[YZF]

People keep saying "right to a violent resistance" but it's not a thing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_resist

Nobody has the "right" to kill other people. That's not a right.

Gaza was not occupied, so they specifically didn't have the right you claim they had that doesn't even exist.

> On the Gaza strip they're denied international relations and trade.

This is also not true. When Israel left in 2005 they pretty much had control of their destiny. They chose to elect Hamas, that said its goal is to kill all Jews in the world. They chose to keep attacking Israel after Israel left. The full blockade on Gaza from the Israeli side was only imposed after Hamas came to power in 2007. Gaza still has a border with Egypt where they were free to negotiate any trade or relationships they felt like. Except the Egyptians didn't like them any better than Israel because they supported ISIS in Sinai.

[dragonwriter]

> People keep saying “right to a violent resistance” but it’s not a thing

Your link says it is a thing:

“In international law, the right to resist is closely related to the principle of self-determination. It is widely recognized that a right to self-determination arises in situations of colonial domination, foreign occupation, and racist regimes that deny a segment of the population political participation. According to international law, states may not use force against the lawful exercise of self-determination, while those seeking self-determination may use military force if there is no other way to achieve their goals.”

> Gaza was not occupied,

Gaza was openly occupied until 2005, and after that Israel “disengaged” but still actively patrolled Gaza’s waters, maintained what was in effect a free fire zone on the Gaza side of the border (with declared entry rules and prohibitions within certain distances, but the shootings occurred both well beyond the declared distances and when civilians were complying with the declared conditions), and otherwise used military force to effectively dictate conditions inside Gaza.

Moreover, Palestine remains occupied whether or not the Gaza piece of it is.

[cess11]

Yes it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_to_resist

Yes it is. It definitely is. It's definitely very much a right to start killing soldiers if another country invades yours and starts occupying it.

Yes it is. Israel controls the borders, airspace, finances, communications, water, and so on. This amounts to occupation.

Your views are so very weird. IS in Sinai has executed people suspected of helping to supply weapons to the Gaza strip, they're at war with Hamas.

[0xA1EF]

Israel withdrawing its soldiers from Gaza doesn't mean that Gaza is not under occupation. There's no Palestinian soveriegn state. All of Palestinian lands and the entire Palestinian population are under occupation, and according to International law, the responsibility of the occupier, and have the right to resist.

[tptacek]

I agree with almost all of this, but you lose me at "the right to resist". What, precisely, does that mean? The right to blockade roads in Gaza, to use force of arms to prevent IDF vehicles from entering Gaza? That makes sense. October 7th, though? Obviously not.