[regentbowerbird]

If I follow your logic:

- Israel has to eradicate Hamas as its existence is too much of a threat ("there is no alternative")

- Hamas has embedded itself in the civilian population in Gaza so that they are indistinguishable

- therefore, Israel must eliminate all Gazawis to guarantee its security

So.. Will Israel kill millions to avenge the deaths of thousands?

[mschuster91]

> therefore, Israel must eliminate all Gazawis itself to guarantee its security

Guess why they're keeping the Palestinians on a run: to ransack the entire place for weapons caches or Gaza Metro entrances. And that's not eliminating the Gazan population, by the way.

I don't like it very much myself, but honestly, I do not see any other way of making sure Hamas does not rise up again.

> Will Israel kill millions to avenge the deaths of thousands?

Again: it's not about revenge any more, it's about preventing the repeat of 2006-2023 aka constant terror from Qassam rockets and other terrorism.

[regentbowerbird]

> Guess why they're keeping the Palestinians on a run: to ransack the entire place for weapons caches or Gaza Metro entrances.

Let's say Israel finds all caches and tunnels, while not disturbing the population of Gaza (besides blockade, forced displacement and destruction of their homes), and then lets the population back in. Israel cannot tell Hamas militants from civilians, so some measure of Hamas will survive the event -- indeed, it might even reinforce anti-Israeli sentiment. What then would stop these leftover Hamas members from rebuilding whatever smuggling routes and weapon caches they had?

> Again: it's not about revenge any more, it's about preventing the repeat of 2006-2023 aka constant terror from Qassam rockets and other terrorism.

According to OCHAOPT Israel suffered 138 casualties on its own territory (ie excluding Gaza and the West Bank) from Palestinian attacks from 2008 to the eve of October 7. Would you say the current Israeli response (which itself inflicts terror) has been proportionate? Where would you place the threshold where it would no longer be an acceptable response?

[mschuster91]

> What then would stop these leftover Hamas members from rebuilding whatever smuggling routes and weapon caches they had?

Disbanding UNRWA, for one, and replacing it with UNHCR which is responsible for every other refugee situation in the world. It's time for the end of the special treatment of Palestinians, and that includes getting rid of inheriting the refugee status.

Following that, there must be strict accountability on all aids and their eventual disbursement in Gaza and the West Bank. No more diversion of construction materials to Gaza Metro, no more diversion of food aid and then re-selling it.

The final important thing to do is stop funding Hamas, and that one falls squarely on Israel, where Netanyahu has covertly funded Hamas to keep Fatah in check. When there's no money to pay for smuggled Qassam parts, there won't be any more smuggled Qassam parts.

> Would you say the current Israeli response (which itself inflicts terror) has been proportionate?

Yes. Israelis had to live 17 years in terror of rockets from Gaza. There's no way calling this acceptable in any form. Hamas and those backing it knew that eventually, Israeli patience would end one day and there would be hell to pay for it.

[jtrip]

I wonder what would have happened if the Americans had taken the same approach with the Iraqis and the Afganis. As someone said, if your enemy is carrying a baby, you don't punch him through the baby, you punch around it.

The staggering number of civilian casualties, deaths and literal executions that have been inflicted in the name of peace must give the acting populace a pause. In the name of humanity. The place is just rubble now. How much more security could one country want? No one else has done something like this since the first world war.

[devcpp]

You used the word indistinguishable, the other person used "deep". You are factually wrong since the ratio of Hamas to Gazan casualties does not represent random targeting even by the worst estimates. You also ignore the possibility of Hamas eventually giving up or some other diplomatic solution being reached.

We are a highly technical community, we should be able to debug the situation and find edge cases rather than trivialize it.

[regentbowerbird]

> You used to word indistinguishable, the other person used "deep". You are factually wrong since the ratio of Hamas to Gazan casualties does not represent random targeting even by the worst estimates.

True, I apologize for the misrepresentation; but reasoning is the same. At some point Hamas is too deeply ingrained in Gazawi society for Israel to perfectly excise it.

Hamas is the civilian government of Gaza and therefore includes firefighters, doctors, policemen, teachers. Israel does count them as members of Hamas and relies on statistical methods to select targets (ie you are on the same WhatsApp group as a member of Hamas, therefore you are likely to be a member, see the "Lavender" target selection program).

For a point of comparison, after Nazi Germany collapsed the Western allies had German civil servants fill questionnaires to assess their level of involvement; of 3.6 millions surveyed, just 1% were charged as "main culprits" (Hauptschuldige), whereas a third were designated as "followers" (Mitläufer), who basically contributed to the regime's crimes but nontheless got to keep their jobs after the war. I'd argue the allies were way too lenient on Germany, but the current Israeli approach (kill them all) is too extreme and will not work because its objectives are unrealistic.

> You also ignore the possibility of Hamas eventually giving up or some other diplomatic solution being reached.

I sure hope peace will be reached but Israel is waging a war without clear conditions of victory, leaving only total destruction of the enemy as their strategic objective. Think of the US trying to eliminate all the communist Vietnamese by compiling kill counts.

My impression is the war will end either when Gaza is drained of all of its population, or Israel tires of the war and reduces its stated objectives (probably this would involve a shift in government).

> We are a highly technical community, we should be able to debug the situation and find edge cases rather than trivialize it.

We can't solve everything with tech principles. Even in our field, probably the biggest thing separating a senior from a junior is humility and ability to connect with other people.

[harshreality]

> For a point of comparison, after Nazi Germany collapsed the Western allies had German civil servants fill questionnaires to assess their level of involvement; of 3.6 millions surveyed, just 1% were charged as "main culprits" (Hauptschuldige), whereas a third were designated as "followers" (Mitläufer), who basically contributed to the regime's crimes but nontheless got to keep their jobs after the war. I'd argue the allies were way too lenient on Germany, but the current Israeli approach (kill them all) is too extreme and will not work because its objectives are unrealistic.

You're comparing the Allies' actions after WWII concluded with Israel's actions in the midst of conflict.

Are you forgetting the Dresden firebombings?

Are you really suggesting that Israel will continue to "kill them all" if Hamas surrenders? That's not even what Israel is doing now, although they have the military capability to do so if they wished.

[regentbowerbird]

I'm comparing the stated goal of Israel (dehamasification) with denazification.

The allies' strategic bombing campaign was intended to destroy industry and infrastructure and was not aimed at any political group in particular, whereas Israel can and does target precise buildings associated with Hamas (see the "Lavender" program that provides bombing targets).

> That's not even what Israel is doing now

There's no real way to know since Israel does not allow journalists in Gaza, but the international court of justice found there was sufficient possibility that an investigation should be carried out. Are you so much better informed than them that you can be sure?