers were also Hamas militants? Or that the UN, through UNRWA, employed Hamas militants? Many of the so-called aid-workers israel killed turned out to actually have been part of Hamas. There is unfortunately extensive evidence that UN employees participated in the 10/7 attacks and the subsequent fighting. And Hamas uses world central kitchen and other aid organization vehicles and infrastructure, so distinguishing is not easy in the first place. > How did you develop your understanding of this situation? And what are you trying to communicate here? I have developed my understanding of this situation from decades of study on this topic, and at least a thousand of hours of research over the past 2.5 years. In the span of 15 years, I've gone from leading so-called pro Palestine rallies to my current positions. What I am trying to communicate is that reality is more nuanced than many (including a younger version of me) like to think. Reality is nuanced, and at odds with the picture you paint.

DiogenesKynikos 8mo ago

> Gaza began the war with a more powerful army than many European countries This is such an insane statement that you instantly disqualify everything else you say.

richardfeynman 8mo ago
It's hard to believe the earth is round, but it is. As I mentioned above, Hamas's army was comparable to countries like Denmark (20k active soldiers), Finland, the Czech republic (27k active) and maybe even the Netherlands (40k active). Estimates of the size of Hamas's army pre October 7 range from 20k to 40k active combatants, with US intelligence estimates converging on 30k. This is looking just at fighters and excludes Hamas's political wing. They also had tens of thousands of rockets.
- ceejayoz 8mo ago
  I would gently suggest that the relative quality of the soldiers and their equipment is not something you can dismiss here. A handful of Delta Force in Mogadishu shot hundreds (at least) of armed assailants, for example. Hamas certainly doesn’t have the Leopard 2 tanks and F-35s Denmark has. Which is pretty important for the “more powerful” assessment.
  - richardfeynman 8mo ago
    Look, I'm obviously not saying that Hamas is stronger than all European countries in every metric, and I already did mention their lack of an air force. All I'm trying to say is that by some standard ways to judge military force (e.g., number of active soldiers) Hamas surprisingly is ahead, which gives lie to the idea that it's a small force. Your position has some nuance, which I appreciate, but another commenter in this very thread wrote "This is such an insane statement that you instantly disqualify everything else you say." It's obviously not an insane statement, given that we can debate things like the accuracy of their munitions and the lack of air power. the other commenter probably simply didn't know how many active soldiers Hamas had and how few some developed European countries have.