To wonder how anyone thought what was happening in Gaza was ok?

[march10th]

I see all these threads popping up about outrage about what's going on, especially now the UN and the US have started acknowledging the situation.
AIBU to wonder how people didn't see this from the beginning??

It's been months and thousands of people have been wiped out. As an Arab with close family links to Palestine, I think this is ethnic cleansing, similar to what Western countries have done to the indigenous people of Australia and America.

@statsfun How would Hamas surrendering stop the bloodshed in Gaza?

I suppose it might mean that the IDF could kill everyone else faster, but I hope that's not what you meant.

The Israeli government has stated consistently that they would not end military action in response to Hamas surrendering and releasing hostages. They have been clear that they would continue the bloodshed in those circumstances.

Why isn't stopping terrorism the focus of all the pro-Palestinian demonstrators? It's the only possible way for life to improve for Palestinians.
@statsfun I don't think that's something within demonstrators control, their marches are directed at the UK government to stop selling arms to Israel and to vote for a ceasefire. I don't think demonstrators in the UK have any influence on Hamas.

I have said before the only way to stop terrorism and to stop terrorists recruiting is to give people hope. Hope of a future, hope that things will get better for their children and that they will no longer be oppressed. I see it as similar to the young people I work with getting enticed into drug gangs, they live in poverty, their lives and future offer them nothing they are easily groomed, manipulated and enticed into a world of crime. They need to be offered a realistic alternative to that. Same goes for Palestinians, what is the alternative? what better future can they have? If there are other options and people can trust in that, support for terrorist tactics dwindle because people want to get on with living their lives and don't want that disrupted or threatened. I don't know how anyone can argue that going back to how Gaza was pre-october is of any benefit to the Palestinians. As horrific as Hamas are who else can Gazans trust at the moment to put their interests first, not that I think Hamas are but at the moment it seems the only option they've got.

Maybe life for Palestinians pre October 7th would have been more hopeful if the Hamas government hadn’t been siphoning off so much of the aid money meant to improve their lives for terrorist purposes.

Of course that's not what I meant!

Do you think any (non-Hamas) Palestinian lives have been saved by the actions of the 30 thousand strong Hamas army over the last 6 months?

Or do you think that there would have been fewer innocent deaths if that army had not existed and had not engaged in fighting the IDF?

My understanding of the Israeli position is that releasing the hostages alone would not be sufficient to stop the war. But surrender of the Hamas military would. There was a proposal along those lines which offered for the Hamas leadership to leave Gaza early on in the war.

I don't think living in Gaza under Israeli occupation is hopeful whether Hamas are there or not.

My understanding of the Israeli position is that releasing the hostages alone would not be sufficient to stop the war. But surrender of the Hamas military would.
That would only work if an independent peacekeeping force was put in and the IDF had no part in it.

@statsfun I think if Hamas as an organisation had wanted to protect Palestinian civilians, they probably wouldn't have initiated one of the most significant terror attacks this century, against a country whose government was pretty much guaranteed to respond by destroying Gaza.

There are some intelligent people in the Hamas leadership. And it doesn't require much intelligence to work out that this would just lead to destruction raining down on the innocent people of Gaza.

Participants in 7/10 are reported to have fully expected to die in their 'mission'. Part of me wonders if the organisers intended this to be the 'sacrifice' of everyone in Gaza, along the lines of "we choose to die now, rather than when our oppressors choose" in the hope that it would trigger wider action. But the people of Gaza didn't sign up for that.

They probably don't give a shit about innocent people dying. We should.

It surely would be better than it is now for Gazans if Hamas were to release the hostages and surrender. But Gazans would be prisoners under a miltary regime that would be very grim.
There would be no real peace for them.

More bulldozing and bombing would happen ostensibly to try to get at all the tunnels.

They would be surveilled night and day, be arrested in the night in their hundreds ( even children who were not throwing stones would be so the IDF could question them), be guarded over, shot ‘for being a terrorist’ including children, including journalists, including doctors, have swathes of land removed to make buffer zones, be blockaded, not be allowed proper schools, probably have land used/settled in deals ‘to help rebuild’ Gaza, have no free access to their mosques, and check points would be everywhere.

There would be no two state solution.

@ScrollingLeaves
You paint a very scary picture. The IDF cannot be left in Gaza they have demonstrated their complete lack of respect to Gazans and their lives. I don't think anyone would agree to that. I would imagine lessons from the experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan when there was regime change could inform the process, not that they were glowing successes 🙄

Yes, keep this brief, but the Good Friday Agreement was an act of surrender by the UK Parliament. It dismantled much of the security apparatus and British armed presence in return for vague promises by terrorists (who can re-arm in hours if they wanted to), makes it against the law to fly the Union flag for most of the year, released loads of terrorists from prison and means that Northern Ireland is only a referendum away from re-joining Ireland. I want peace yes. But not at any price.
Give me strength!

For the umpteenth time, Hamas terrorism is not explained by occupation, or settlements, or the question of statehood. It won’t be solved by a two-state solution. It won’t be solved by some Kristalnachtey policy of boycotting trade with Israel. It is explained by jihadism.

Jihadism is a global problem. Boko Haram behave in the same way in Nigeria - they have nothing to do with Israel or Palestine. And other oppressed peoples, such as Tibetan Buddhists, don’t practice terrorism. They only hope is that the Islamic world recognise the problem of its fundamentalism and have some kind of reformation where the extremists are isolated.

Once Israel don’t have such serious security concerns because of genocidal fanatics then a path to statehood for the Palestinians can be realised.

Netanyahu has never agreed to any of those proposals.
He wants an Israeli state only.
He and his followers also believe everyone is Hamas, even small children. So this idea is not about Hamas leaving it’s about everyone leaving.

Do you think it is the existence of the Hamas army which prevents this?

I think you're right, but I'm not really asking whether Hamas actions triggered the war.

More whether there is any way in which military resistance actually helps the Palestinians.

I know even the language "surrender" it wasn't a war!

You really appear not to understand how different cultures react to oppression, you just lump everyone together.
For the umpteenth time, Hamas terrorism is not explained by occupation, or settlements, or the question of statehood.
Please provide facts to support your opinion. I am waiting.

That made me chuckle! Not to understand how bloody difficult it must have been for all parties to actually be in the same room, let alone come to agreement and decide to work together towards peace is well ignorant.

If you're asking about whether there are times when use of force is necessary to preserve life, that's quite context-dependent. If someone has armed men shooting their neighbours and family, is there an argument for use of force as self-defence? That's different from terrorism though. Self-defence, non-violent resistance, armed resistance and terrorism are all different things.

No, I mean specifically the Hamas army. Do you think that their armed resistance over the last 6 months has saved any Palestinian lives (any Palestinians who are not themselves Hamas soldiers).

Pp have described scary scenarios which would happen if Gaza had no army to protect them against Israel. BUT I don't think that the Hamas army actually protects Gazans in any way. I don't think they can. And I suspect they don't even try. Am I wrong about that? If so, tell me examples.

When Hamas made a stand and engaged in protracted firefights over several weeks outside an infrastructure facility, did it actually prevent anyone there from being killed? Or did it in fact result in more innocent Gazans being killed?

So if having Hamas army doesn't protect Gazans - and in fact puts them in more danger - AND it's an obstacle to peace then don't you agree that it would be better if the Palestinians didn't have an army?

@statsfun I don't actually view Hamas as being a legitimate army engaging in armed resistance. Hamas is a proscribed terrorist organisation with an armed wing of fighters, who have engaged in terrorism rather than armed resistance.

I've seen some pretty horrible examples of what has happened to unarmed civilians at the hands of IDF soldiers, and it was IDF soldiers rather than Hamas who executed my civilian friends and colleagues recently. There's also a long history of unarmed Palestinians being killed by IDF soldiers and 'settlers'. So being unarmed and not defending oneself isn't a particularly protective strategy.

Do I think Hamas leadership will be busily trying to protect civilians? Probably not. Do I think individual people or smaller groups may have fought to protect people they care about? Quite possibly. Do I think they would have been effective? Almost certainly not, given the vast asymmetry in this conflict.

Palestinians are almost certainly not going to be safe without some legitimate protective/peace-keeping force in place. I don't think that needs to be a Palestinian military at this point. De-militarisation, an international peace-keeping force and a commitment to neutrality (similar to other countries around the world) could be part of the creation of a Palestinian state.

@Scirocco your friends' deaths at the hands of the IDF is terrible. And I'm certainly not saying that being unarmed protects you in Gaza, as it generally would here in the UK. This is an incident which I'm sure will be examined by the ICJ, if that gives you any comfort.

I do hope that some way is found to have a demilitarised, neutral government and peacekeeping in Gaza which protects Gazans whilst also preventing terrorism. I think everyone wants that.

It's interesting that you don't view Hamas as being a legitimate army engaging in armed resistance, and instead a proscribed terrorist organisation with an armed wing of fighters, who have engaged in terrorism rather than armed resistance. Do you think that view is widely shared in Gaza? A few days ago, @Dulra posted an article which included a poll showing support for armed struggle (in Gaza and West Bank combined) has dropped from 63% to 46%, driven largely by Palestinians in Gaza. Even 46% is still incredibly high. What do you think they support, if not Hamas fighting?

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/gazans-back-two-state-solution-rcna144183

What do you think they support, if not Hamas fighting?

Having read quite a few articles about how people in Gaza feel about their lives atm their 2 main overwhelming pre-occupations are surviving the next 24 hours [an end to the bombardment and getting food/water] and a strong sense of having been abandoned by the world. Often they talk about having 'no future'

Whether it's a realistic expectation or not Hamas are the only people 'on their side' at the negotiating table who give them a voice and can bring about a ceasefire ?relieve their immediate suffering

Under these circumstances 'supporting Hamas' is simply self-preservation and a lack of other options?

Plus I'm not sure how valid it is polling traumatised people in crisis and what the results actually mean

I remember the article you are referring to and I posted it more to make a point to another poster who was suggesting the majority still support hamas. I queried the relevance of polls in a war zone and how people were questioned and what questions were they asked. That poll you mention only questioned about 700 people. I personally don't read too much into them when people are more preoccupied with staying alive and wondering where their next meal is coming from.

I do hope that some way is found to have a demilitarised, neutral government and peacekeeping in Gaza which protects Gazans whilst also preventing terrorism. I think everyone wants that.
Yes I agree with this and I want Gaza to be free completely of the IDF they do not respect them as equal human beings and I would not trust them to do anything in the interests of Gazans or to protect Gazan lives.

It's a genuine question, not a gotcha. @Scirocco has lived and worked in Gaza with medical teams in several hospitals. Whilst it's impossible to really know what anyone else thinks (especially about controversial subjects which friends and colleagues might be cagey about if they suspect you don't think the same way) I think she probably has good insight.

I know you were concerned about the legitimacy of a poll during wartime @Dulra but the first poll was taken before the war, and many polls do consistently show strong support for armed resistance over time. I'm not saying this to blame. If we don't understand the situation clearly - as it truly is, not through the lens of how we think it should be - then we won't correctly guess the consequences of different international interventions.