Merged Gaza just launched an unprovoked attack on Israel

[Loren Pechtel]

With Hamas not willing to accept Israel's existence nor the presence of Jews in the ME there is no viable side for Israel or anyone else, to deal with.

Isn't that the entire rationale behind removing Hamas from power in Gaza?

If Hamas is unwilling to accept Israel's existence and is committed to perpetual conflict, then they're obviously not a viable negotiating partner. That's precisely why I support efforts to remove Hamas from power and replace it with a leadership that is at least capable of pursuing coexistence.

And since Loren seems determined to ignore this point: yes, Israel's stated position is that peaceful coexistence is possible without regimes like Hamas and Hezbollah in power. I happen to agree with that objective. Do I personally think achieving it will be easy, or even likely? No. But I support the effort to try.

What exactly is objectionable about that? If the alternative is leaving organizations in power whose stated goals include the destruction of Israel and endless conflict, then what is the competing solution supposed to be?

Your constant tantrums about this not being a perfect world just makes me want to ask: where did the world touch you?

The problem is you are proposing a fantasy solution. How do you propose to remove Hamas and prevent their replacement?? There is simply too much terror money for this to actually happen.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Seriously?

Tigers!, is that true? That Instagram post is what you were calling the equivalent of telling Israel to "lie back and think of England"?

Look at the time.

It is in effect telling Israel to abandon it's hostages. Don't defend yourself when attacked. Sounds an awful lot like lie back and think of England--when you're being raped.

I didn’t get that sense at all. One what textual basis do you base your interpretation?

Yeah, you're not supposed to see the antisemitism. The thing is it's not in the letter. It's in the letter compared to the situation on the ground. It's all about Israeli restraint, while not a peep about why they are at war.

If it is not in the letter, then it is insane to impute it.

The letter was written in relation to facts on the ground, it doesn't stand in isolation.

 

[laughing dog]

If it is not in the letter, then it is insane to impute it.

The letter was written in relation to facts on the ground, it doesn't stand in isolation.

True, but that doesn’t justify imputing meaning that is admittedly (by you) not in the content.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I feel like you're looking at this through a pretty extreme lens. A lot of people fiercely oppose Hamas, felt sickened by October 7, and stand with Iranian protestors, yet they still believe Palestinians have a right to their own future and that Israel's government isn't above criticism. You seem to be reducing this to a binary choice between supporting human rights and condemning terrorism, when it's entirely possible to do both.

No. You are looking at a fantasy of peaceful coexistence, but the Palestinian Hamas cause is and always has been one of genocide.

FTFY

1948 was about genocide.

1948 was about the genocide in Europe. It was about hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing oppression and murder in Europe and hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing murder and terrorism in Palestine. It was about European immigrants taking a huge bite out of the homeland of the Palestinian people and claiming it for a Jewish ethno-state. It was about who was going to be in charge of what now that the British Mandate was ending, the French had been rendered toothless, and the US and Soviet Union were squaring off over the region.

Trying to recast the origins of the conflict into a childish "Arabs hate Jews" just-so story is ridiculous. Who do you think you're fooling? Not anyone who knows even a little bit of the history, that's for sure.

1) So what if there's a migration? Locally, there used to be a lot of comments about refugees from California. The growth caused some problems. Doesn't mean we objected to the people, though. The change in government would not have hurt anyone other than in their feelings.

2) 1948 was about the Arab armies committing genocide against the Jews.

 

[Gospel]

The problem is you are proposing a fantasy solution.

The problem here is that this isn't my proposal, it's Israel's. I've explained that repeatedly, yet you keep arguing with me as though I personally drafted the policy. At some point, you're going to have to force that through your remarkably thick skull: I'm describing Israel's stated position, not presenting my own peace plan for your approval. Not a single living creature on earth is seeking your approval on anything.

 

[Gospel]

I'm just going to say it: Loren is the most disruptive member I've ever seen on this forum. Holy shit. I've seen trolls, contrarians, derailers, and people who can turn any discussion into an argument. Loren somehow manages to combine all of them into a single posting style.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The primary goal was to get the hostages back. The war ended when that was accomplished, but Hamas keeps skirmishing.

Do you actually believe the "primary goal" of the bombings was to get the hostages back?

The primary goal was retribution. I get it. Nothing particularly wrong there. All the western world got it too. And looked the other way as Israel did what they felt was necessary. Mossad enacted the Hezbollah communication plot as well. But none of that was going to get hostages returned. And the bombings went on longer than needed to effect the return of the remaining hostages. The attacks could have ended at 12 months with the same result.

Ended at 12 months with the same result? And you have a magic wand that would make Hamas agree??

In general, I think that the conditions at 24 months wouldn't have been much different than 12 months. It isn't a magic wand, it was Netanyahu had long since exhausted the patience of the world and the military actions had long become fruitless towards the goal of ending Hamas.

How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th? Or what needs to be done to stop Hezbollah shelling northern Israel?

Getting Iran to stop funding it. And oddly enough, there is an agreement that could have involved that. Of which the GOP and Trump have not put a dyne of pressure on Iran to do that! laughing dog is a red herring. What laughing dog says here is irrelevant. The GOP and Trump have a moment in which they could press for this, and they aren't touching it with a 1000 meter long pole. All this bullshit about how the liberals are anti-Semites, and we see where the GOP actually stands on Israel!

There has never been an agreement that would have involved not funding Hamas. Nothing even close.

Sure and Jordan and Egypt would always be at war with Israel too.

The Islamists do not need everyone at war with Israel. They need someone at war with Israel.

Firstly, you are dodging the point... that two nations at war with Israel... stopped being at war with Israel. It happened. It can happen again.

Secondly, terrorists need money, they need souls. We did this already in Iraq. When after 2006 election debacle, the W Admin and the military shifted tactics to one with inclusion of the locals and things started going better. There will always be people that want to do bad things. The goal is to get them isolated. And right now, they aren't isolated.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With respect to future deterrence, It's impossible to say what will prevent future violence. Hamas, unlike Egypt and Jordan cannot and should not be counted on to act in good faith.

I think one solution would be to create DMZ several kilometers wide. It's worked in Korea for 70 years.

At some point it needs to be accepted that radical Islamists will never be willing to make peace with Israel.

This is exactly the kind of conversation I'd rather see more of. These are the discussions people who genuinely care about the safety, security, and long-term future of Israelis and Palestinians should be having.

Frankly, people who spend more time hurling accusations than discussing actual solutions don't strike me as particularly concerned with Israel at all. Israel is a nation of real people facing real security issues being used as a rhetorical shield to attack anyone who doesn't fall in line with a particular viewpoint.

The problem is that discussing "solutions" while ignoring the Islamists doesn't produce useful answers. You're after an end point that won't exist.

For my part, I largely agree with Israel's stated position on what Gaza should look like after Hamas is removed from power. Given the events of October 7th and the decades of rocket attacks, terrorism, and failed peace efforts that preceded it, I think it is entirely reasonable for Israelis to prioritize security above all else.

This makes sense to me:

• Hamas should be dismantled and disarmed.
• Hamas should not be permitted to govern Gaza in any form.
• Israel should maintain security responsibility for the foreseeable future to prevent another October 7th-style attack.
• Gaza should eventually be administered by Palestinian actors who are not affiliated with Hamas or other terrorist organizations.
• Any future governing structure should demonstrate both the ability and willingness to coexist peacefully before being entrusted with greater autonomy

And you think there's actually a path to accomplishing anything on this list?!

• .

It's worth noting that "coexist peacefully" was apparently meant as an insult when Loren accused me of using the term.

The problem is with the notion that if you remove Israeli provocations you'll have peace.

That said, I would hope the first and last points evolve over time. Ideally, as trust is built, violence decreases, and stable institutions emerge, Israel's direct security involvement could gradually diminish and Palestinians could move toward greater self-governance and, under the right conditions, eventual independence. But expecting Israel to simply hand over control immediately after the deadliest attack in its history seems detached from political and security realities.

And what do you propose to do to stop the rise of a new Hamas? The money Iran pours into terror will simply overwhelm them.

These are the conversations worth having. Could a DMZ work? What security guarantees would be required? How should reconstruction be handled? What incentives would encourage peace? What would a realistic pathway toward Palestinian self-government look like? How do you prevent Hamas 2.0 from emerging a decade from now?

DMZ? Israel tried that last time. Defined a zone on the border that nobody would enter. Hamas forced families into it until Israel stopped shooting them, effectively removing the DMZ.

And there's no way Israel is going to accept anyone's security guarantees. Once again, tried and failed--UNIFIL. They do absolutely nothing about Hezbollah, in times of conflict their cameras are used by Hezbollah and they've kept their people out there as human shields.

Those questions are infinitely more productive than the endless purity tests and ideological witch hunts that dominate these threads from just two members.

I have no interest in supporting Hamas. I also have no interest in pretending Israel's security concerns are imaginary. What I am interested in is discussing practical ways to reduce future violence, improve security, and create conditions where fewer people die on both sides.

That seems infinitely more worthwhile than watching Loren and DrZoidberg spend another hundred posts arguing over who possesses the correct ideological membership card this week.

And every time you scream about supposed war crimes in Gaza you're aiding Hamas.

Loren, if you have to keep explaining what I "really mean" instead of quoting what I actually wrote, you've abandoned the argument. All I'm seeing is "you," "you," "you," and more "you." You've spent more time inventing motives than the argument. As we say in the hood: can you get off my dick and get back on the topic?

Inventing motives? I don't believe you intend to help Hamas, I believe they have manipulated you into doing so.

How about addressing the rest of my points?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And since Loren seems determined to ignore this point: yes, Israel's stated position is that peaceful coexistence is possible without regimes like Hamas and Hezbollah in power. I happen to agree with that objective. Do I personally think achieving it will be easy, or even likely? No. But I support the effort to try.

And you think there's actually a path to accomplishing anything on this list?!

Does the quote above answer your question?

Because I can do this all day with virtually every claim you've made about me. The difference is that I have a life outside this forum and don't consider your arguments compelling enough to spend hours dismantling them one by one.

You're arguing for fixing it by taking multiple impossible steps that make no sense if you understand that it's not Hamas, but Iran that's the real cause.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The massive floodplain marsh where I do a lot of work has become a monoculture of Salix caroliniana. This is largely due to hydrological changes stemming from flood control water management in the headwaters. Ecologists don’t like this invasive shrub swamp monoculture because it has displaced a thriving heterogeneous herbaceous marsh. Water managers are mad the the willow use too much water.

The water managers think the solution is to just bring in the crop dusters and kill all the willow. Guess what happens if don’t fix the degraded hydrologic condition that made the willow a problem in the first place? You have to keep killing the willow in perpetuity.

Unless the bullshit going back to the mid 20th century is fixed the whackamole will continue. And right now Israel is doing the human equivalent of using a non selective herbicide that kills the willow and everything else trying to hang on and survive around it.

A reasonable approximation, but how do you repair the ecosystem in this case?

It didn't actually start in the mid 20th century, that's just when it became obvious. But even if you grant that it did, what is the solution? Allow the "refugees" to "return"? They win the next election, genocide. Jews go home? Genocide.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th?

Do you really think you could stop another October 7th? It was done with small arms and motorcycles. It could easily be repeated.

The problem is that Israel is held to a standard that Hamas/Hezbollah et. al are not.
When Hamas/Hezbollah do what they do there is sighing, clutching of pearls, attack of vapours etc. but nothing is done.
When Israel responds we get calls of possible war crimes, disproportionate response, 'haul them to the Hague', sanctions etc. Why the difference?

Hamas is dog bites man. Israel is man bites dog.

So? The fact that evil is normal doesn't make it not evil.

Never said it wasn't.

The problem is you are basically saying that Israel must not defend itself from evil.

How in the world am I saying that??? Plot that out for me.

Tigers asked why Hamas doesn't get the attention that Israel gets. I answered him as to why. Everyone knows Hamas is evil. Evil organizations do evil shit. It's a tautology.

When Israel does evil shit, like leveling entire cities to get a few terrorists, that's unusual so it makes news.

1) Where did they level a city to get "a few terrorists"??

2) Too bad. They keep fighting. Your cities getting leveled is what happens when you start a war you can't win and then won't surrender when invaded. Blame Hamas for using every building as a fighting position.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And how does the world stop Iran's funding of terrorists?

At present, it doesn't.

That is non-responsive to the question of how to stop Iran’s funding of terrorists.

BTW, how has world pressure meaningfully curtailed Israel in Gaza?

You think that the hardliners in the Israeli govt were not prepared to fling all the Gazans out? It did not happen due to world pressure.

Interesting, you are effectively saying that world pressure kept Israel from the complete ethnic cleansing of Gazans.

It's not ethnic cleansing to remove an attacker. Relative force doesn't matter, you can respond with lethal force to a deadly attack no matter how many opponents you must kill to end the threat.

Also non-responsive to the context of that topic] (the bold-faced remarks) Please try reading the entire post before joining the conversation.

A very Republican answer.

 

[crazyfingers]

Let me know when you guys decide which is more evil. Hamas/Hezbollah or Israel, and I'll watch this topic again.

 

[Gospel]

How about addressing the rest of my points?

Why? You're attacking an idea that isn't even mine. Take the DMZ proposal as an example. That wasn't my idea; it was brought up by Colonel Sanders. Do you not see how bizarre your posts are? You keep responding as though I personally authored every proposal that gets mentioned, when in reality I'm just discussing ideas put forward by other people.

 

[Gospel]

You're arguing for fixing it by taking multiple impossible steps that make no sense if you understand that it's not Hamas, but Iran that's the real cause.

Then take that up with the Israeli government. It's their proposal, not mine.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

2. I never said no one should judge Israel for any reason. What I do find absolutely puzzling is the pervasiveness of anti-Israel, pro Hamas on the left*. Couching it in terms of living standards for the Palestinian people is misguided at best. Hamas runs the show there, not Israel nor any other nation. If we agree that a government is responsible for the health and welfare of its people, then that government must be held responsible; and currently, the government governing Palestine is an oppressive and authoritarian theocracy. Most issues have a million shades of grey, but to me, this one doesn't. There are some, but not many.

The Palestinians are victims. It's just Israel isn't the oppressor. But the fact that they aren't a democracy doesn't change things. We didn't avoid invading Germany because they no longer had a choice about Hitler. Basically, the Palestinians went up to the biggest guy around and punched him in the face. But rather than learning their lesson every time they get even slightly back on their feet they throw another punch.

The average person hasn't really seen much of the horrors of war, entirely normal outcomes are being reported as war crimes. Geneva is pretty clear in what it says, but people see the bit they're looking for and quit reading--not seeing the conditions that are put on it. Geneva does not protect labels! Israel just killed another "reporter" that was a Hamas sniper. Slapping a "reporter" label on him doesn't make it a war crime.

 

[laughing dog]

And how does the world stop Iran's funding of terrorists?

At present, it doesn't.

That is non-responsive to the question of how to stop Iran’s funding of terrorists.

BTW, how has world pressure meaningfully curtailed Israel in Gaza?

You think that the hardliners in the Israeli govt were not prepared to fling all the Gazans out? It did not happen due to world pressure.

Interesting, you are effectively saying that world pressure kept Israel from the complete ethnic cleansing of Gazans.

It's not ethnic cleansing to remove an attacker. Relative force doesn't matter, you can respond with lethal force to a deadly attack no matter how many opponents you must kill to end the threat.

Also non-responsive to the context of that topic] (the bold-faced remarks) Please try reading the entire post before joining the conversation.

A very Republican answer.

I guess it is too much to expect you to stop with your derailing nonsense, At least you had the courtesy of keeping your nonsense short.

 

[ZiprHead]

How about a few hundred words saying this is what needs to be done to stop Hamas doing another Oct 7th?

Do you really think you could stop another October 7th? It was done with small arms and motorcycles. It could easily be repeated.

The problem is that Israel is held to a standard that Hamas/Hezbollah et. al are not.
When Hamas/Hezbollah do what they do there is sighing, clutching of pearls, attack of vapours etc. but nothing is done.
When Israel responds we get calls of possible war crimes, disproportionate response, 'haul them to the Hague', sanctions etc. Why the difference?

Hamas is dog bites man. Israel is man bites dog.

So? The fact that evil is normal doesn't make it not evil.

Never said it wasn't.

The problem is you are basically saying that Israel must not defend itself from evil.

How in the world am I saying that??? Plot that out for me.

Tigers asked why Hamas doesn't get the attention that Israel gets. I answered him as to why. Everyone knows Hamas is evil. Evil organizations do evil shit. It's a tautology.

When Israel does evil shit, like leveling entire cities to get a few terrorists, that's unusual so it makes news.

1) Where did they level a city to get "a few terrorists"?

Just about every major metropolitan area in Gaza has been almost completely destroyed.



30,000 Hamas member out of a population of 2.1 million constitutes as a few.

2) Too bad. They keep fighting. Your cities getting leveled is what happens when you start a war you can't win and then won't surrender when invaded. Blame Hamas for using every building as a fighting position.

30,000 fighters in Gaza certainly cannot use "every building as a fighting position."

Khan Younis


This was a city of 400,000 people. Destruction as far as the eye can seen.

 

[ZiprHead]

Let me know when you guys decide which is more evil. Hamas/Hezbollah or Israel, and I'll watch this topic again.

They are both evil now.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

How about addressing the rest of my points?

Why? You're attacking an idea that isn't even mine. Take the DMZ proposal as an example. That wasn't my idea; it was brought up by Colonel Sanders. Do you not see how bizarre your posts are? You keep responding as though I personally authored every proposal that gets mentioned, when in reality I'm just discussing ideas put forward by other people.
View attachment 54594

Well, if you aren't penning the solution to the Middle East problems, you are part of the problem.