Social Biden considers accepting Palestinian refugees

[avenue94]

We’re thinking a brief campaign, keeping Hamas capabilities mostly in tact, keeping the tunnels and infrastructure intact and just more stringent blockades and more control over what comes in and out would have been better for both sides?

Yes, that would likely have left Israel in the same position it is right now, minus the growing blowback regionally and globally. I'll also add that attacking a foreign embassy was a huge miscalculation and unforced error. As for the blockade and control of the Strip, again, context. It's not like Gaza woke up one day and decided they hated Israel. You can't snap your fingers and make a population forget decades of being under brutal military occupation.

What in your mind is Israel's endgame here? Where are they a year from now and 5 years from now?

 

[kflo]

Yes, that would likely have left Israel in the same position it is right now, minus the growing blowback regionally and globally. I'll also add that attacking a foreign embassy was a huge miscalculation and unforced error. As for the blockade and control of the Strip, again, context. It's not like Gaza woke up one day and decided they hated Israel. You can't snap your fingers and make a population forget decades of being under brutal military occupation.

What in your mind is Israel's endgame here? Where are they a year from now and 5 years from now?

And it would have ensured hamas ruling gaza for generations to come and no hope for improvement in the conditions for the people of Gaza.

The end game is no hamas, no terror infrastructure, and hopefully, international coalition helping rebuild with no tolerance for terror attacks. Provide the people of Gaza hope for a better future. It will of course take a lot of time for that to be plausible. But the cycle that existed was just going to perpetuate for more and more generations and that wasn’t good for anyone.

 

[avenue94]

And it would have ensured hamas ruling gaza for generations to come and no hope for improvement in the conditions for the people of Gaza.

Israel's decades long strategy and its continuation of it in this war guarantees that already. What group can replace Hamas in running Gaza right now?

The end game is no hamas, no terror infrastructure, and hopefully, international coalition helping rebuild with no tolerance for terror attacks.

Israel has already failed at these goals. The idea that you can eliminate a terrorist group through sheer firepower is naive. Again, can you point me to an occupation post 1900s that you think Israel can emulate with Gaza? What historical case studies do we have that give hope that Israel can occupy Gaza successfully?

It should be noted that part of the reason Israel's war goals are so futile is that they are not the country's strategic goals, but Bibi's improvised attempts to hand on to power as long as he can. IT's his greatest strength and weakness, his lack of scruples in dealing with whatever extremist coalition partner he needs in order to maintain leadership.

Provide the people of Gaza hope for a better future. It will of course take a lot of time for that to be plausible. But the cycle that existed was just going to perpetuate for more and more generations and that wasn’t good for anyone.

I agree with this. But an occupation and civilian casualties of the scale Israel inflicts kills any hopes of this happening. Like I said, where are the case studies showing Israel can do this because country x or y did it in a similar situation?

 

[kflo]

Israel's decades long strategy and its continuation of it in this war guarantees that already. What group can replace Hamas in running Gaza right now?

Israel has already failed at these goals. The idea that you can eliminate a terrorist group through sheer firepower is naive. Again, can you point me to an occupation post 1900s that you think Israel can emulate with Gaza? What historical case studies do we have that give hope that Israel can occupy Gaza successfully?

It should be noted that part of the reason Israel's war goals are so futile is that they are not the country's strategic goals, but Bibi's improvised attempts to hand on to power as long as he can. IT's his greatest strength and weakness, his lack of scruples in dealing with whatever extremist coalition partner he needs in order to maintain leadership.

I agree with this. But an occupation and civilian casualties of the scale Israel inflicts kills any hopes of this happening. Like I said, where are the case studies showing Israel can do this because country x or y did it in a similar situation?

I don’t understand how your positioning Israel’s actions as more of the same and your suggested approach is new. It’s the opposite. Your approach ensures NOTHING changes.

And why are you asking for case studies for such a unique situation where there is no case study that shows any approach that works?

And I didn’t even mention occupation. I mentioned an international coalition overseeing Gaza.

 

[Rational Poster]

Which, as I've said previously, is what "entitled Westerners" said about Ireland and the Troubles. Yet here we are. I'll ask you the same question that everyone keeps ducking: If Israel is somehow supposed to subdue Palestine through brute force and military's occupation, what historical examples do we have since 1900 that show us that's a viable strategy?

If you don't want an adversary and hostile population that is far too easily enamored with terrorism and violent uprisings, you have to give them alternative options. Israel has not only not done this, it's actively tried to limit alternative options. This is basic counter-insurgency 101. Hamas doesn't even need to try hard to recruit because there is already a massive amount of Palestinian youth who have had innocent family members killed by Israel. That's the part you keep ignoring.

But the Troubles isn't an argument though. This isn't the Troubles, this is an entire different conflict that has been going on for much longer and much more fiercely.

Israel's goal isn't to subdue Palestine through brute force, if that was their goal it would have been achieved decades ago. This isn't a counter-insurgency either. Israel isn't trying to win hearts and minds so they can rule there after. That ship sailed long ago when they willingly gave up the territory and much more in search of peace.

They're retaliating against a belligerent force that's unwilling to negotiate or admit defeat. They're going after the people responsible for planning and coordinating the Oct. 7th attack and rescuing hostages or recovering their remains.

This idea that they're trying to divide and conquer is so fucking silly. If they wanted to do either it could have easily been done at any point between now and the start of the conflict. Clearly they do not want to resort to the complete brute force occupation of Palestine.

 

[HereticBD]

Israel's decades long strategy and its continuation of it in this war guarantees that already. What group can replace Hamas in running Gaza right now?

The group that's currently kicking their fucking ass.

It kills me how you think Palestine's statehood/independence is some kind of guarantee, and it won't just be a piece of land the big boys swallowed up and control(yes, FAR more control than they've ever exercised), and then the world moves on, because Palestine really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

What exactly do you think happens when the bombs stop dropping? Israel just leaves, and lets them rebuild by themselves?

 

[avenue94]

I don’t understand how your positioning Israel’s actions as more of the same and your suggested approach is new. It’s the opposite. Your approach ensures NOTHING changes.

And why are you asking for case studies for such a unique situation where there is no case study that shows any approach that works?

And I didn’t even mention occupation. I mentioned an international coalition overseeing Gaza.

The unspoken part of my approach is Israel needs to rein in its more extreme voting blocs and give up more at the bargaining table.

In what ways do you see this conflict as unique? It's quite similar to the Troubles and its origins and sectarian dimensions.

What interntioanl coalition would oversee Gaza?

But the Troubles isn't an argument though. This isn't the Troubles, this is an entire different conflict that has been going on for much longer and much more fiercely.

The troubles and this conflict date back to the turn of the 19th century.

They're retaliating against a belligerent force that's unwilling to negotiate or admit defeat. They're going after the people responsible for planning and coordinating the Oct. 7th attack and rescuing hostages or recovering their remains.

If so, why are there mass protests demanding that Bibi do more to get hostages back?

This idea that they're trying to divide and conquer is so fucking silly. If they wanted to do either it could have easily been done at any point between now and the start of the conflict. Clearly they do not want to resort to the complete brute force occupation of Palestine

My guy...you have been presented with Bibi literally saying this was the strategy. You're at this point saying the sky isn't blue.

 

[avenue94]

The group that's currently kicking their fucking ass.

It kills me how you think Palestine's statehood/independence is some kind of guarantee, and it won't just be a piece of land the big boys swallowed up and control(yes, FAR more control than they've ever exercised), and then the world moves on, because Palestine really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things.

What exactly do you think happens when the bombs stop dropping? Israel just leaves, and lets them rebuild by themselves?

I think it's quite likely that after it's said and then Hamas is still the dominant power in the region due to Israel making sure Hamas was in charge of Gaza for so long.

And when did I say Palestinian statehood was a guarantee?

 

[HereticBD]

I think it's quite likely that after it's said and then Hamas is still the dominant power in the region due to Israel making sure Hamas was in charge of Gaza for so long.

Oh', that makes total sense, LOL. They could've achieved that without leveling the place for their rebuild.

You can't have it both ways. They're friends of Hamas and want them to remain in power, but are literally hunting them and destroying the nation they rule over to get them, with no fucks given.

Sure bud, they're doing all this so Hamas can rule again. Is that what one of your books told you?

 

[kflo]

The unspoken part of my approach is Israel needs to rein in its more extreme voting blocs and give up more at the bargaining table.

The bargaining table with Hamas?

In what ways do you see this conflict as unique? It's quite similar to the Troubles and its origins and sectarian dimensions.

It’s very different.

What interntioanl coalition would oversee Gaza?

We’ll have to see who gives a shit about the people there, or not.

 

[kflo]

I think it's quite likely that after it's said and then Hamas is still the dominant power in the region due to Israel making sure Hamas was in charge of Gaza for so long.

And when did I say Palestinian statehood was a guarantee?

How did Israel “make sure Hamas was in charge of Gaza for so long”? What should they have done? What means did they have for Hamas to not be in charge of Gaza?

And Hamas won’t be the dominant power. Again, they would be under your version. But they won’t be in this version.

 

[avenue94]

Oh', that makes total sense, LOL. They could've achieved that without leveling the place for their rebuild.

You can't have it both ways. They're friends of Hamas and want them to remain in power, but are literally hunting them and destroying the nation they rule over to get them, with no fucks given.

Sure bud, they're doing all this so Hamas can rule again. Is that what one of your books told you?

I said they previously supported Hamas at various points. I didn't say they're still trying to do that.

Let's say Israel invades and takes Rafah. Who will be in charge of Gaza and what do you think Palestonian public opinion of Hamas will be?

 

[HereticBD]

I said they previously supported Hamas at various points. I didn't say they're still trying to do that.

No, now you just doubled back(likely because you realized how stupid your logic was). You said Hamas would be in power due to Israel keeping them in power for so long. What exactly does that mean? Hamas is gonna remain in power because of tradition, or some shit? Israel is just gonna leave them alone to make it happen...after all this?

You just stepped on your dick. Go read some more books.

 

[avenue94]

The bargaining table with Hamas?

At this post Hamas has be at the table given there aren't really other groups (see earlier point about the fruits of Israel propping up Hamas as a counterweight to the PLO and PNA). I would hope that Hamas isn't the only representative of Gaza at the table, but we're playing with the cards we're dealt here.

It’s very different.

What are these major differences? They certainly exist but you'll find a lot more similarities than not.

We’ll have to see who gives a shit about the people there, or not.

This reminds me of invading Iraq and thinking we could figure out occupation and reconstruction after the fact. I'll also point out that debaathification was one of the most damaging US failures of the post-invasion phase.

How did Israel “make sure Hamas was in charge of Gaza for so long”? What should they have done? What means did they have for Hamas to not be in charge of Gaza

They could have done their part to allow Palestinian society to organize itself more organically. Hamas would still probably be around but you would have had other counterweights. And as I mentioned, a brutal 30 year military occupation under martial law is about as perfect a breeding ground for terrorism you'll find.

And Hamas won’t be the dominant power. Again, they would be under your version. But they won’t be in this version

Who will be more dominant and powerful than them in the eyes of Gazans? Hamas is still worlds more popular than the PNA

 

[avenue94]

You said Hamas would be in power due to Israel keeping them in power for so long. What exactly does that mean?

Hamas will be in power, de factor or de jure, because they are only game in town at this point in Gaza. And one of the reasons (not the only reason) this is the case, is Israel was happy to aid Hamas during its rise and play it and the PLO/PNA off of each other, to keep Palestinians divided civically.

I've explained this multiple times already. Your reading comprehension leaves as much to be desired as your willingness to learn anything about a rather complex issue.

 

[HereticBD]

Hamas will be in power, de factor or de jure, because they are only game in town at this point in Gaza. And one of the reasons (not the only reason) this is the case, is Israel was happy to aid Hamas during its rise and play it and the PLO/PNA off of each other, to keep Palestinians divided civically.

I've explained this multiple times already. Your reading comprehension leaves as much to be desired as your willingness to learn anything about a rather complex issue.

My comprehension of your incomprehensible posts, is spot on.

So, in your opinion, the end game of all this is...going back to the status quo. Yeah, good luck with that. You're arguing as if this is just a little routine spat between the two, and not a complete siege of the region. It's so funny that you can be both aware of the immense and total destruction of Palestine, but somehow think it's gonna return to the state it was, with the people who caused it still in charge.

You're living in a fairy tale.

 

[kflo]

At this post Hamas has be at the table given there aren't really other groups (see earlier point about the fruits of Israel propping up Hamas as a counterweight to the PLO and PNA). I would hope that Hamas isn't the only representative of Gaza at the table, but we're playing with the cards we're dealt here.

What are these major differences? They certainly exist but you'll find a lot more similarities than not.

This reminds me of invading Iraq and thinking we could figure out occupation and reconstruction after the fact. I'll also point out that debaathification was one of the most damaging US failures of the post-invasion phase.

They could have done their part to allow Palestinian society to organize itself more organically. Hamas would still probably be around but you would have had other counterweights. And as I mentioned, a brutal 30 year military occupation under martial law is about as perfect a breeding ground for terrorism you'll find.

Who will be more dominant and powerful than them in the eyes of Gazans? Hamas is still worlds more popular than the PNA

Israel “propped up” Hamas in the 70s. Then they became mortal enemies when Hamas pledged to kill Jews and eradicate Israel. Stop repeating bullshit. Hamas was voted into power by gazans. Against the wants of Israel who almost invaded Gaza to prevent Hamas from gaining control after their election.

And are you suggesting Israel shouldn’t have limited the access Hamas had to resources after they were elected and took control of Gaza (after Israel’s unilateral withdrawal)?

Hamas can only be a rogue terror group in Gaza. They won’t be allowed to govern or control resources.

Again, YOUR version was the one where nothing changes and hamas is still not only governing but in control of all resources and still has their tunnels and their military embedded in all civilian spaces. That’s over.

 

[kflo]

Hamas will be in power, de factor or de jure, because they are only game in town at this point in Gaza. And one of the reasons (not the only reason) this is the case, is Israel was happy to aid Hamas during its rise and play it and the PLO/PNA off of each other, to keep Palestinians divided civically.

I've explained this multiple times already. Your reading comprehension leaves as much to be desired as your willingness to learn anything about a rather complex issue.

When was this “happy to aid Hamas during it’s rise”??? When did this happen?

 

[avenue94]

My comprehension of your incomprehensible posts, is spot on.

So, in your opinion, the end game of all this is...going back to the status quo. Yeah, good luck with that. You're arguing as if this is just a little routine spat between the two, and not a complete siege of the region. It's so funny that you can be both aware of the immense and total destruction of Palestine, but somehow think it's gonna return to the state it was, with the people who caused it still in charge.

You're living in a fairy tale.

Who, in the eyes of Gazans, will be more popular than Hamas after the fighting is over? Popularity and power are relative, unless there is a Gazan group more popular or powerful than Hamas, we're back to square one as far as de facto rulers.

Israel “propped up” Hamas in the 70s. Then they became mortal enemies when Hamas pledged to kill Jews and eradicate Israel. Stop repeating bullshit. Hamas was voted into power by gazans. Against the wants of Israel who almost invaded Gaza to prevent Hamas from gaining control after their election.

Israel continued tacit and financial support of Hamas through most of the 80s as well, even going as far as cabinet level informal meetings with Hamas leaders. The shift really only came in the late 80s.

And again, people vote on whoever is in front of them. The elections were neither free or fair (not entirely Israel's fault), but what do you expect after years of civil society erosion? Israel's goal from the 70s onward was primarily ensuring moderate Palestinian groups didn't gain traction, you don't think that has any bearing on today's lack of moderating civil groups?

Hamas can only be a rogue terror group in Gaza. They won’t be allowed to govern or control resources.

Officially, sure. Unofficially (aka at a community level), yes they will still hold most of the power. I've already asked you keep not answering: who in the eyes of Gazans is more popular than Hamas at this point?

Again, YOUR version was the one where nothing changes and hamas is still not only governing but in control of all resources and still has their tunnels and their military embedded in all civilian spaces. That’s over.

I said this is the track Israel is on. Not that I want this track or think it's going to turn out great. You're confusing my stances with my observations.

 

[avenue94]

When was this “happy to aid Hamas during it’s rise”??? When did this happen?

1 post at a time, brother. See the reply right above.