|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 5, 2024 9:42:07 GMT -5
Oh, to add: the Hamas tunnel networks are undoubtedly extensive and sophisticated, but they are not purely military in function. A significant amount of Gaza's civilian infrastructure entered via the tunnel networks due to inadequate material coming through the Israeli-controlled border crossings. It hasn't been built with a spoon, but it absolutely is equivalent to a prison smuggling network.
Most of the materials used to rebuild Gaza after the last Israeli bombardment came through the tunnels. Gaza would have still been full of ruins at the start of the current fighting if not for the tunnels. They very much benefit Hamas (who was taking a cut of the trade and uses them for direct military purposes) but it is pretty simplistic to state they were made from stolen aid money when they have been used to form a vital part of the civilian economy in the face of a blockade.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 5, 2024 10:01:12 GMT -5
But, I see it as a fight of civilisation and ethics against insanity and religious fundamentalism, and we have had our moral compass skewed by the awful site of human suffering and children being lifted from rubble. This... this reads very poorly. My morale compass is not being skewed by dead children, I didn't think dead children should be happening prior to October 7th. I don't support Hamas, and the dead children are not making me support Hamas. But I also don't support the IDF. Maybe, just maybe, this conflict needs a political solution because the only military solution will be ethnic cleansing in one direction or the other. I mean... I've not grown up in a prison so yeah, not going to have much in common. A majority in Gaza supports Hamas, but Hamas is fighting back against their occupier. Desperate people be desperate. They are trapped in a large concentration camp and regularly get bombed by the nation that controls the camp ("mowing the lawn"). I also don't have much in common politically with the majority in current Israeli society, who support settlements in the West Bank and increasing violence in Gaza. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 5, 2024 10:47:15 GMT -5
To add a little, the rules of war are quite clear on proportionality. Even though Hamas is clearly engaging in war crimes by using human shields, that does not give Israel carte blanche in return.
Proportionality is always difficult to establish, but it should not exceed the advantage obtained. Lets take the Hamas launched rockets. These are terrible of course, but their relative damage is incredibly low due to technological obstacles and Israeli defenses. If you have to wipe out a good number of civilians to disable a launch site, this is unlikely to be proportional. The value of bombing a residential building to blow up a tunnel access is again of doubtful military advantage overall, given the sheer scale of the supposed network.
A lot of Israeli actions are not in proportion to the threat/advantage, but few countries ever get taken to trial.
|
|
|
|
Post by easye on Feb 5, 2024 10:51:24 GMT -5
This is an unpopular opinion. The ugly truth of the matter is that Israel is the Occupier by choice. Israel also run an apartheid government (within Israel) by choice.
Everything else is a symptom of these two truths. The more we justify these two truths, the deeper and more intractable the issue becomes.
|
|
|
|
Post by crispy78 on Feb 5, 2024 11:07:59 GMT -5
Neither of them seem that fussed about innocent people being killed on either side. My simple, un-nuanced take on it is they're both being dicks and, in boomer parenting terms, need to have their heads banged together.
|
|
|
|
Post by dabbler on Feb 5, 2024 11:41:00 GMT -5
Only one of the sides is currently committing a genocide, and we're only arming one of those sides with our international aid.
When we deal with that then we'll deal with the currently lesser evil in the conflict (which weirdly is the only one recognised as a terrorist or criminal organisation)
Deal with the large, immediate problem first. Then deal with the rest
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 5, 2024 11:44:21 GMT -5
Only one of the sides is currently committing a genocide, and we're only arming one of those sides with our international aid. When we deal with that then we'll deal with the currently lesser evil in the conflict (which weirdly is the only one recognised as a terrorist or criminal organisation) Deal with the large, immediate problem first. Then deal with the rest States don't get recognised as terrorists. Part of the reason Israel does not want Palestine to be recognised as a state. |
|
|
|
Post by dabbler on Feb 5, 2024 12:11:52 GMT -5
They'd be immediately slapped with the sponsor label like Iran and Syria and all, and be treated as if they were though.
|
|
|
|
Post by herzlos on Feb 5, 2024 17:38:12 GMT -5
I don't really profess to any great understanding of the ongoing situation over there, but are Israel *really* fighting for their survival still? As far as I can see, Hamas seem to be basically a terrorist organisation, with AK47s, RPGs and some shoulder-launched missiles etc. Whereas Israel are now a modern military force with F35 jets, recon satellites... Are they really in danger of being destroyed by Hamas? It feels very much to me like Israel are an example of the classic victim-turned-bully trope. I genuinely can't see how Israel is under any existential threat from Palestine. Everything is so skewed in Israels favour. Technology, equipment, manpower. Hell Israel can cut off water/power/food to Gaza and the West Bank at a whim.
Hamas is a thorn in Israels side - as any kind of guerilla force* would be. Without winning hearts and minds it's going to be virtually impossible to get rid of them, and you can't win Palestinians hearts and minds if you don't even regard them as human.
*I don't like terrorist here, because one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter and all that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Feb 5, 2024 20:16:00 GMT -5
I genuinely can't see how Israel is under any existential threat from Palestine.
They aren't, but only because they have that position of overwhelming power to commit their genocide. Any sort of compromise or backing off from their position of power will not lead to winning hearts and minds, it will simply give the other side more ability to commit their genocide. That's the fundamental problem with this situation, both sides are starting from a premise that total extermination of their religious enemies is the goal. We can choose which side's genocide to support (entirely for cynical political and foreign policy goals) but at this point I don't see any possible way to stop the slaughter short of sending troops in to divide up Israel by force and maintain borders that neither side is permitted to cross.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 6, 2024 3:03:52 GMT -5
I don't see why UN peacekeepers aren't an option.
|
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Feb 6, 2024 3:25:50 GMT -5
I don't see why UN peacekeepers aren't an option.
Because their use requires unanimous agreement from the five permanent UN security council members and the US and Russia support opposing groups of genocidal fanatics for various political reasons. It is incredibly unlikely that they would agree to any outside intervention in the conflict.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 6, 2024 3:27:58 GMT -5
I don't see why UN peacekeepers aren't an option. Because Israel doesn't give a shit about the UN, Israel has killed multiple UN peacekeepers in Lebanon over the years, to little international response. The only way the UN would have teeth, is if the peacekeeping force was an armed to the teeth occupation force. |
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 6, 2024 4:41:56 GMT -5
Sorry, should have been more clear but I was typing quickly.
I am aware the US continuing to be dickwads means there is no chance of UN peacekeepers. However, that is true of any realistic restraints on Israeli violence in Gaza and the West Bank. Until the US stops unconditionally supporting Israel, they have no reason to change their behaviour.
I don't think that means we shouldn't discuss options available.
However, Disciple raises very good points that Israel has shown a disregard for peacekeepers in the past and any peacekeepers would have to be substantial military forces in their own right.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 6, 2024 4:48:20 GMT -5
I genuinely can't see how Israel is under any existential threat from Palestine.
They aren't, but only because they have that position of overwhelming power to commit their genocide. Any sort of compromise or backing off from their position of power will not lead to winning hearts and minds, it will simply give the other side more ability to commit their genocide. That's the fundamental problem with this situation, both sides are starting from a premise that total extermination of their religious enemies is the goal. We can choose which side's genocide to support (entirely for cynical political and foreign policy goals) but at this point I don't see any possible way to stop the slaughter short of sending troops in to divide up Israel by force and maintain borders that neither side is permitted to cross.
I think this is more absolutionist than it needs to be. Neither group is acting irrationally*, and I think a proper two state solution at 1967 borders could lead to a durable peace. In addition, most of the Arab states around Israel have no interest in hostilities with Israel in this era (although popular support against Israel is present in many of these states). There isn't any reason Israel cannot remain militarised and not occupy Palestine. Indeed, occupying the West Bank is probably what allowed October 7th to be so devastating. Finally, peace hasn't realistically been tried, because the conditions Israel has always demanded for any Palestinian state are unacceptable. *I don't think their rationales are good, but they are there. |
|
