Israel Hamas War, West Bank, Etc. | Hostilities resume

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 79K
  • Politics 
On the plus side Israel's actions in Gaza have left Hamas a shell of what it once was, and unable to launch another 10/7 type attack:

Israel has achieved all that it can militarily in Gaza, according to senior American officials, who say continued bombings are only increasing risks to civilians while the possibility of further weakening Hamas has diminished.

With the Biden administration racing to get cease-fire negotiations back on track, a growing number of national security officials across the government said that the Israeli military had severely set back Hamas but would never be able to completely eliminate the group.

In many respects, Israel’s military operation has done far more damage against Hamas than U.S. officials had predicted when the war began in October.

Israeli forces can now move freely throughout Gaza, the officials said, and Hamas is bloodied and damaged. Israel has destroyed or seized crucial supply routes from Egypt into Gaza. About 14,000 combatants in Gaza have been killed or captured, the Israeli military said last month. (The U.S. intelligence agencies use different, more conservative methodologies to estimate Hamas casualties, though the precise number remains classified.)
The Israeli military also asserted that it had eliminated half the leadership of the Qassam Brigades, the military wing of Hamas, including the top leaders Muhammad Deif and Marwan Issa.
“Hamas is largely depleted but not wiped out, and the Israelis may never achieve the total annihilation of Hamas,” said Ralph Goff, a former senior C.I.A. official who served in the Middle East.

But U.S. officials believe that Israel has achieved a meaningful military victory. Hamas is no longer capable of planning or executing an attack on the scale of Oct. 7, and its ability to launch smaller terrorist attacks on Israel is in doubt, they say.

Hamas has been so damaged in the war that its officials have told international negotiators it is willing to give up civilian control of Gaza to an independent group after a cease-fire is in place. How long Hamas will be willing to give up a measure of its power will depend on what happens after a cease-fire, and what concessions Israel is prepared to make, American officials said.

I'd agree with this.

Bibi and Hamas would sign the Peace Treaty, but it would mean the end of Bibi and Hamas. Pressure from the Arab Nations, War cabinet, the people of Israel are going to have to force the issue.
 
It's origins are tribal and the religions involved are certainly a very significant aspect of that tribalism, but it is true that religion is often used as a justification in situations that are largely unjustifiable otherwise.
The PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah over the decades have leveraged religion, but mostly it's been about "driving the Jews to the sea."
 
We are taking care of "our business" which is why we are involved in the world's conflicts. The world is an interconnected place both economically and culturally - we are in this together. Isolationism is impossible in the modern world. Our country is also home as a majority to one of those "crazy organized religions." And while religion is the justification - it is not the sole reason for the destruction and chaos.
Thats ridiculous.....easy to be self sufficient if we werent so greedy ad power hungry. Plenty of countries are basically self sufficient. As far religions, they are the main justifications for the chaos and have been for centuries.
 
The PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah over the decades have leveraged religion, but mostly it's been about "driving the Jews to the sea."
I've found discourse that attempts to use history to justify the current situation largely a waste of time.
Thats ridiculous.....easy to be self sufficient if we werent so greedy ad power hungry. Plenty of countries are basically self sufficient. As far religions, they are the main justifications for the chaos and have been for centuries.
What country in this world is "basically" self sufficient?

 
Historically speaking you are largely incorrect - the USA tried to remain somewhat isolated from anything happening outside N/C/S America up to WWI. The events of both World Wars largely proved that to not only be impossible but against our own interests as a nation.
 
Historically speaking you are largely incorrect - the USA tried to remain somewhat isolated from anything happening outside N/C/S America up to WWI. The events of both World Wars largely proved that to not only be impossible but against our own interests as a nation.

World war II, probably should take that lesson, especially in Asia, but I'm not so sure we should take that lesson in world war 1. If we'd stayed out of it, there's a fair chance there wouldn't be a world war II.
 
World war II, probably should take that lesson, especially in Asia, but I'm not so sure we should take that lesson in world war 1. If we'd stayed out of it, there's a fair chance there wouldn't be a world war II.
No we left Germany in shambles and did nothing to help afterwards.
 
It would be helpful if people could realize that this conflict has almost nothing to do with "organized religion", especially on the Palestinian side.
I don't really think that is a supportable statement. Hamas is a theocratic organization, Islamist to the core. Whether or not its reliance on terrorism is specific to the religion, the specific methodologies surely are. I don't know of any non-Islamic terrorist organizations (of which there are many) who use suicide bombings as their primary offensive weapon (which has been true of Islamism basically everywhere until quite recently).
 
I just wish we would take care of our business and stay out of others. No one is ever going to stop all the crazy organized religions from killing one nother though.
I can't tell you if we are best buddies with Israel-because we took the UN Que after WW II-or, well we are hugely involved in the Middle East because of Oil . But after 9/11 I think it is given we will be involved in that region-forever Now I will grant you there might not have beeen a 9/11 if we had not been so involved-but yea oil
 
No we left Germany in shambles and did nothing to help afterwards.

Germany wasn't in shambles. I might be wrong but I don't think a single shell landed on German soil during WW1. I am confident it was between zero and very few.

But I thought he meant non-interventionism in the sense that we aren't putting troops on the ground. No one knows for sure, but I think if we stayed out of WW1, we and the world would have been better off.
 
Germany wasn't in shambles. I might be wrong but I don't think a single shell landed on German soil during WW1. I am confident it was between zero and very few.

But I thought he meant non-interventionism in the sense that we aren't putting troops on the ground. No one knows for sure, but I think if we stayed out of WW1, we and the world would have been better off.
Germany was in economic shambles after WW1 and the crushing reparations imposed by the Treaty of Versailles made matters worse. The hardship of the reparations along with the territorial concession required (remember Lebensraum?) led to the rise of Nazis
 
The PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah over the decades have leveraged religion, but mostly it's been about "driving the Jews to the sea."

And by "driving the Jews to the sea" they mostly mean regaining their own land that was stolen from them.
 
I don't really think that is a supportable statement. Hamas is a theocratic organization, Islamist to the core. Whether or not its reliance on terrorism is specific to the religion, the specific methodologies surely are. I don't know of any non-Islamic terrorist organizations (of which there are many) who use suicide bombings as their primary offensive weapon (which has been true of Islamism basically everywhere until quite recently).

It's absolutely supportable.

What you say about Hamas is true-ish, but really need to be understood in its historical context, and specifically that much of the Islamic world didn't really come into contact with industrialized Europe until oil was found there, and that fact has shaped the forms of resistance, violent and non-violent, that have taken shape in the region. But more importantly to this point, Hamas is 2% of the population of Gaza, if that.

What the Palestinians want, at core, has nothing to do with Islam. It has to do with getting back the land and property that was taken from them, having security and quality of life for their children, economic opportunity, and basic freedoms. None of those things are unique to Islam, nor really do they have anything to do with it.
 

Zionism is the reason I qualified my statement with "especially on the Palestinian side"

Zionism does drive the conflict, and it does have its roots in religious ideology. It's also got some generational trauma from European antisemitism and the Nazi holocaust, but that's another story.
 
And by "driving the Jews to the sea" they mostly mean regaining their own land that was stolen from them.
It's a bit more complex than that.

Before the WWI victory of the British and Allies over the Ottoman Turks, Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot agreement splitting mandates in the Middle East and worked out a deal with the Saudis. Syria and Lebanon became under the control of the French. Algeria, Morocco became French protectorates. Egypt and control of the Suez Canal to the Brits. The British made up the country of Iraq to maximize oil flow, and screwing over the Kurds. Saudi Princes became Kings in Syria, Iraq. The Brits split off part of Palestine (bastardized from Philistines, hated enemies of the Jews) into Trans-Jordan and eventually Jordan.

After WWII the Brits and UN in their infinite wisdom decided to further divide the rest of Palestine in Israel and Palestine - West Bank + Gaza...a decision at least as disastrous as the India/Pakistan decision. The country of Palestine existed from November 1947 - May 1948 when Jordan, Egypt, and Syria attempted to drive the Jews to the Sea.

Israel captured a small portion of the West Bank and annexed it. Most of the West Bank fell into the hands of Jordan, who annexed the WB. It is part of the Jordanian UN charter. Egypt made Gaza a territory. Egypt and Jordan occupied legally the WB and Gaza for 20 years.

In 1954 the Arab States attacked Israel again. It did not go well for them. In 1967 it was deja vu all over again. This time it was a complete disaster for the Arab states. Israel captured the strategic Golan Heights. Eventually, Israel rightly annexed the Golan Heights. IMO, Israel made a huge mistake in not annexing the WB and Gaza in 1967 - instead they used them as negotiating pieces with mixed results long-term. Since the mid 1960s Egyptian/Palestinian/Iran backed terrorists (PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah) have fronted the Palestinians, who have used the people as human shields.

At this point, although "Palestine" only existed for 6 months almost 80 years ago...the only viable solution is a 3-state one (Jordan, Israel, Palestine) where Palestine is under a shared Arab State/US/Israel protectorate. The allied team would chose the leadership of Palestine. Hamas would be banned. Bibi would deservedly lose his PM post and likely be thrown in prison.

So, you can understand why Bibi and Hamas are pretending to make additional demands to avoid signing their own political death warrants. We must hope and pray that they are leveraged to do so. There are no more viable military targets or operations left. What is left is to make the peace.
.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit more complex than that.

Before the WWI victory of the British and Allies over the Ottoman Turks, Britain and France signed the Sykes-Picot agreement splitting mandates in the Middle East and worked out a deal with the Saudis. Syria and Lebanon became under the control of the French. Algeria, Morocco became French protectorates. Egypt and control of the Suez Canal to the Brits. The British made up the country of Iraq to maximize oil flow, and screwing over the Kurds. Saudi Princes became Kings in Syria, Iraq. The Brits split off part of Palestine (bastardized from Philistines, hated enemies of the Jews) into Trans-Jordan and eventually Jordan.

After WWII the Brits and UN in their infinite wisdom decided to further divide the rest of Palestine in Israel and Palestine - West Bank + Gaza...a decision at least as disastrous as the India/Pakistan decision. The country of Palestine existed from November 1947 - May 1948 when Jordan, Egypt, and Syria attempted to drive the Jews to the Sea.

Israel captured a small portion of the West Bank and annexed it. Most of the West Bank fell into the hands of Jordan, who annexed the WB. It is part of the Jordanian UN charter. Egypt made Gaza a territory. Egypt and Jordan occupied legally the WB and Gaza for 20 years.

In 1954 the Arab States attacked Israel again. It did not go well for them. In 1967 deja vu all over again. This time it was a disaster. Israel captured the strategic Golan Heights. Eventually, Israel rightly annexed the Golan Heights. IMO Israel made a huger mistake in not annexing the WB and Gaza in 1967 - instead they used them as a negotiating piece with mixed results long-term. Since the mid 1960s Egyptian/Palestinian/Iran backed terrorists (PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah) have fronted the Palestinians, who have used the people as human shields.

At this point, although "Palestine" only existed for 6 months almost 80 years ago...the only viable solution is a 3-state (Jordan, Israel, Palestine) that is under a shared Arab State/US/Israel protectorate. The allied team would chose the leadership of PAlestine. Hamas would be banned. Bibi would deservedly lose his PM post and likely be thrown in prison.

So, you can understand why Bibi and Hamas are pretending to make additional demands to avoid signing their own political death warrants. We must hope and pray that they are leveraged to do so. There are no more viable military targets or operations left. What is left is to make the peace.
.

Yes, I'm aware of the history. Your snippet of it here is tendentious, but decent.

The Palestinian demands are overwhelmingly material, and rooted in a powerful and IMO justified sense of being wronged not just by Israel, but by Britain, the US, and the UN. To the extent they want to "drive the Jews to the sea" (which you quoted, and which I'm sure you know is often used to paint the Palestinians as Islamist zealots), that desire is overwhelmingly for redress of wrongs, and restoration of lands and goods taken from them against their will, and has little or nothing to do with religion.
 
Back
Top