What should Israel do with Gaza?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If it is to destroy Hamas, then it should allow livable conditions in Gaza and wait for Hamas to fail on its own. Hamas is an Islamic extremist organization. Islamic extremism thrives under some particular conditions- foreign intervention, war, harsh living conditions, a sense of persecution. You can't just kill off Islamic extremists, because as long as there are angry young men to take the place of the angry young men you've killed, they will continue. It's not very effective at governing. So if they are under peaceful conditions where they just fail at governing, they will eventually lose popularity. It could take years, it could take months. Look at the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Peace is the only answer.

But I don't think Israel actually wants Hamas to fail. I think they want to use Hamas as an excuse to give absolutely no concessions to the Palestinians, forever.

So you think Israel's response should be to sit and hope that, instead of using unfettered access to build stronger, deadlier weapons and use them against Israel, Gaza's response to the improved living conditions gained in response to Hamas' aggression is to turn around and kick out Hamas? That Gazans are able to overcome a sense of persecutions and the effects of decades of war and harsh living conditions before Hamas can build and launch those weapons? And that they should sit quietly under a barrage of rockets (at best) for a generation or two until that happens? I don't think that's realistic.

I don't think it's realistic to expect that blasting an occupied territory until they cry uncle is going to lead to security. Israel is working very hard to build a generation of Gazans who despise Israel. Is that going to lead to safety? The only true way for Israel to have "security" is to literally kill everyone in Gaza. I also think it's unrealistic to believe that basic concessions will lead to Hamas having a military capacity that will compete with Israel, one of the most powerful militaries in the world. Israel helped create this situation, and now has to put the safety of its people at risk in order to move forward. Too bad, but that's the situation it created.

You're being disingenuous. Hamas doesn't need an army. All it needs are better rockets, which are easy to get with unfettered access to supply streams. And I can't imagine a country in the world that would put its citizens at risk like that without meaningful attempts to mitigate that risk. Be realistic.

Don't talk to me as if you know me. I'm an anonymous internet commenter. If I were living in Gaza, I don't imagine that I would want Hamas to demilitarize. I wouldn't want to be completely at Israel's mercy. Israel wants risk-free security. That doesn't exist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If it is to destroy Hamas, then it should allow livable conditions in Gaza and wait for Hamas to fail on its own. Hamas is an Islamic extremist organization. Islamic extremism thrives under some particular conditions- foreign intervention, war, harsh living conditions, a sense of persecution. You can't just kill off Islamic extremists, because as long as there are angry young men to take the place of the angry young men you've killed, they will continue. It's not very effective at governing. So if they are under peaceful conditions where they just fail at governing, they will eventually lose popularity. It could take years, it could take months. Look at the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Peace is the only answer.

But I don't think Israel actually wants Hamas to fail. I think they want to use Hamas as an excuse to give absolutely no concessions to the Palestinians, forever.

So you think Israel's response should be to sit and hope that, instead of using unfettered access to build stronger, deadlier weapons and use them against Israel, Gaza's response to the improved living conditions gained in response to Hamas' aggression is to turn around and kick out Hamas? That Gazans are able to overcome a sense of persecutions and the effects of decades of war and harsh living conditions before Hamas can build and launch those weapons? And that they should sit quietly under a barrage of rockets (at best) for a generation or two until that happens? I don't think that's realistic.

I don't think it's realistic to expect that blasting an occupied territory until they cry uncle is going to lead to security. Israel is working very hard to build a generation of Gazans who despise Israel. Is that going to lead to safety? The only true way for Israel to have "security" is to literally kill everyone in Gaza. I also think it's unrealistic to believe that basic concessions will lead to Hamas having a military capacity that will compete with Israel, one of the most powerful militaries in the world. Israel helped create this situation, and now has to put the safety of its people at risk in order to move forward. Too bad, but that's the situation it created.

You're being disingenuous. Hamas doesn't need an army. All it needs are better rockets, which are easy to get with unfettered access to supply streams. And I can't imagine a country in the world that would put its citizens at risk like that without meaningful attempts to mitigate that risk. Be realistic.

Don't talk to me as if you know me. I'm an anonymous internet commenter. If I were living in Gaza, I don't imagine that I would want Hamas to demilitarize. I wouldn't want to be completely at Israel's mercy. Israel wants risk-free security. That doesn't exist.

I ..... okay, Mr. Anonymous person whom I affirm that I do not know!

I don't think Israel wants or expects risk-free security. But I think Israel sees opening the supply line completely to be too large a risk, and I think that's a realistic assessment of the situation. So without a mitigation of that risk (say, through demilitarization), how do we move the ball forward?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Israel's goal is security. It has no interest in governing Gaza or fighting with Gaza. How does Israel open the blockade and still maintain security? Thats the question that has not been answered.

I find Israel is partially responsible for the conditions that led to Hamas' power. Now it has to deal with it. It can either negotiate with Hamas and push forward with an imperfect, risky peace process, or it can have war forever. Obviously you think war forever is the more viable option. I disagree.

Michael Oren has a proposal for demilitarization of Gaza, easing of the blockade, opening border crossings, and rebuilding infrastructure. If the argument is that Hamas' weapons are 1) largely ineffective and 2) that the tunnels were not meant for attacks, then why do they need them?

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-oren-israel-gaza-disarmament-20140722-story.html

Hamas would still want weapons and internal tunnels for defensive purposes. Israel should absolutely try to negotiate demilitarization. I doubt that Hamas would accept it, but Israel should at least try.

And if Hamas rejects it, what choice does Israel have?

(I am asking these questions in all seriousness. I am a huge supporter of Israel but HATE the current situation and find the deaths on both sides to be horrible but I honestly see no alternative)

When you negotiate something, you have priorities, must-haves, wants, etc. Hamas will also make requests that Israel will refuse. That is at least two or three steps ahead of where we are at this moment. You can't call a negotiation doomed before it even occurs.

[Anonymous]

Israel has been trying to use its military to enforce its will on the Palestinians for decades and has not succeeded.

In fact, with each conflagration such as this one where hundreds of civilians are killed and thousands are wounded, Israel is merely breeding the next batch of militants who will then be involved in attacks against Israel. Just as surely as Israel has sought revenge against those who attack Jews you can be sure that the Palestinians will do the same thing against the Jews. Both Israel and the Palestinians believe in the "eye for an eye" doctrine.

To those who feel that Israel cannot make peace with the Palestinians let me just say that there was a sizable number of Israelis who believed that peace was not possible with Egypt either. Even Menachem Begin made peace with Egypt despite strong misgivings. It is a peace that has held for over three decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If it is to destroy Hamas, then it should allow livable conditions in Gaza and wait for Hamas to fail on its own. Hamas is an Islamic extremist organization. Islamic extremism thrives under some particular conditions- foreign intervention, war, harsh living conditions, a sense of persecution. You can't just kill off Islamic extremists, because as long as there are angry young men to take the place of the angry young men you've killed, they will continue. It's not very effective at governing. So if they are under peaceful conditions where they just fail at governing, they will eventually lose popularity. It could take years, it could take months. Look at the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Peace is the only answer.

But I don't think Israel actually wants Hamas to fail. I think they want to use Hamas as an excuse to give absolutely no concessions to the Palestinians, forever.

So you think Israel's response should be to sit and hope that, instead of using unfettered access to build stronger, deadlier weapons and use them against Israel, Gaza's response to the improved living conditions gained in response to Hamas' aggression is to turn around and kick out Hamas? That Gazans are able to overcome a sense of persecutions and the effects of decades of war and harsh living conditions before Hamas can build and launch those weapons? And that they should sit quietly under a barrage of rockets (at best) for a generation or two until that happens? I don't think that's realistic.

I don't think it's realistic to expect that blasting an occupied territory until they cry uncle is going to lead to security. Israel is working very hard to build a generation of Gazans who despise Israel. Is that going to lead to safety? The only true way for Israel to have "security" is to literally kill everyone in Gaza. I also think it's unrealistic to believe that basic concessions will lead to Hamas having a military capacity that will compete with Israel, one of the most powerful militaries in the world. Israel helped create this situation, and now has to put the safety of its people at risk in order to move forward. Too bad, but that's the situation it created.

You're being disingenuous. Hamas doesn't need an army. All it needs are better rockets, which are easy to get with unfettered access to supply streams. And I can't imagine a country in the world that would put its citizens at risk like that without meaningful attempts to mitigate that risk. Be realistic.

Don't talk to me as if you know me. I'm an anonymous internet commenter. If I were living in Gaza, I don't imagine that I would want Hamas to demilitarize. I wouldn't want to be completely at Israel's mercy. Israel wants risk-free security. That doesn't exist.

I ..... okay, Mr. Anonymous person whom I affirm that I do not know!

I don't think Israel wants or expects risk-free security. But I think Israel sees opening the supply line completely to be too large a risk, and I think that's a realistic assessment of the situation. So without a mitigation of that risk (say, through demilitarization), how do we move the ball forward?

I do not find Israel's embargo to be acceptable to begin with, no matter what the risk was. I also think that it worked against Israel's long term security on top of being unjustifiable.

[Anonymous]

I do not find Israel's embargo to be acceptable to begin with, no matter what the risk was. I also think that it worked against Israel's long term security on top of being unjustifiable.

So...what? Israel strengthens a neighbor openly intent on its destruction and crosses its fingers? Israel builds a time machine? What?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I do not find Israel's embargo to be acceptable to begin with, no matter what the risk was. I also think that it worked against Israel's long term security on top of being unjustifiable.

So...what? Israel strengthens a neighbor openly intent on its destruction and crosses its fingers? Israel builds a time machine? What?

It's already doing that right now, so I don't see how allowing regular people in Gaza to live like human beings instead of caged animals is worse. You need to understand- keeping Gazans in an open air prison strengthens Hamas more than anything else will.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

If it is to destroy Hamas, then it should allow livable conditions in Gaza and wait for Hamas to fail on its own. Hamas is an Islamic extremist organization. Islamic extremism thrives under some particular conditions- foreign intervention, war, harsh living conditions, a sense of persecution. You can't just kill off Islamic extremists, because as long as there are angry young men to take the place of the angry young men you've killed, they will continue. It's not very effective at governing. So if they are under peaceful conditions where they just fail at governing, they will eventually lose popularity. It could take years, it could take months. Look at the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

Peace is the only answer.

But I don't think Israel actually wants Hamas to fail. I think they want to use Hamas as an excuse to give absolutely no concessions to the Palestinians, forever.

So you think Israel's response should be to sit and hope that, instead of using unfettered access to build stronger, deadlier weapons and use them against Israel, Gaza's response to the improved living conditions gained in response to Hamas' aggression is to turn around and kick out Hamas? That Gazans are able to overcome a sense of persecutions and the effects of decades of war and harsh living conditions before Hamas can build and launch those weapons? And that they should sit quietly under a barrage of rockets (at best) for a generation or two until that happens? I don't think that's realistic.

I don't think it's realistic to expect that blasting an occupied territory until they cry uncle is going to lead to security. Israel is working very hard to build a generation of Gazans who despise Israel. Is that going to lead to safety? The only true way for Israel to have "security" is to literally kill everyone in Gaza. I also think it's unrealistic to believe that basic concessions will lead to Hamas having a military capacity that will compete with Israel, one of the most powerful militaries in the world. Israel helped create this situation, and now has to put the safety of its people at risk in order to move forward. Too bad, but that's the situation it created.

You're being disingenuous. Hamas doesn't need an army. All it needs are better rockets, which are easy to get with unfettered access to supply streams. And I can't imagine a country in the world that would put its citizens at risk like that without meaningful attempts to mitigate that risk. Be realistic.

Don't talk to me as if you know me. I'm an anonymous internet commenter. If I were living in Gaza, I don't imagine that I would want Hamas to demilitarize. I wouldn't want to be completely at Israel's mercy. Israel wants risk-free security. That doesn't exist.

I ..... okay, Mr. Anonymous person whom I affirm that I do not know!

I don't think Israel wants or expects risk-free security. But I think Israel sees opening the supply line completely to be too large a risk, and I think that's a realistic assessment of the situation. So without a mitigation of that risk (say, through demilitarization), how do we move the ball forward?

I do not find Israel's embargo to be acceptable to begin with, no matter what the risk was. I also think that it worked against Israel's long term security on top of being unjustifiable.[/quote
Well, the rockets started before the blockade. When Israel first withdrew from Gaza in 2005, there was no blockade and they left a lot of Israeli green houses and infrastructure, including irrigation systems for Gaza to begin building an economy. Gaza destroyed all those. They then started shooting missiles at Israel and in 2007, elected Hamas, a terrorist organization committed to the destruction of the state of Israel.

So what should Israel have done at that point if not a blockade to prevent them from getting weapons and left the borders open allowing Gazans unfettered access to Israel?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Time for a big parking lot in the desert.

This is what my husband says all the time.

lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Time for a big parking lot in the desert.

This is what my husband says all the time.

lol

Israel supporter here

There is nothing "lol" or funny about destroying civilians in Gaza and statements like these only perpetuate the myth that Israel enjoys or seeks out civilian casualties.
I would happily take out Hamas but most of Hamas leadership is enjoying this war from a distance and hiding out in Qatar.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Time for a big parking lot in the desert.


This is what my husband says all the time.

lol


Israel supporter here

There is nothing "lol" or funny about destroying civilians in Gaza and statements like these only perpetuate the myth that Israel enjoys or seeks out civilian casualties.
I would happily take out Hamas but most of Hamas leadership is enjoying this war from a distance and hiding out in Qatar.

Not the pp, but the context in which I have heard the parking lot in the desert was more about both Israel and the palistinians should be destroyed.

[Anonymous]

Israel should go back to the 68 border or a one state solution. Time is running out for Israel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

This sentence presupposes that Hamas cannot abide by an agreement, or that they are some sort of irrational actor. What is *your* basis for that?

1. Having a charter that lists the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews as their primary goal.
2. Starting a war that they cannot win and knowingly puts their own civilians in danger
3. The fact that Hamas continued to shoot rockets and dig tunnels after the last 2 ceasefires.

How is this NOT obvious to others?!?! I sincerely don't understand how there are people out there who think Hamas will stop their aggression!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Do you honestly believe that Hamas would stop aggression against Israel - rockets and tunnels - if Israel dropped the blockade? On what basis other than hope?

This sentence presupposes that Hamas cannot abide by an agreement, or that they are some sort of irrational actor. What is *your* basis for that?

1. Having a charter that lists the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews as their primary goal.
2. Starting a war that they cannot win and knowingly puts their own civilians in danger
3. The fact that Hamas continued to shoot rockets and dig tunnels after the last 2 ceasefires.

How is this NOT obvious to others?!?! I sincerely don't understand how there are people out there who think Hamas will stop their aggression!!!

I sincerely don't understand why you and other like you don't see that Israel's goal is expansionist and has taken land belonging to the Palestinians ever since 1967 and continues to do so!!! There are numerous settlements that have been built on land confiscated from the Palestinians.

I sincerely don't understand why you cannot see why after almost five decades of conflict since 1967, Israel has not been successful in subjugating the Palestinians!!! What makes you think that Israel will be successful in the future?

I sincerely don't understand why you cannot see that Israel's actions in the past week will have the effect of creating another generation of militant Palestinians!!! The ones who used to fight Israel after 1967 are now dead or aged. You have another generation that is now confronting Israel.

I sincerely don't understand why you cannot see that Palestinians view Israel as the aggressor and a country that really does not want peace because any peace agreement will require withdrawal from much of the land that it has confiscated!!! As long as there is no peace Israel can hold on to the land it grabbed and continue to grab even more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Time for a big parking lot in the desert.

This is what my husband says all the time.

lol

Sure hope your husband did not lose family members during the Jewish and Romanian Holocaust.