Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, this week announced that Israel would retain an open-ended security presence in Gaza. Israeli officials talk of imposing a buffer zone to keep Palestinians away from the Israeli border. They rule out any role for the Palestinian Authority, which was ousted from Gaza by Hamas in 2007 but governs semi-autonomous areas of the occupied West Bank.
The United States has laid out a much different vision. Top officials have said they will not allow Israel to reoccupy Gaza or further shrink its already small territory. They have repeatedly called for a return of the internationally recognized Palestinian Authority and the resumption of peace talks aimed at establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel.
These conflicting visions have set the stage for difficult discussions between Israel and the U.S.
The ideology of Hamas has deep support in Gaza; no matter how thoroughly the organization is destroyed now, it will be rebuilt unless it is kept actively suppressed. I don’t see how that’s possible without an occupation, and I suspect American leadership would privately agree, given the experience of the USA in Iraq and Afghanistan. (How much of what the USA publicly announces is the same as what it says to Israel in private?)
An occupation would be expensive, bloody, and globally unpopular - it can’t last forever and the only way I see of ending it eventually without a return to the pre-war status quo is to find some organization that is capable of both coexisting with Israel and ruling Gaza. If that’s not the Palestinian Authority, what is it? The Israelis opposed to a two-state solution haven’t offered a realistic alternative.
you mean where we tried to- and failed- to keep Iraq and Afghanistan
oppressed"suppressed"? Our experience says… it ain’t gonna happen.The hard-right Israelis have already offered their solution. it’s called “Nakba” - the translation? Genocide.
The problem is that you can’t just roll in an army, shoot anything that pokes its head out, and call it a day. Without extensive efforts to build infrastructure and create jobs to give people a sense of normalcy and belief that their lives are improving, you’ll just build up resentment. That’s what the US did for Germany and Japan post-WWII, and any other such endeavors will require at least that same amount of ongoing commitment. Admittedly, German and Japanese rehabilitation was also greatly helped by the fact that the USSR existed as a convenient external enemy to point at, and I don’t think there’s anything nearly as convenient in the Middle East, given that for most Israel would be said external enemy.
exactly. the Zionists are unwilling to give them that normalcy… or representation or basic rights, even. Hamas needs the Zionists, and the Zionists need Hamas, because their goals are to annihilate the other; any moderates that get traction towards peace of any sort compromise their goals.
There was actually a jobs programs allowing Gazans to work in Israel. Some of the Gazans then participated in the October 7th attacks and murdered civilians in the very villages they were working in.
…and? What’s the point here?
Many in that program were starting their day at 3 am just to get through the checkpoint, because the number let out was largely controlled. There shouldn’t have to be a jobs program, and there wouldn’t be such a program if they weren’t oppressing the palistinians in the first place.
Dude the slaves in the US had jobs (unpaid of course) and were working when they revolted. They totally should have been grateful and tried some civil disobedience instead. /S
We need some proof for that statement.
I thought Israel was building infrastructure and providing them with services, that’s why they were able to shut them off when they went to war.
The US insisted on unconditional surrender by both Germany and Japan because of the circumstances that led to world war II after world war I; lies and uncertainty and scapegoating regarding the causes for their loss, wouldn’t happen again.
Should Israel do something similar? It certainly seems like the Jews are once again being blamed for the consequences of a war they did not start, and their opponents this time refuse to lay down arms no matter how many times they are defeated. That would make the circumstances of Germany and Japan, and hopefully the outcome, be similar to that of Palestine.
The US also didn’t continuously send in armed squatters to kick the Germans and Japanese out of their homes, which is a state of affairs that works directly counter to the notion that things might get better.
Hey look it’s the cudgel I mentioned in another post. No one is talking about Jews here except you when you want to wield it as a weapon to shut down discussion.
Calling everything anti-semitism when it’s only criticism of Israel makes it easier for actual anti-Semites to find cover. See: “The boy who cried wolf” or “chicken little” for reference.
Stop it, it’s gross and unhelpful.
I was drawing parallels between WWII and this conflict, not calling anyone posting here an antisemite or shutting down discussion. I posted to encourage discussion. Certainly, though, I don’t think it’s controversial to say that a force that wants to genocide Jews is antisemitic, which is what the bit you cited implies. Not, “critics of Israel.”
Well you missed the mark.
Israel is committing genocide and ethnic cleansing in Gaza.
Is that hard to admit?
Think of the holocaust, would you have listened to propaganda and denied it too? Imagine how longer it would have gone on if people just ate up all that Nazi propaganda for longer.
Have you ever heard of [Breaking the Silence]( And it’s not even comparable, stop equating things with holocaust, it’s really disrespectful)? It’s a Jewish organization so you can keep your tits calm.
Iraq actually showed us a way to solve it without suppression. We brought the local militias into the fold.
I think this is a mistake. Hamas’s popularity doesn’t come from the fact that their ideas are wildly popular, but because Fatah was exposed as horrendously corrupt in the late 90s and early 2000s. Hamas’s radical ideology is not a core part of Palestinian identity - it is simply a result of circumstances that were in no small part urged on by Israeli manipulation.
Their popularity also comes from how peace is just not working. Which is why even if it’s destroyed, another armed resistance organization will spring up. Hamas is the only logical answer to a situation where peace 100% won’t work, while violence only 90% won’t work.
And let’s no forget that Israel was the one who started and funded Hamas. Eventually the citizens of Gaza then elected Hamas as their governing body. All that to say, a single state is the best we can hope for. Israel is repulsed by that but after this shit show it’s the only thing that makes any sense.
Hamas was voted in 20 years ago, and ran as moderates.
They now rule Gaza through violence and fear.
They exist because Israel helped found them, but they still exist because Israel is still propping them up.
Yeah, you said it better than I did. Thank you.
AFAIK Hamas’s election platform was that peace clearly wasn’t working.
Their election platform was that Fatah was an Israeli puppet and they wanted to move towards a two state solution and stopping the settlers.
The action was to give up moderation because the entire world supported the Israeli blockade and treating Hamas as a terrorist organization.
Hamas was elected in 2006 so almost 18 years ago.
Please provide verifiable support for this statement.
About a thousand news reports from 2006. We’re not going down this rabbit hole where you demand sources for well known stuff.
deleted by creator
So nothing then.
Cool.
What a moronic comment.
“I demand sources that are easily goggleable and will declare victory if you don’t do the search for me!” – girlfreddy
Open a fucking history book. This isn’t hard.
deleted by creator
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2014/07/30/how-israel-helped-create-hamas/
https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Hamas literally would not exist without Israeli support
This one from 2019
https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Netanyahu-Money-to-Hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-Palestinians-divided-583082
Direct funding of Hamas to keep the Palestinian people divided.
deleted by creator
Israel specifically chose to amplify the voice of Sheik Ahmed Yassin, the founder of Hamas. Now, to be fair, he had not founded Hamas when Israel chose him. Instead, he was a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, a terrorist organization out of Egypt, that was banned in Egypt but allowed in Gaza under Israeli rule, because they kept attacking Egypt.
Israel took a man with known terrorist ties, and built him a college so that he could teach his terrorist adjacent dogma.
All because he was super orthodox religious, and the main Palestinian organization that Israel didn’t like was secular.
And you quibble because the word Hamas wasn’t uttered until later.
Sheik Ahmed Yassin took the legitimacy offered by Israel, and used it to found Hamas, and taught the first members out of the college built for him by Israel.
Hamas literally would not exist without Israeli support
This one from 2019
https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Netanyahu-Money-to-Hamas-part-of-strategy-to-keep-Palestinians-divided-583082
Direct funding of Hamas to keep the Palestinian people divided.
But isn’t that kind of the point? Their “experience in Iraq and Afghanistan” is what’s telling them this is a stupid idea that only creates problems and solves nothing.
I think that’s oversimplifying the American experience: occupation doesn’t generate goodwill and lay the groundwork for an occupier-friendly local government, but it does keep the area relatively quiet and secure. America wanted goodwill and a friendly local government; eventually we gave up when that didn’t happen. Israel wants to keep the area relatively quiet and secure. They can do that if they’re willing to pay the high cost indefinitely.
Gaza isn’t really comparable to Afghanistan though, since it’s so much smaller. It’s more comparable to Kabul, which relative to the rest of Afghanistan was thriving. I’m pretty sure most Kabul residents preferred life before the Taliban.
I would call it likely, but I think an occupation and nation building is way more possible in Gaza than it ever could have been in Afghanistan.
I presume that alternative involves another Nakba and more annexation, probably slowly via settlements. Palestine’s best bet would be choosing a strong leader who is willing to abandon fruitless intifada, negotiate for peace, make realistic concessions, and enforce it.
How many times since the first nakba has that been tried already and sabotaged by outside forces or by israel directly? No really, I want you to go look it up so you will not need to repeat a silly thing like this again.