[ceejayoz]

Rightly or wrongly, the US went into Afghanistan because of a "local and immediate" event in New York City in 2001. It serves as an illustration of how hard it is to change a population's ideology via force. The distance isn't really what matters.

Again, I don't doubt the threat. It's demonstrably real. I doubt the IDF's current response to that threat is going to be successful at neutralizing it. I strongly suspect the response to that threat is going to make things worse in the next few decades.

[underdeserver]

There's still a large difference. The Afghan government collapsed. The Afghan people, presumably, did not fear for their lives enough to stand up to the Taliban. Biden said "American troops cannot and should not be fighting in a war and dying in a war that Afghan forces are not willing to fight for themselves."

This is not about Israel protecting someone else. This is about physically protecting our home. We do this or we die.

Hamas rockets have the range to reach about 80% of Israel's population. They've shown willingness to amass and fire them in large numbers. It's not a question of "if", but "when". Again, would you sit and wait?

[ceejayoz]

> The Afghan government collapsed.

So'd the Palestinian one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007) No elections in seventeen years, now.

> The Afghan people, presumably, did not fear for their lives enough to stand up to the Taliban.

I would presume, as with Hamas, that it's the opposite; that fear for their lives is precisely why they do not stand up to violent extremist groups controlling their area.

> Again, would you sit and wait?

I'd start with fixing the intelligence failures that permitted the attack to proceed.

Ignored warnings: https://www.ft.com/content/277573ae-fbbc-4396-8faf-64b73ab8e...

Halted overnight/weekend operations: https://www.timesofisrael.com/top-israeli-intel-unit-wasnt-o...

I'd also be investing a lot in expanding things like Iron Dome and border surveillance.

There are actions available that are not "flatten entire blocks of Gaza and displace a million people, generating the next generation of pissed off extremists".

[underdeserver]

First let's continue to distinguish between the PA, that's still functioning (for some definition of the word) in the West Bank, and the Hamas government of Gaza.

> I would presume, as with Hamas, that it's the opposite; that fear for their lives is precisely why they do not stand up to violent extremist groups controlling their area.

I can accept that.

> I'd start with fixing the intelligence failures that permitted the attack to proceed.

Of course they're doing that, and will continue to do that after the war ends.

> I'd also be investing a lot in expanding things like Iron Dome and border surveillance.

Here's the thing about Iron Dome and border surveillance. These are like watchdog mechanisms and monitoring systems for software. You can add as many of these as you like, at some point you're going to have downtime. You and I don't know of all the times significant attacks were planned and foiled. We do know of all the rocket attacks - of which there have been many over the years - and Iron Dome is not perfect.

> There are actions available that are not "flatten entire blocks of Gaza and displace a million people, generating the next generation of pissed off extremists".

You've suggested defense. I agree. We should be better at defense. We should fix as many bugs in our defense as we can. But as the quote goes, the bomber will always get through. Things will not materially change until the extremists on their side* are removed from power, both for Israelis who live in fear of attacks, and Palestinians who live in fear of Israeli retribution - but also in dire economic terms and without prospects, even well before October 7th.

* and ours, though their damage is generally directed at the West Bank for now

[ceejayoz]

> Things will not materially change until the extremists on their side* are removed from power...

Agreed! Generating a bunch of new extremists in Gaza via 6,000 bombs (so far) and a land invasion that leaves a pile of rubble in its wake is not likely to accomplish this.

You continue to make the same logical fallacy; "we must do something, this is something, therefore we must do this".

[underdeserver]

I addressed that. Take their guns and they can't shoot you.

I'm not a general. I don't know if the bombing was militarily necessary. The IDF high command thinks it was, and has proof that every bomb targeted a Hamas asset.

Israel has called again and again for civilians to leave. The vast majority did. They're not doing great but they are alive and safe, at least from Israeli attacks. International aid has been brought in over the past week.

You seem to imply there is an alternative. I explained why bolstering defense is not enough. I explained why doing nothing is not an option. I explained why this action will remove the threat, however temporarily. I agree with you that more nonviolent action is needed, after the dust settles, to achieve a more permanent peace. But for now, how do we address the immediate threat?

[HDThoreaun]

> Take their guns and they can't shoot you.

It is not possible to stop people from becoming suicide bombers by any means other than convincing them it's a bad idea. There is no way to take away all the resources that can be used to create bombs.