Do people fully support Palestine?

[Dawk]

I read this article and the scales fell from my eyes a bit: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/feb/11/amid-the-ceasefire-wrangling-how-popular-is-hamas-in-gaza-now

I hadn’t realised that a majority of Gazans want a conservative Islamist state and the complete destruction of Israel to create an Islamic state covering the whole country (from the river to the sea I guess). They also support violence and even the sacrifice of their own lives.

I am appalled by the destruction and loss of life in Gaza, but having read this article I can’t understand why support for Palestine isn’t more caveated. Why are people waving flags and supporting Gaza so unconditionally? When you look at the polling described in the article it seems fairly clear that many/most don’t actually want peace unless it follows the complete destruction of Israel.

For me it’s a bit like supporting Iran. I would never wave the Iranian flag around because of what the country stands for. In this case I am horrified by the scale of destruction wrought by the IDF so support Palestine completely in that respect but I’d never wave the flag or chant the slogans.

If you consider yourself ‘pro-Palestine’, what do you think of the ideology described in the article?

The fact doesn't remain as you claim.

ACLED state the following: "the group (Hamas) may still retain up to nearly half the number of its pre-war fighters". That's after what they assume they have recruited. Wouldn't it be lovely if children were taught another way, peace instead of 80 years of ongoing hate.

Thr 17,000 figure comes from Israel. I thought there might be an updated credible figure that's why I asked.

Hamas AND Putin apologism. Great stuff.

No, of course they are not an organized army. Gaza doesn't have clear areas marked as military. Bombing a hospital, a school or a refugee camp is not the same as bombing a military facility.

Hamas have battalions just like other armies. At around 30,000 strong prior to the conflict, that is an army of fighting men, much stronger than countries with larger populations have.

It's an army, with weapons ready to fight. They use terrorism and querilla tactics. They fire guns and missiles and aren't a bunch of misunderstood fluffy bunnies.

How would I know? I'm not defending Hamas' actions. But Hamas' irresponsibility towards civilians doesn't give a free pass to Israel to commit crimes against civilians.

An interesting read on how Hamas built their army.

https://www.washingtoninstitute.org/policy-analysis/how-hamas-built-army

www.october72023series.com/?wbraid=CkAKCAiA2cu9BhBTEjAAad609NLXAGaY5hXq9d4LKXHRuW8BjXbw1714DUkYAYVBn4ZdE1n84gzYxRdil0kaArsv

Just saw this on Twitter. I don't know if this link works but it is about the attacks on 7th October & the subsequent demonstrations in favour of Gaza & Palestine (I don't recall any such demonstrations when ISIS were taking hostages & chopping off the heads of aid workers).

Of course some Hamas fighters would have been killed. The question is whether the mode of action was worth the consequences and has it resulted in increased likelihood of peace. A quick glance at critique of their own methodology suggests a high degree of assumptions by ACLED. What else would we expect?

The mode of deployment of the IDF was to minimise their own casualties. So there would be aerial destruction of a region before sending in soldiers. I can understand this, but there was a calculated decision as to what the lives of individuals Palestinians were worth in comparison to those of IDF recruits- and this appears to have been nothing.

I really don't understand. If they are not an army, how do they have brigades? They literally call themselves Al-Qassam Brigades. That's what they name themselves. They are telling you themselves that they are an army. They refer to the conflict they started as a 'war' which obviously despite all the death and destruction they won.

Why, when they tell you what they are, do you refuse to believe them?

And I'm also really interested in your answers to the question a few posts back as to why you came to believe that the 1948 war wasn't intended by the Arab League as a war of elimination against Israel? You didn't answer that yet? Again, another Arab ( Secretary General of the Arab League in this case ) telling us exactly what the war was about, and you refuse to hear and say it wasn't about that. Can you explain why you don't take his words as he says them?

I answered your claim that you made that 'hamas have almost as many fighters as before the conflict' which is incorrect. Hence sharing the comments from ACLED.

Also many leaders have been taken out. Although of course with recent release of longer term prisoners for hostages some may take on leadership roles. Sinwar released previously went onto plan October 7th.

You honestly don't know why Hamas doesn't always wear uniforms while fighting? And fights amoung civilians? While making no provision to protect civilian lives? And you call this 'irresponsibility?'

What do you call it when Israel causes civilian deaths? Is that also 'irresponsible?' Because I'm pretty sure you'd use a stronger word...

Or is it one standard for the IDF and another for Hamas?

Indeed. Why are some reluctant to acknowledge that Hamas military wing are an army of fighters. Hamas have various sections in their terrorist organisation. Terrorists can and do form armies.

I didn’t make that claim and agree of course some Hamas fighters would have been killed. Dumb bombs aren’t selective either way. We don’t know how many have been killed, how many have be recruited and how many will be recruited. You can’t kill an ideology is what I said.

This article is over a year old and its conclusion has been disproved. Hamas still has territory and counterterrorism tactics are not being used against them.

The situation has moved on - now the situation is the talk about removing all Palestinians from Gaza.

No-one has actually said that they disagree with concerns that Israeli actions in Gaza and the West Bank will not help in longer term peace. Maybe this is just a given.

I apologise, it was FIFIFIREWORKS who claimed "The fact remains that Hamas seem to have as many fighters as they did before the war" not you. An incorrect claim which I was replying to.

However, more than 'some hamas fighters ' have been killed, OCLED data suggests thousands of hamas fighters have been killed, as you would expect. However, with no uniforms on (unless parading at hostage handover) its difficult to say which men are part of the army of the military wing of Hamas or Hamas general members. They don't want people to know who they are during fighting, it's a part of their tactics to go within the population. Querilla warfare isn't nice and doesn't follow usual rules of engagement.

International law disagrees that Hamas is a legitimate army.

The article is shared to show how a terrorist organisation can and did build an army of fighters. That you don't think brigades with organisation and 30,000 fighters is an army is a you problem.

An army is a large military force that fights on land. 30,000 fighting men in a brigade is no coffee meet up.

@ImmediateReaction

My claim is not incorrect, it is based on US intelligence who have said Hamas have recruited between 10,000 and 15,000 fighters

@ImmediateReaction

i won’t argue with you. It’s immaterial whether terrorists can be called armies in some situations.

nobody is saying they are a coffee meet up or any kind of a peaceful entity. I have not seen any comment defending Hamas or agreeimg with violence. The only people defending violence on this entire thread are people defending the Israeli actions in Gaza.

Hamas is technically a terrorist organization. By nature, they are an illegal formation. Don't twist my words as if I'm defending them.

I'm making two points here: 1- It is almost always impossible to win war against terrorism. Terrorism is always used as a tool for negotiation and war against terrorism can be won by changing the conditions that create terrorism in the first place. 2- Hamas' actions doesn't give a free pass to Israel to commit crimes against civilians.

Thousands? 1000, 2000, 5000? How are we actually to know? ACLED have said there is no clear way of knowing themselves.

Or course there will be guérilla warfare. The whole of the region is densely populated. But there was an unnecessary level of violence against innocent people; why use dumb bombs in highly populated areas to target individual prominent Hamas leaders. They didn’t care about how many Palestinians they killed.

www.nytimes.com/2023/11/03/world/middleeast/israel-bomb-jabaliya.html

I didn't twist your words, I directly quoted you.

And you still haven't answered any of the questions I asked.

Instead of answering direct questions, you've pivoted to ask another. I'll answer yours here but would really appreciate answers to mine.

1)Yes I agree it is very difficult to win a war against an army made up of terrorists. Many historical examples of this. Does that mean we shouldn't try? I don't think so. I think where we see extreme evil we should try to stamp it out. Don't you?

2. Yes I agree Israel shouldn't get a free pass. But if you start an urban war you expect urban deaths. And of the 2 groups at war, Hamas and Israel, I find Hamas to be by far the more problematic. Do you agree? That's why I lay the blame at Hamas' door.

Could you answer mine now?

It’s not a legitimate army . It’s a terrorist and therefore illegitimate army. They don’t act by the accepted rules of warfare. They dress as civilians. They use civilian centres as operational centres.