|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 8, 2024 1:06:29 GMT -5
The point is that an organization such as Hamas doesn't have the power to defeat Israel though. Terrorist organizations don't have the strength to trigger nuclear deterrence.
Israeli nuclear weapons deter a concerted attack by other states, because if Israel goes down, it will take at least the region with them.
Are we really going to argue that Hamas is a realistic existential threat to (i.e. capable of destroying) the state of Israel to trigger a nuclear response?
|
|
|
|
Post by dabbler on Feb 8, 2024 1:23:38 GMT -5
It seems like some people are, it's the only way they can justify shrugging off the ongoing genocide, the worry that maybe Hamas would manage to get their own going as effectively as this one day, despite them never having managed that before
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 8, 2024 1:52:25 GMT -5
Not sure when Germany was an existential threat to France given that even when France decisively lost WW2 it still didn't stop existing, but nonetheless I wrote “could”. If you just allow Hamas to rule a country without any safeguard they will just have more resources to do the same kind of attacks. Israeli of course don't want that. I think here it depends a bit on how you define existential and how you include genocidal. Germany was an existential threat to France in (what was) their current form of state and society. If Nazi Germany would for whatever reason not have lost the war, the France that was might have never existed again. Permanently reduced to a facist led rump puppet. If you consider the Cold War, that was an existential fight between two systems, but not necessarily based on the idea of genocide in how most people consider it. It is true what you state about Hamas, there is very likely no reasoning with them in their current splintered political/militant form. However, Israel doesn't have a solution beyond keeping the bear contained in the zoo, the people locked in there with the bear by Israel are what gives Hamas its staying power. After 20 years, it shows that this strategy isn't working. Yet for some parts of Israeli politics, this is a useful situation (excluding the 7th surprise attack of course), because it keeps Palestine divided in two pieces and reduces international pressure to clean up Israel's own act on the West Bank. That's why Israel rejects the idea of the more moderate Palestinian faction (that Israel weakens for its benefit) taking over governance of Gaza after the war, they're not even paying the idea lip service: www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-says-palestinian-authority-current-form-should-not-run-gaza-2023-11-12/ |
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 8, 2024 3:44:25 GMT -5
It is true what you state about Hamas, there is very likely no reasoning with them in their current splintered political/militant form. However, Israel doesn't have a solution beyond keeping the bear contained in the zoo, the people locked in there with the bear by Israel are what gives Hamas its staying power. After 20 years, it shows that this strategy isn't working. Yet for some parts of Israeli politics, this is a useful situation (exluding the 7th surprise attack of course), because it keeps Palestine divided in two pieces and reduces international pressure to clean up Israel's own act on the West Bank. That's why Israel rejects the idea of the more moderate Palestinian faction (that Israel weakens for its benefit) taking over governance of Gaza after the war, they're not even paying the idea lip service: www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israel-says-palestinian-authority-current-form-should-not-run-gaza-2023-11-12/Yes, Netenyahu has openly stated there will be no two state solution and tweeted Biden to confirm he did in fact mean this after Biden gave a speech saying Israel is still committed to a two state solution. I think there is an option that Israel is pursuing other than caging the bear in the zoo- they could also drive the bear out of the zoo into the next city, so it isn't their problem anymore. As the number of starving Palestinian refugees builds around Rafah and the civilian infrastructure in Israeli-controlled areas is increasingly flattened, I think there is a very high chance of mass displacement into Egypt. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 8, 2024 4:10:55 GMT -5
Well, it has been offered as a recent option, but some old-fashioned ethnic cleansing makes it hard for everyone to still see you as the victim in this situation. You would think (or hope) they lose Western support over it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 8, 2024 4:27:11 GMT -5
Well, it has been offered as a recent option, but some old-fashioned ethnic cleansing makes it hard for everyone to still see you as the victim in this situation. You would think (or hope) they lose Western support over it. Well, given the number of Israeli spokepeople and politicians that have used phrases along the lines of "voluntary migration" and the very aggressive responses to anyone referring to that "voluntary" movement as ethnic cleansing, I think they are already building a narrative with the aim of sufficient plausible deniability for the US. |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 8, 2024 5:03:24 GMT -5
As far as I know, the US government has already stated this is not an acceptable solution, so you would hope the US holds to those statements. But that's just the Democrats.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 8, 2024 5:41:13 GMT -5
As far as I know, the US government has already stated this is not an acceptable solution, so you would hope the US holds to those statements. But that's just the Democrats. The US has also held the settlers in the West Bank are unacceptable too, but never done anything meaningful to prevent Israel from supporting it. If Israel goes ahead and empties Gaza of Palestinians, will the US actually punish Israel in any meaningful way like reducing aid or an arms embargo? I highly doubt it. Then the rest of the Middle East, North Africa, and Europe gets hit with another 2 million refugees the US doesn't have to worry about (plus probably more if it destabilises the fragile Egyptian government, there is currently an inflation crisis in Egypt that isn't going to be helped by 2 million refugees). |
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 10, 2024 12:56:56 GMT -5
So Netenyahu has ordered the evacuation of Rafah in anticipation of a ground attack.
Rafah currently holds 1-1.5 million Palestinians, its population prior to October was 280,000. Food supplies are also extremely scarce.
Egypt has categorically stated they do not accept displacement of Palestinians into the Sinai and that this would violate the current peace treaty between Egypt and Israel. Frankly, Egypt probably couldn't handle an influx of a million starving refugees due to its economic crisis even if it wanted to.
I do not see this ending well.
|
|
|
|
Post by bobtheinquisitor on Feb 10, 2024 14:25:45 GMT -5
Netanyahu will probably be remembered as one of modern history’s monsters. Hopefully he won’t bring down the whole region with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Haighus on Feb 11, 2024 14:19:49 GMT -5
The suggestion seems to be "We'll house them in newly-created tent cities in the open areas of Gaza". Aside from sanitation being a logistical mess for such a large number of people, it spunds an awful lot like they are proposing concentration camps.
|
|
|
|
Post by Least censored on the planet! on Feb 11, 2024 23:47:57 GMT -5
Germany was an existential threat to France in (what was) their current form of state and society. If Nazi Germany would for whatever reason not have lost the war, the France that was might have never existed again. Permanently reduced to a facist led rump puppet. Hamas doesn't want Israel to exist in another form, they want it destroyed for ever. No matter how you turn it, it should be obvious why current Germany isn't likely to turn into an existential threat to current France in the way current Hamas is likely to turn into an existential threat for Israel if left to their own device... |
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 12, 2024 1:51:24 GMT -5
Germany was an existential threat to France in (what was) their current form of state and society. If Nazi Germany would for whatever reason not have lost the war, the France that was might have never existed again. Permanently reduced to a facist led rump puppet. Hamas doesn't want Israel to exist in another form, they want it destroyed for ever. No matter how you turn it, it should be obvious why current Germany isn't likely to turn into an existential threat to current France in the way current Hamas is likely to turn into an existential threat for Israel if left to their own device... Hamas, at the moment, doesn't have the power to be an existential threat to Israel. The 7th didn't just occur because of Hamas planning, it was also Israel security services' failure, who ignored the warning signs. To go back to the WW2 comparison, Germany is no longer a threat because said threat was removed. The Allies were the existential threat to Nazi Germany, they won, which is why Germany currently is not an existential threat to Europe. Destroying Hamas (if possible) would remove the threat towards Israel, but it doesn't (have to) mean that Gaza doesn't produce future threats. Hamas in part exists due to the actions or inactions of Israel. If you remove Hamas but leave Gaza unchanged, another group will simply rise up to fill the void. Hamas just doesn't have the resources to be an existential threat, because the Israeli state is just so much stronger. That's the difference when it comes to existential threats, Hamas wants to be one in theory, but will likely never be one in reality. Israel isn't going to defeat Hamas by invading Gaza. Only significant change in the region will remove most of the support Hamas needs. |
|
|
|
Post by Peregrine on Feb 12, 2024 2:10:10 GMT -5
To go back to the WW2 comparison, Germany is no longer a threat because said threat was removed.
But that includes the removal of the cultural threat. We didn't just defeat Germany, we destroyed the Nazi party, banned Nazi ideology, executed the Nazi leadership, and divided up the country between new anti-Nazi owners. Germany isn't just not a threat anymore because of the military defeat, regardless of military strength in 2024 Germany isn't going to be committing genocide because no significant element in Germany wants to commit genocide. The same is not true of Hamas, Hamas very much wants to commit genocide and is only restrained from genocide by the military superiority of Israel and Israel's ongoing campaign of genocide. If the relative military positions were reversed Hamas would be enthusiastically committing genocide instead.
|
|
|
|
Post by Disciple of Fate on Feb 12, 2024 3:43:00 GMT -5
To go back to the WW2 comparison, Germany is no longer a threat because said threat was removed.
But that includes the removal of the cultural threat. We didn't just defeat Germany, we destroyed the Nazi party, banned Nazi ideology, executed the Nazi leadership, and divided up the country between new anti-Nazi owners. Germany isn't just not a threat anymore because of the military defeat, regardless of military strength in 2024 Germany isn't going to be committing genocide because no significant element in Germany wants to commit genocide. The same is not true of Hamas, Hamas very much wants to commit genocide and is only restrained from genocide by the military superiority of Israel and Israel's ongoing campaign of genocide. If the relative military positions were reversed Hamas would be enthusiastically committing genocide instead.
But the key here is that the removal of Nazi Germany did not destroy Germany, an existential threat therefore doesn't have to be a genocidal threat. This whole discussion started because of the mix-up between the two. Hamas is certainly a genocidal threat, but not a threat capable of destroying the state of Israel. Hamas being such a threat doesn't present Israel with carte blanche though. Removal of Hamas also doesn't guarantee that Gaza will be pacified, because Hamas doesn't exist in a vacuum. |
|
