jaborch99 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

There are always (at least) two things missing from these types of arguments.

1) A solution of what things should look like going forward.

2) An acknowledgment that Hamas wants the suffering of their people. It's their strongest weapon.

---

Alright, let's get real about this because most of these conversations leave out the stuff that actually matters.

• What should really happen going forward?
  If you think endless bombing and blockades will fix centuries of conflict, you're setting yourself up for failure. Real peace means a political solution an end to occupation, a sovereign Palestinian state, and a serious disarmament of terrorist groups like Hamas. No more cheering for one-sided violence or collective punishment. It's about mutual recognition and ensuring both sides feel secure. The puzzle's been on the table for decades, but it takes guts from leaders to make moves and that includes the international community actually putting muscle behind justice and rebuilding, not just rhetoric or weapons.
  

• Yeah, Hamas uses suffering as a weapon.
  They're brutal and cynical no question. Embedding fighters among civilians, using human shields, refusing to free hostages it's the worst kind of strategy. But falling for that tactic and then punishing millions of innocent people in response isn't smart it just fuels the hate, the anger, the next round of violence. Collective punishment isn't justice; it's revenge dressed up as policy. And revenge never ends well.

So stop spinning this like a simple good vs evil story. Real peace and justice demand facing uncomfortable truths, cutting through propaganda, and pushing for solutions that protect real people not statistics or hashtags. If you want to break the cycle, demand ceasefires, unimpeded humanitarian aid, and real diplomacy that addresses all the issues, not just the convenient talking points. Otherwise, you're just riding the same endless war hamster wheel, and everyone loses.

---

You believe that at least a sizable portion of the Palestinian population thinks like we do and operates under the same motivations, and that just isn't true.

Israel has offered Palestine a state on multiple occasions over the years, before and after Hamas. They are always turned down because a large majority of the people hate Jews more than they love anything in their lives. They hate Jews more than they love their own children in many cases. They will never agree to anything that includes a maintenance of the state of Israel.

They only want a Palestinian state if it includes an end to the Jewish state.

---

Look, the idea that every Palestinian hates Jews so much that peace is impossible is a convenient stereotype that sells well but doesn't match the whole story. Yeah, some hold brutal, hateful viewsand Hamas fosters and profits from thatbut the Palestinian population isn't some monolith of rage.

Polls over the last couple of years show support for Hamas dropping sharply in Gaza, while backing for a two-state solution and negotiation has actually increased. People want peace, stability, and a future that isn't war and siege. The problem is there's no leadership or political framework they trust to deliver that peace, thanks largely to decades of conflict, occupation, and yes, Hamas's brutality.

Sure, there are extremists who reject Israel's right to exist. But lumping millions of people into that camp ignores the nuance, hard reality, and the many Palestinians who simply want a chance to live normal lives. Hatred doesn't run that deep uniformlyand painting it that way only fuels the cycle of conflict by hardening attitudes on both sides.

If we're serious about peace, we have to stop reducing a complex population to caricatures and start pushing for political leadership and solutions that resonate with the broader Palestinian publicnot just the hardliners.

---

Every poll ever done of Palestinians shows they will never accept a Palestinian state that exists concurrently with Israel. The absolute lowest percentage I can find anywhere in 40 years worth of polling is 73%. Most are between 80 and 92%. To this day, even after all that has happened, hindsight support for October 7th is north of 60%. That means nearly two thirds of Palestinians support that action even knowing the suffering it brought to them.

Any claim that there is enough support among Palestinians for a real two state solution to happen organically is pure wishcasting. There is simply no data anywhere ever that supports that belief.

txags92 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

BillYeoman said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Look, if your only framework is "Hamas bad, Israel good, so anything goes"- you're missing half the picture.

Hamas absolutely committed horrifying acts. No honest person defends that. But using those horrors to justify the ongoing, collective punishment of millions - including the blockade, the bombing campaigns, and the deliberate throttling of aid flat-out ignores basic decency and international law. You can't say you care about justice and brush past the images of dead and starving children, or the credible reports from NGOs and even the U.S. government warning about famine, displacement, and mass civilian deaths.

If Israel's aim was actually to wipe out Hamas - the group, the leadership, the tunnels - after 20 months of scorched-earth tactics and with all the resources of a modern military, why haven't they succeeded? Instead, what has succeeded is erasing entire neighborhoods, cratering Gaza's infrastructure, and letting hundreds of thousands get caught in the crossfire with no way out. If you think that's all excusable - and that every adult in Gaza is equal to a Hamas militant - then you're just buying war propaganda. That doesn't make you "tough on terror"; it just makes you a cheerleader for endless war.

And let's not forget: The bigger game here isn't about "good guys vs bad guys" - it's about real people on all sides, and about the U.S. government writing blank checks (with your tax dollars) for policies that do nothing but fuel more suffering, more blowback, and more endless conflict. The same endless war logic we've seen fail over and over again.

If you're genuinely serious about justice, liberty, or any values the West is supposed to stand for, then the only morally coherent stance is this: Stop supporting collective punishment. Demand a ceasefire. Send humanitarian aid in, unimpeded. Stop treating Palestinian civilians as expendable. Call for real diplomacy instead of more bombs and more excuses. Otherwise, don't act surprised when the next round of violence comes - because as history shows (see Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria...), this kind of "solution" always begets more chaos, more enemies, and less security for everyone.

And for those quoting "Blessed are the peacemakers" - that's not just for decoration. It's a radical call to break these cycles, not perpetuate them.

---

War is hell. Hamas should surrender and release the prisoners. Until they do that…Hamas has zero "Moral authority." And they never did. But unfortunately Americans and people in the West are buying into it.

This reminds me of "Lost Cause" type of stuff.

Again, War is Hell. Hamas started it. Israel is finishing it

---

Yeah, "War is hell" no argument there. But the idea that Hamas "should just surrender" and that ends everything? That's the kind of wishful thinking that ignores reality and the complexities on the ground.

Hamas does want suffering. They weaponize it. They embed their fighters in civilian areas, use human shields, and refuse peace deals that would save lives because their strategy depends on blood and chaos. Zero moral authority? Absolutely. They're a terrorist group, plain and simple.

But throwing your hands up and saying "Israel is finishing it" without demanding an end to collective punishment, unrestricted humanitarian aid, and a real political process isn't courage or clarity it's abdication. It's letting the cycle spin out endlessly, where millions live in hell while the same mistakes repeat.

And that "lost cause" comparison? C'mon. No one's arguing Hamas is justified. The point is: justice and peace don't come from grinding innocent populations to dust. They come from breaking the cycle, cutting off incentives for terror, and pushing real diplomacy not just bombs and blockades.

If you really want to help end the hell, start demanding that side too. Otherwise, you're just spitting slogans while the nightmare drags on.

---

There are plenty of people saying Hamas is justified as freedom fighters. They are delusional and refuse the evidence before their own eyes, but there are a ton of them out there. A good chunk of them are openly anti-semitic and support Hamas for that reason, but others honestly believe they are no different than the US founding fathers who revolted against an unjust government using unconventional warfare. They are the ones you see out there chanting "from the River to the Sea".

And "unrestricted humanitarian aid" is how Hamas smuggled in all their weapons and rocket components. The UN aid agencies have been proven to be complicit in doing so. Israelis wise to not trust them and demand their own role in the process.

All of the valid available pathways to true peace in Gaza start and end with Hamas being out of power and disarmed. They can either agree to it and hand over their weapons and hostages/remains or Israel can keep going as they have been. Even the other Arab countries and neighbors who usually take the Palestinian side are not calling for Hamas to remain in power at the end of any peace deal. They all want Hamas disarmed and out of power. All that is left is for the Gazans to start ratting Hamas out and helping the world take away their weapons. As long as the Gazans continue to see Israel as more of an enemy than Hamas, Hamas will continue to hold power.

---

Comparing Hamas to the U.S. Founding Fathers is not just wildit's dangerous revisionism designed to whitewash terrorism. The Founders fought a colonial power that broadly respected civilian lives, with a political vision rooted in freedom and rule of law. Hamas? They're a terrorist group that deliberately targets civilians, hides behind their own people, and cynically uses suffering as a weapon. There's zero moral equivalence there.

As for the "unrestricted humanitarian aid" claim being a smokescreen for weapons smugglingyeah, Hamas has weaponized aid. No doubt. But the answer isn't to choke off all aid and punish an already devastated civilian population. That's collective punishment, not strategy. If Israel wants a real solution, they need controlled aid channels that get food and medicine to the people without arming terroristsnot a crushing blockade that starves civilians and fuels more hatred.

And the notion that peace begins and ends with Hamas leaving power is a convenient cop-out. Destroying Hamas sounds straightforward until you realize it's been the stated goal for decades, yet here we are20 months, thousands of lives lost, and Hamas still rides. Meanwhile, Gaza remains a humanitarian disaster with no political future if the cycle doesn't break.

The real breakthrough has to come from the Palestinians turning on Hamas, surebut nobody is going to "rat out" a group that still enjoys considerable support partly because people feel trapped and desperate. Israel, the international community, and regional neighbors all need to push for political alternatives, reconstruction, and humanitarian relief nownot just after some hypothetical "Hamas gone" moment.

If we keep insisting that everything revolves around crushing Hamas first, the suffering won't endit will just continue to breed more violence, more extremism, and more wars down the line. Real peace means protecting humans and building political reality today, not waiting for some military fantasy that hasn't materialized.

BillYeoman said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Look, if your only framework is "Hamas bad, Israel good, so anything goes"- you're missing half the picture.

Hamas absolutely committed horrifying acts. No honest person defends that. But using those horrors to justify the ongoing, collective punishment of millions - including the blockade, the bombing campaigns, and the deliberate throttling of aid flat-out ignores basic decency and international law. You can't say you care about justice and brush past the images of dead and starving children, or the credible reports from NGOs and even the U.S. government warning about famine, displacement, and mass civilian deaths.

If Israel's aim was actually to wipe out Hamas - the group, the leadership, the tunnels - after 20 months of scorched-earth tactics and with all the resources of a modern military, why haven't they succeeded? Instead, what has succeeded is erasing entire neighborhoods, cratering Gaza's infrastructure, and letting hundreds of thousands get caught in the crossfire with no way out. If you think that's all excusable - and that every adult in Gaza is equal to a Hamas militant - then you're just buying war propaganda. That doesn't make you "tough on terror"; it just makes you a cheerleader for endless war.

And let's not forget: The bigger game here isn't about "good guys vs bad guys" - it's about real people on all sides, and about the U.S. government writing blank checks (with your tax dollars) for policies that do nothing but fuel more suffering, more blowback, and more endless conflict. The same endless war logic we've seen fail over and over again.

If you're genuinely serious about justice, liberty, or any values the West is supposed to stand for, then the only morally coherent stance is this: Stop supporting collective punishment. Demand a ceasefire. Send humanitarian aid in, unimpeded. Stop treating Palestinian civilians as expendable. Call for real diplomacy instead of more bombs and more excuses. Otherwise, don't act surprised when the next round of violence comes - because as history shows (see Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria...), this kind of "solution" always begets more chaos, more enemies, and less security for everyone.

And for those quoting "Blessed are the peacemakers" - that's not just for decoration. It's a radical call to break these cycles, not perpetuate them.

---

This is a warped, perverse and immoral understanding of justice.

Again, this is no different than arguing that a murderer should go free in order to prevent the murderer's children from becoming fatherless. That is a perversion of justice. It's mindless social media pseudo compassion at its absolute worst.

---

Look, I get where you're coming from with the murderer analogyit's a gut-level kind of justice that demands punishment regardless of consequences. But that black-and-white thinking doesn't hold up when you're talking about millions of civilians trapped in a war zone, not just the guilty few.

Justice isn't about vengeance for its own sake. It's about proportionality, fairness, and protecting the innocent. Dropping collective punishment on an entire population because their government is evil doesn't make you a heroit makes you complicit in creating more hatred, more cycles of violence, and more innocent suffering.

If you really want justice, then stop cheering for policies that tear apart families, starve children, and destroy infrastructure with no clear end game except endless war. Holding people accountable is one thing. Blaming an entire population and treating them as collateral damage is something else entirelyand it's a failure of moral imagination and strategic thinking.

So yeah, call out Hamas for their crimes. But don't pretend collective punishment is justice. It's exactly the kind of pseudo-compassion that leads to more bloodshed down the road, not less.

Justice isn't delivered by firing indiscriminately, it's delivered by breaking the cycle, protecting the innocent, and demanding real solutions. If you think punishing millions for the crimes of a few is justice, then honestly, you're just indulging in a cheap version of it.

---

A collective is going to be necessarily punished in this scenario, it is unavoidable. The only question is will it be the Palestinians or the Israelis?

A ceasefire right now under the conditions that Hamas would agree to means collective punishment for Israel. Their people will suffer and die in the long run as a result. Is it unfortunate that Palestinians are suffering now? Yes. Did they help bring this upon themselves? Also yes. And because their actions over decades ultimately led to 10/7, whether they intended for them to or not, their suffering as a necessary consequence to protect Israel is the just outcome. Not asking Israel to shed more of their own innocent blood in order to appear nice and compassionate.

Don't look at this through the lens of body counts. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of justice. How many more Palestinians die than Israelis is not a relevant fact with respect to the moral question here. The question is who should bear the consequences of Hamas' actions? Because someone has to. And under your proposal it will be Israel.

---

Look, saying "someone's gotta pay" and it's either Palestinians or Israelis isn't some straightforward moral calculusit's total oversimplification and a cop-out. You're arguing that millions of civilians trapped in Gaza have no choice but to bear the consequences of Hamas's crimes because morality demands Israel not bleed more. That's a brutal zero-sum game view, but it's not justice or reason.

Justice isn't about picking a side to punish wholesale; it's about breaking cycles of violence, protecting innocents, and seeking solutions that don't doom one population to indefinite suffering. The idea that Palestinian suffering is a necessary consequence makes them collateral damage in a forever war, which morally makes anyone who supports that complicit in their misery.

And yes, Hamas's actions are barbaric and they want to drag their people down with them. But that doesn't mean Israel or the world should accept collective punishment and blockades that crush entire families, kids, and communities. That's a tactical and moral failure that fuels hatred and instabilitynot security.

If you want sustained peace and justice, you have to stop buying the logic that innocent civilians have to be punished for decades of conflict. That's not a "just outcome," it's a brutal shortcut to endless war and suffering. Demand strategies that protect human life on all sides and insist on real diplomatic solutions. Otherwise, you're part of the problem, not the solution.

---

In order for justice and peace to be served….who is responsible for these "innocent" civilians? You are suggesting Israel is the responsible party here.

Things like "justice and peace"need parties that actually believe in Justice and Peace. Hamas doesn't believe in either.

---

When you ask who's responsible for the civilians caught in Gaza, the answer isn't some simple assignment of blame to Israel alone. Yes, Israel has a duty to abide by international law and avoid unnecessary civilian harm. That's a baselineno debate there.

But responsibility is messy here. You can't ignore that Hamas is a ruthless terrorist organization deliberately embedding itself among civilians, launching attacks from densely populated areas, and cynically using their own people as shields. They don't believe in justice or peace; they use violence and human suffering as weapons. It's a brutal fact we can't sugarcoat.

So yes, Hamas is the primary culprit for the horrific tragedy unfolding they started this war with their October 7 attacks and deliberately continue to feed the cycle of violence and misery. But Israel, as the occupying and militarily dominant force, carries the weight of avoiding collective punishment and protecting civilians despite Hamas's tactics. Failing to do so makes them morally and legally culpable for the suffering too.

Innocent civilians in Gaza are ultimately victims trapped between a terrorist government that doesn't care for their lives and a military campaign that disproportionately harms them. To talk about "justice and peace," we have to recognize the complicated shared responsibility: the terror tactics that put civilians in harm's way and the state response that must minimize civilian deaths while defending itself.

Ignoring Hamas's role lets people excuse terror. Ignoring Israel's role lets people excuse suffering. Justice requires we face both honestly, stop hiding behind slogans, and demand an end to the bloodshed on all sides.

jaborch99 said:

---

txags92 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

BillYeoman said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Look, if your only framework is "Hamas bad, Israel good, so anything goes"- you're missing half the picture.

Hamas absolutely committed horrifying acts. No honest person defends that. But using those horrors to justify the ongoing, collective punishment of millions - including the blockade, the bombing campaigns, and the deliberate throttling of aid flat-out ignores basic decency and international law. You can't say you care about justice and brush past the images of dead and starving children, or the credible reports from NGOs and even the U.S. government warning about famine, displacement, and mass civilian deaths.

If Israel's aim was actually to wipe out Hamas - the group, the leadership, the tunnels - after 20 months of scorched-earth tactics and with all the resources of a modern military, why haven't they succeeded? Instead, what has succeeded is erasing entire neighborhoods, cratering Gaza's infrastructure, and letting hundreds of thousands get caught in the crossfire with no way out. If you think that's all excusable - and that every adult in Gaza is equal to a Hamas militant - then you're just buying war propaganda. That doesn't make you "tough on terror"; it just makes you a cheerleader for endless war.

And let's not forget: The bigger game here isn't about "good guys vs bad guys" - it's about real people on all sides, and about the U.S. government writing blank checks (with your tax dollars) for policies that do nothing but fuel more suffering, more blowback, and more endless conflict. The same endless war logic we've seen fail over and over again.

If you're genuinely serious about justice, liberty, or any values the West is supposed to stand for, then the only morally coherent stance is this: Stop supporting collective punishment. Demand a ceasefire. Send humanitarian aid in, unimpeded. Stop treating Palestinian civilians as expendable. Call for real diplomacy instead of more bombs and more excuses. Otherwise, don't act surprised when the next round of violence comes - because as history shows (see Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria...), this kind of "solution" always begets more chaos, more enemies, and less security for everyone.

And for those quoting "Blessed are the peacemakers" - that's not just for decoration. It's a radical call to break these cycles, not perpetuate them.

---

War is hell. Hamas should surrender and release the prisoners. Until they do that…Hamas has zero "Moral authority." And they never did. But unfortunately Americans and people in the West are buying into it.

This reminds me of "Lost Cause" type of stuff.

Again, War is Hell. Hamas started it. Israel is finishing it

---

Yeah, "War is hell" no argument there. But the idea that Hamas "should just surrender" and that ends everything? That's the kind of wishful thinking that ignores reality and the complexities on the ground.

Hamas does want suffering. They weaponize it. They embed their fighters in civilian areas, use human shields, and refuse peace deals that would save lives because their strategy depends on blood and chaos. Zero moral authority? Absolutely. They're a terrorist group, plain and simple.

But throwing your hands up and saying "Israel is finishing it" without demanding an end to collective punishment, unrestricted humanitarian aid, and a real political process isn't courage or clarity it's abdication. It's letting the cycle spin out endlessly, where millions live in hell while the same mistakes repeat.

And that "lost cause" comparison? C'mon. No one's arguing Hamas is justified. The point is: justice and peace don't come from grinding innocent populations to dust. They come from breaking the cycle, cutting off incentives for terror, and pushing real diplomacy not just bombs and blockades.

If you really want to help end the hell, start demanding that side too. Otherwise, you're just spitting slogans while the nightmare drags on.

---

There are plenty of people saying Hamas is justified as freedom fighters. They are delusional and refuse the evidence before their own eyes, but there are a ton of them out there. A good chunk of them are openly anti-semitic and support Hamas for that reason, but others honestly believe they are no different than the US founding fathers who revolted against an unjust government using unconventional warfare. They are the ones you see out there chanting "from the River to the Sea".

And "unrestricted humanitarian aid" is how Hamas smuggled in all their weapons and rocket components. The UN aid agencies have been proven to be complicit in doing so. Israelis wise to not trust them and demand their own role in the process.

All of the valid available pathways to true peace in Gaza start and end with Hamas being out of power and disarmed. They can either agree to it and hand over their weapons and hostages/remains or Israel can keep going as they have been. Even the other Arab countries and neighbors who usually take the Palestinian side are not calling for Hamas to remain in power at the end of any peace deal. They all want Hamas disarmed and out of power. All that is left is for the Gazans to start ratting Hamas out and helping the world take away their weapons. As long as the Gazans continue to see Israel as more of an enemy than Hamas, Hamas will continue to hold power.

---

Comparing Hamas to the U.S. Founding Fathers is not just wildit's dangerous revisionism designed to whitewash terrorism. The Founders fought a colonial power that broadly respected civilian lives, with a political vision rooted in freedom and rule of law. Hamas? They're a terrorist group that deliberately targets civilians, hides behind their own people, and cynically uses suffering as a weapon. There's zero moral equivalence there.

As for the "unrestricted humanitarian aid" claim being a smokescreen for weapons smugglingyeah, Hamas has weaponized aid. No doubt. But the answer isn't to choke off all aid and punish an already devastated civilian population. That's collective punishment, not strategy. If Israel wants a real solution, they need controlled aid channels that get food and medicine to the people without arming terroristsnot a crushing blockade that starves civilians and fuels more hatred.

And the notion that peace begins and ends with Hamas leaving power is a convenient cop-out. Destroying Hamas sounds straightforward until you realize it's been the stated goal for decades, yet here we are20 months, thousands of lives lost, and Hamas still rides. Meanwhile, Gaza remains a humanitarian disaster with no political future if the cycle doesn't break.

The real breakthrough has to come from the Palestinians turning on Hamas, surebut nobody is going to "rat out" a group that still enjoys considerable support partly because people feel trapped and desperate. Israel, the international community, and regional neighbors all need to push for political alternatives, reconstruction, and humanitarian relief nownot just after some hypothetical "Hamas gone" moment.

If we keep insisting that everything revolves around crushing Hamas first, the suffering won't endit will just continue to breed more violence, more extremism, and more wars down the line. Real peace means protecting humans and building political reality today, not waiting for some military fantasy that hasn't materialized.

---

See the post above yours. If 60+% of the Palestinians STILL support Hamas' 10/7 attack after all it has put them through, there is nothing to negotiate with. Wars end when one or both sides decide they are not worth fighting any longer. If Hamas laid down their weapons, the war would end. If Israel laid down their weapons, Israel would end. This is an existential conflict for Israel, precipitated by an attack from Hamas. In the past, they have stopped when international outcry got too strong, leaving Hamas to rearm and try again. They are unwilling to continue that pattern and so the fight will go on until the Palestinians decide the fight isn't worth continuing.

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

Quote:

---

You're arguing that millions of civilians trapped in Gaza have no choice but to bear the consequences of Hamas's crimes because morality demands Israel not bleed more.

---

Correct, but it's not because I just want to see Palestinians suffer as a point of vengeance. It's because reality necessitates it. If there were a solution where nobody has to suffer and die that would be wonderful, but there isn't.

Quote:

---

Justice isn't about picking a side to punish wholesale; it's about breaking cycles of violence, protecting innocents, and seeking solutions that don't doom one population to indefinite suffering. The idea that Palestinian suffering is a necessary consequence makes them collateral damage in a forever war, which morally makes anyone who supports that complicit in their misery.

---

I'm not picking a side just to play favorites, I'm picking the side that bears the moral burden for a situation in which there is no way out of that involves no suffering and death. Millions of Germans died as byproduct of the destruction of Nazism, and while sad for any individual German on the whole that was just because they all carried the moral burden of the evil society they lived in. Does that mean they should have kept suffering and dying behind the point that was necessary for total victory? No, but it means that until total victory was achieved their suffering to whatever degree it had to occur was just.

Palestinians should stop suffering and dying the moment an end game is reached that allows Israel to no longer be realistically threatened by them. That means a final, forever end to Hamas rule, the return of all hostages and an Israeli or western coalition helping set up a new set of rules for them. Until then, to whatever extent they do suffer on the way to that solution, their suffering is moral and just.

---

I get the hard truth you're grappling with: nobody wants innocent people to suffer, but the reality is brutal and messy. Saying Palestinians "bear the moral burden" just like Germans did post-Nazism sounds tough, but let's not kid ourselvesunlike Nazi Germany, Gaza isn't a fully accountable state that invited destruction to wipe out an explicit genocidal ideology. Hamas is a terrorist group embedded within a civilian population, yes, but millions of ordinary Palestinians didn't sign up for war or choose Hamas rule.

You're right that "total victory" means disarming Hamas and ending Israel's security threat. But the idea that suffering is "moral and just" as long as it's on the path to some undefined victory is a cold calculus that accepts indefinite agony for innocents without any real timeline or guarantee. History shows us wars don't end neatly, and collective punishment without clear end states just drags on suffering and plants the seeds for the next conflict.

The Germans eventually rebuilt under Allied supervision with a clear plan, governance, and peace frameworkGaza right now has none of that. Holding millions hostage to an endless siege and bombardment, saying it's "just" because of Hamas, isn't moral clarity. It's a convenient way to dodge responsibility for the very real humanitarian catastrophe unfolding.

If you want "justice," it has to include protecting innocents along the way, pushing for ceasefires, humanitarian access, and political solutions that don't treat entire populations like pawns in a zero-sum game. Otherwise, you're just rationalizing endless war and suffering as if it's inevitable fate rather than a tragic failure of leadership and imagination.

Quote:

---

and a military campaign that disproportionately harms them.

---

By what metric?

Quote:

---

If you want "justice," it has to include protecting innocents along the way

---

So the Allied victory in WW2 was unjust?

Tell me the historical war that meets your standards.

txags92 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Look, if your only framework is "Hamas bad, Israel good, so anything goes"- you're missing half the picture.

Hamas absolutely committed horrifying acts. No honest person defends that. But using those horrors to justify the ongoing, collective punishment of millions - including the blockade, the bombing campaigns, and the deliberate throttling of aid flat-out ignores basic decency and international law. You can't say you care about justice and brush past the images of dead and starving children, or the credible reports from NGOs and even the U.S. government warning about famine, displacement, and mass civilian deaths.

If Israel's aim was actually to wipe out Hamas - the group, the leadership, the tunnels - after 20 months of scorched-earth tactics and with all the resources of a modern military, why haven't they succeeded? Instead, what has succeeded is erasing entire neighborhoods, cratering Gaza's infrastructure, and letting hundreds of thousands get caught in the crossfire with no way out. If you think that's all excusable - and that every adult in Gaza is equal to a Hamas militant - then you're just buying war propaganda. That doesn't make you "tough on terror"; it just makes you a cheerleader for endless war.

And let's not forget: The bigger game here isn't about "good guys vs bad guys" - it's about real people on all sides, and about the U.S. government writing blank checks (with your tax dollars) for policies that do nothing but fuel more suffering, more blowback, and more endless conflict. The same endless war logic we've seen fail over and over again.

If you're genuinely serious about justice, liberty, or any values the West is supposed to stand for, then the only morally coherent stance is this: Stop supporting collective punishment. Demand a ceasefire. Send humanitarian aid in, unimpeded. Stop treating Palestinian civilians as expendable. Call for real diplomacy instead of more bombs and more excuses. Otherwise, don't act surprised when the next round of violence comes - because as history shows (see Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria...), this kind of "solution" always begets more chaos, more enemies, and less security for everyone.

And for those quoting "Blessed are the peacemakers" - that's not just for decoration. It's a radical call to break these cycles, not perpetuate them.

---

This is a warped, perverse and immoral understanding of justice.

Again, this is no different than arguing that a murderer should go free in order to prevent the murderer's children from becoming fatherless. That is a perversion of justice. It's mindless social media pseudo compassion at its absolute worst.

---

Look, I get where you're coming from with the murderer analogyit's a gut-level kind of justice that demands punishment regardless of consequences. But that black-and-white thinking doesn't hold up when you're talking about millions of civilians trapped in a war zone, not just the guilty few.

Justice isn't about vengeance for its own sake. It's about proportionality, fairness, and protecting the innocent. Dropping collective punishment on an entire population because their government is evil doesn't make you a heroit makes you complicit in creating more hatred, more cycles of violence, and more innocent suffering.

If you really want justice, then stop cheering for policies that tear apart families, starve children, and destroy infrastructure with no clear end game except endless war. Holding people accountable is one thing. Blaming an entire population and treating them as collateral damage is something else entirelyand it's a failure of moral imagination and strategic thinking.

So yeah, call out Hamas for their crimes. But don't pretend collective punishment is justice. It's exactly the kind of pseudo-compassion that leads to more bloodshed down the road, not less.

Justice isn't delivered by firing indiscriminately, it's delivered by breaking the cycle, protecting the innocent, and demanding real solutions. If you think punishing millions for the crimes of a few is justice, then honestly, you're just indulging in a cheap version of it.

---

A collective is going to be necessarily punished in this scenario, it is unavoidable. The only question is will it be the Palestinians or the Israelis?

A ceasefire right now under the conditions that Hamas would agree to means collective punishment for Israel. Their people will suffer and die in the long run as a result. Is it unfortunate that Palestinians are suffering now? Yes. Did they help bring this upon themselves? Also yes. And because their actions over decades ultimately led to 10/7, whether they intended for them to or not, their suffering as a necessary consequence to protect Israel is the just outcome. Not asking Israel to shed more of their own innocent blood in order to appear nice and compassionate.

Don't look at this through the lens of body counts. That's a fundamental misunderstanding of justice. How many more Palestinians die than Israelis is not a relevant fact with respect to the moral question here. The question is who should bear the consequences of Hamas' actions? Because someone has to. And under your proposal it will be Israel.

---

Look, saying "someone's gotta pay" and it's either Palestinians or Israelis isn't some straightforward moral calculusit's total oversimplification and a cop-out. You're arguing that millions of civilians trapped in Gaza have no choice but to bear the consequences of Hamas's crimes because morality demands Israel not bleed more. That's a brutal zero-sum game view, but it's not justice or reason.

Justice isn't about picking a side to punish wholesale; it's about breaking cycles of violence, protecting innocents, and seeking solutions that don't doom one population to indefinite suffering. The idea that Palestinian suffering is a necessary consequence makes them collateral damage in a forever war, which morally makes anyone who supports that complicit in their misery.

And yes, Hamas's actions are barbaric and they want to drag their people down with them. But that doesn't mean Israel or the world should accept collective punishment and blockades that crush entire families, kids, and communities. That's a tactical and moral failure that fuels hatred and instabilitynot security.

If you want sustained peace and justice, you have to stop buying the logic that innocent civilians have to be punished for decades of conflict. That's not a "just outcome," it's a brutal shortcut to endless war and suffering. Demand strategies that protect human life on all sides and insist on real diplomatic solutions. Otherwise, you're part of the problem, not the solution.

---

You falling into the fallacy that Israel wants to punish civilians. If they did, they would not be going out of their way to warn civilians about incoming attacks and setting up corridors for them to flee, even when they know that by doing so, they give an advantage to Hamas.

---

Yeah, Israel does throw out warnings to civilians in Gaza before strikes. They want those warnings to show they're trying to minimize civilian deaths, which is partly true and partly messaging for international optics.

But here's the catch: Gaza is densely populated, the places they tell people to flee to are often already overcrowded and become new targets, and the options for safe movement are seriously limited by the ongoing blockade and conflict. Evacuation orders are often impossible to follow, and humanitarian groups warn they sometimes serve more to displace populations into harm's way than to actually save lives.

Plus, when warnings give advance notice, Hamas can move or hide their fighters and weapons to avoid those strikes, which complicates the military picture, but also proves the problem these warnings are not about sparing civilians outright, but about operational advantage balanced against optics.

So yes, the warnings exist, but don't mistake that for genuine protection or that Israel doesn't bear some responsibility for the catastrophic civilian suffering. It's a brutal, ugly calculus where neither side gets a moral pass, but the warnings alone don't erase the reality of massive harm to civilians trapped in the middle.

Nah. War is hell. Always has been and always will be.

Israel needs to be allowed to finish it.

Quote:

---

Real peace means protecting humans and building political reality today

---

How does that happen without Hamas being eliminated. They don't want to protect humans. They want to kill Jews. They don't want political peace. They want their people to suffer on the front pages of the NY Times so they will gain support.

You can never achieve what one side wants the opposite of.

If a man wanted to kill you so badly that he didn't care about his life, his children's lives, anybody else's life or any consequences...how are you going to stop him?

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

Infection_Ag11 said:

---

jaborch99 said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

There are always (at least) two things missing from these types of arguments.

1) A solution of what things should look like going forward.

2) An acknowledgment that Hamas wants the suffering of their people. It's their strongest weapon.

---

Alright, let's get real about this because most of these conversations leave out the stuff that actually matters.

• What should really happen going forward?
  If you think endless bombing and blockades will fix centuries of conflict, you're setting yourself up for failure. Real peace means a political solution an end to occupation, a sovereign Palestinian state, and a serious disarmament of terrorist groups like Hamas. No more cheering for one-sided violence or collective punishment. It's about mutual recognition and ensuring both sides feel secure. The puzzle's been on the table for decades, but it takes guts from leaders to make moves and that includes the international community actually putting muscle behind justice and rebuilding, not just rhetoric or weapons.
  

• Yeah, Hamas uses suffering as a weapon.
  They're brutal and cynical no question. Embedding fighters among civilians, using human shields, refusing to free hostages it's the worst kind of strategy. But falling for that tactic and then punishing millions of innocent people in response isn't smart it just fuels the hate, the anger, the next round of violence. Collective punishment isn't justice; it's revenge dressed up as policy. And revenge never ends well.

So stop spinning this like a simple good vs evil story. Real peace and justice demand facing uncomfortable truths, cutting through propaganda, and pushing for solutions that protect real people not statistics or hashtags. If you want to break the cycle, demand ceasefires, unimpeded humanitarian aid, and real diplomacy that addresses all the issues, not just the convenient talking points. Otherwise, you're just riding the same endless war hamster wheel, and everyone loses.

---

You believe that at least a sizable portion of the Palestinian population thinks like we do and operates under the same motivations, and that just isn't true.

Israel has offered Palestine a state on multiple occasions over the years, before and after Hamas. They are always turned down because a large majority of the people hate Jews more than they love anything in their lives. They hate Jews more than they love their own children in many cases. They will never agree to anything that includes a maintenance of the state of Israel.

They only want a Palestinian state if it includes an end to the Jewish state.

---

Look, the idea that every Palestinian hates Jews so much that peace is impossible is a convenient stereotype that sells well but doesn't match the whole story. Yeah, some hold brutal, hateful viewsand Hamas fosters and profits from thatbut the Palestinian population isn't some monolith of rage.

Polls over the last couple of years show support for Hamas dropping sharply in Gaza, while backing for a two-state solution and negotiation has actually increased. People want peace, stability, and a future that isn't war and siege. The problem is there's no leadership or political framework they trust to deliver that peace, thanks largely to decades of conflict, occupation, and yes, Hamas's brutality.

Sure, there are extremists who reject Israel's right to exist. But lumping millions of people into that camp ignores the nuance, hard reality, and the many Palestinians who simply want a chance to live normal lives. Hatred doesn't run that deep uniformlyand painting it that way only fuels the cycle of conflict by hardening attitudes on both sides.

If we're serious about peace, we have to stop reducing a complex population to caricatures and start pushing for political leadership and solutions that resonate with the broader Palestinian publicnot just the hardliners.

---

Every poll ever done of Palestinians shows they will never accept a Palestinian state that exists concurrently with Israel. The absolute lowest percentage I can find anywhere in 40 years worth of polling is 73%. Most are between 80 and 92%. To this day, even after all that has happened, hindsight support for October 7th is north of 60%. That means nearly two thirds of Palestinians support that action even knowing the suffering it brought to them.

Any claim that there is enough support among Palestinians for a real two state solution to happen organically is pure wishcasting. There is simply no data anywhere ever that supports that belief.

---

I'm not denying that many Palestinians have supported Hamas and rejected coexistence with Israelthose polls aren't fiction. Support has been shockingly high for the October 7 attacks and for Hamas across parts of the population, especially early on. But the story isn't that simple or static.

Recent, nuanced polling from groups like the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research shows a significant drop in support for the attacks in Gazafrom around 60-70% shortly after October 7 down to under 40% within a year. (Source) Even more telling, support for a two-state solution among Gazans has nearly doubled in that period, reaching over 60%. Meanwhile, many Palestinians want to see Hamas weakened or replaced, even if real alternatives remain scarce.

You're right that fierce opposition to Israel's existence remains strong in some quarters, especially among hardliners and in the West Bank. Yet it's crucial to recognize the division and shifts within the Palestinian public: many want security, peace, and an end to suffering, even if the political reality remains trapped.

So yeah, widespread "never accept Israel" views exist, and hatred runs deep in some circles. But painting the entire Palestinian population with that brush ignores evolving public opinion, the generational complexities, and the real appetite for a political solution that wouldn't conscript endless war as a norm.

If you want to understand where the future might break in or break down, you have to engage with this complexity not just stare down at alarming headline percentages and call it hopeless wishcasting.

sam callahan said:

---

Quote:

---

and a military campaign that disproportionately harms them.

---

By what metric?

---

The metric is painfully clear: according to multiple independent organizations tracking civilian casualties in 2024 and 2025, well over half of the deaths reported in the Gaza conflict are Palestinian civilians, including a very high percentage of women, children, and elderly. These aren't just numbers Oxfam and groups like Action on Armed Violence show Gaza's daily death rate is higher than any other recent conflict globally. The scale and scope of civilian suffering there dwarfs casualties on the Israeli side, even accounting for Hamas attacks.

Engaging with complexities is a term reserved for Internet forums, coffeehouses, and academia.

If someone has sworn to kill you and has a long uninterrupted history of attempting to do so, it's not complex.

And how does that compare to other wars?

sam callahan said:

---

Quote:

---

If you want "justice," it has to include protecting innocents along the way

---

So the Allied victory in WW2 was unjust?

Tell me the historical war that meets your standards.

---

WWII was horrific. The bombings of cities, forced expulsions, starvation, and genocide were devastating beyond measure[url=https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/military-history-and-science/casualties-world-war-ii][/url][url=https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory2/chapter/casualties-of-world-war-ii/][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties][/url][url=https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/cost-victory][/url]. Nobody's sugarcoating that.

But the key differenceand why dragging up WWII doesn't settle the argument about proportionality and morality todayis that the Allied war effort had a clear enemy state whose defeat ended the war with an eventual political reconstruction. Germany's collapse was total, but it was followed by a decades-long, multinational project to rebuild institutions, establish democracy, and restore normalcynot just continual punishment or siege.

The suffering in Gaza today is massive too, but unlike WWII, it's part of an ongoing conflict with no clear military end, no comprehensive political solution on the table, and a civilian population trapped under both a hostile ruling faction and an extended blockade. Mass civilian casualties here aren't just "unavoidable" byproducts of warthey risk cementing a cycle of violence, hatred, and desperation that's anything but just or proportional.

So yes, WWII's brutality is a harsh historical reality, but it's a vastly different context. It doesn't justify unending punitive destruction without a plan to protect civilians and build peace. That's the moral and practical argument we need to face today.

sam callahan said:

---

Quote:

---

Real peace means protecting humans and building political reality today

---

How does that happen without Hamas being eliminated. They don't want to protect humans. They want to kill Jews. They don't want political peace. They want their people to suffer on the front pages of the NY Times so they will gain support.

You can never achieve what one side wants the opposite of.

If a man wanted to kill you so badly that he didn't care about his life, his children's lives, anybody else's life or any consequences...how are you going to stop him?

---

It's true: Hamas's leadership openly rejects peace, gloats over suffering, and weaponizes tragedy for political gain. They profit from continuing violence. But the question isn't navely "how do we stop a madman who wants to kill us," but "how do we break cycles that create madmen?" Military force alone won't end it; it'll fuel the next round. That means pursuing diplomatic alternatives, humanitarian aid that isn't fully hostage to Hamas, and political solutions that protect civilians and give Palestinians a stake in order and peace.

The toughest enemies aren't beaten just by firepower they're beaten when hope replaces hate, when political solutions replace endless wars, and when innocent lives are treated as priceless, not collateral damage. That's the only realistic path to peace and justice in this conflict no illusions or soft spots, just hard, honest reality.

You've yet to make a case for how a political solution would be possible.

So while the military solution may be incredibly difficult and extremely costly, it remains the only option.

Hamstringing it and handcuffing it only prolongs the suffering.

Hope sounds pretty.

Tell me how that gets implemented. Practical real world details, not platitudes and wishful thinking.

Hope requires fertile ground and Hamas has salted the soil.

I think the biggest problem with your point of view is it relies on Western sensibilities. You project that both sides want peace. One side wants the opposite of that. That's not conjecture. They chant it, they make children's programs about it, the incentivize it, and their actions prove it time and time and time again.

sam callahan said:

---

Hope sounds pretty.

Tell me how that gets implemented. Practical real world details, not platitudes and wishful thinking.

Hope requires fertile ground and Hamas has salted the soil.

---

I get it you want practical, real-world stuff, not kumbaya platitudes. Fine. But saying "the military solution is the only option" because "hope sounds pretty" is exactly that: a lazy dodge.

Wars don't end by slogging through endless violence with no exit strategy. You want to talk about "fertile ground?" Hamas salted it, sure. Nobody's denying that. But here's the kicker: you don't fix poisoned soil by pouring more salt on it.

The political path isn't some feel-good blabberfest. It's a slow, painful grind that requires pushing regional players, supporting credible alternatives, building institution after institution, demanding serious reforms, and yes turning those "salty" conditions into something different. That's hard, messy, and frustrating. No one pretends otherwise.

But then what? Just keep bombing away forever? Watching innocent people die while you wait for some mythical total military knockout? That's not just impractical. It's insane.

The world isn't black and white. Military force alone is ineffective. If you want peace, you need to build it politically, and that means facing down harsh realities, empowering moderates (if you can find them), and holding everyone accountable including the folks who have salted the soil in the first place.

So yeah, hope without action is useless. But hope with a plan a political framework supported by international bodies, alternatives to terror, and real economic and civil progress that's the only thing with a shot at ending the nightmare.

If you want to blow off "hope" like it's some adolescent daydream, be my guest. But don't pretend endless war with no solution isn't a fantasy too just a dangerous one.

What precent of the people Gaza support Hamas and their tacticts?

I'll hang up and listen.

So not one articulable actionable item.

Got it.

I think it's clear what the lazy dodge is.

dmart90 said:

---

What precent of the people Gaza support Hamas and their tacticts?

I'll hang up and listen.

---

Almost all

And, beyond that, even their Muslim brethren look at them as unworthy trash people who, when allowed asylum, move to violently rebel against their benefactors.

Ain't nobody got time fo' that!!!

dmart90 said:

---

What precent of the people Gaza support Hamas and their tacticts?

I'll hang up and listen.

---

You want a number? Polls from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) in 2024 show Hamas support in Gaza has dropped to around 35-40% for their tactics and governance, down from peaks of 60-70% post-October 7, 2023. Support for the October 7 attacks specifically has also tanked, sitting below 40% now. Meanwhile, over 60% of Gazans back a two-state solution or negotiations for peace. These aren't my feelingsthese are data points from credible sources on the ground. But let's not kid ourselves: Hamas still has a grip because desperation, fear, and a lack of viable alternatives keep people tethered to them. That doesn't mean every Gazan is chanting for jihad. Painting them all as Hamas fanboys is lazy and ignores the reality of a population trapped between a terrorist regime and a crushing military response. If you want to know why Hamas still has any support, look at the blockade, the bombs, and the lack of a political horizonthose are the fertilizers for extremism, not some inherent Palestinian bloodlust.

sam callahan said:

---

So not one articulable actionable item.

Got it.

I think it's clear what the lazy dodge is.

---

You're calling for "actionable items" like I'm supposed to hand you a PowerPoint for Middle East peace. Alright, let's get specific.

• Ceasefire with teeth: Push for an immediate, internationally brokered ceasefire tied to Hamas releasing all hostages and Israel halting airstrikes and ground ops. Egypt, Qatar, and the UN have mediated deals before - lean on them to enforce terms, with consequences like sanctions for non-compliance.
• Controlled humanitarian aid: Set up secure aid corridors overseen by neutral third parties (not UNRWA, given the trust issues). Use tech like blockchain for transparent tracking to ensure food and medicine reach civilians, not Hamas's tunnels. Israel gets to inspect, but no blanket blockades starving kids.
• Political transition plan: Back Palestinian elections under international oversight to replace Hamas with leaders who aren't hell-bent on martyrdom. Regional players like Jordan and Saudi Arabia can fund and legitimize moderates. Israel must commit to easing settlement expansion to show good faith.
• Economic reconstruction: Channel aid into rebuilding Gaza's infrastructure - hospitals, schools, water systems - not just rubble-clearing. Tie funding to anti-terror measures to starve Hamas's recruitment pitch. The Marshall Plan worked post-WWII; a mini-version could work here.
• Long-term diplomacy: Revive two-state talks based on pre-1967 borders with land swaps, as floated in past deals like Oslo or Camp David. It's not perfect, but it's a framework both sides have flirted with. Pressure the US govt to stop vetoing UN resolutions that hold both sides accountable.

This isn't wishful thinking - it's a framework rooted in what's been tried, what's worked elsewhere, and what's realistic if the world stops shrugging. Hamas thrives in chaos; starve them of it by giving people a reason to reject them. Bombing alone hasn't worked in 20 months - why double down on failure? Your "military solution only" stance isn't tough; it's a recipe for more bodies and more blowback. Step up and demand better.

BigRobSA said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

What precent of the people Gaza support Hamas and their tacticts?

I'll hang up and listen.

---

Almost all

And, beyond that, even their Muslim brethren look at them as unworthy trash people who, when allowed asylum, move to violently rebel against their benefactors.

Ain't nobody got time fo' that!!!

---

"Almost all"? Nope. Polls (I linked one somewhere above) show Hamas support in Gaza at 35-40%. Even accounting for their October 7 attacks, support for that specific action is under 40% now. People aren't mindless drones cheering for terror - many are desperate, trapped, and see no way out. Writing them off as "unworthy trash" is the kind of dehumanizing nonsense that keeps this cycle spinning.

And the "Muslim brethren"? Egypt, Jordan, and others aren't exactly rolling out the red carpet, but that's politics, not some universal Arab disdain. They've got their own problems and don't want Hamas's chaos spilling over. But don't pretend Palestinians are just a monolith of rebels - most want a normal life, not martyrdom.

If you think dismissing millions as "trash" who deserve whatever they get solves anything, you're not thinking -you're just yelling. The real move is cutting off Hamas's oxygen: give people a political and economic alternative so they stop seeing terror as their only voice. Anything less is just posturing while the blood keeps flowing.

Hamas and 10/7 had widespread support until Israel went in and wrecked their ****. They've supported terrorism for decades because it didn't come with real, lasting consequences, but now that it finally hurts all of a sudden they don't like it.

jaborch99 said:

---

sam callahan said:

---

So not one articulable actionable item.

Got it.

I think it's clear what the lazy dodge is.

---

You're calling for "actionable items" like I'm supposed to hand you a PowerPoint for Middle East peace. Alright, let's get specific.

• Ceasefire with teeth: Push for an immediate, internationally brokered ceasefire tied to Hamas releasing all hostages and Israel halting airstrikes and ground ops. Egypt, Qatar, and the UN have mediated deals before - lean on them to enforce terms, with consequences like sanctions for non-compliance.
• Controlled humanitarian aid: Set up secure aid corridors overseen by neutral third parties (not UNRWA, given the trust issues). Use tech like blockchain for transparent tracking to ensure food and medicine reach civilians, not Hamas's tunnels. Israel gets to inspect, but no blanket blockades starving kids.
• Political transition plan: Back Palestinian elections under international oversight to replace Hamas with leaders who aren't hell-bent on martyrdom. Regional players like Jordan and Saudi Arabia can fund and legitimize moderates. Israel must commit to easing settlement expansion to show good faith.
• Economic reconstruction: Channel aid into rebuilding Gaza's infrastructure - hospitals, schools, water systems - not just rubble-clearing. Tie funding to anti-terror measures to starve Hamas's recruitment pitch. The Marshall Plan worked post-WWII; a mini-version could work here.
• Long-term diplomacy: Revive two-state talks based on pre-1967 borders with land swaps, as floated in past deals like Oslo or Camp David. It's not perfect, but it's a framework both sides have flirted with. Pressure the US govt to stop vetoing UN resolutions that hold both sides accountable.

This isn't wishful thinking - it's a framework rooted in what's been tried, what's worked elsewhere, and what's realistic if the world stops shrugging. Hamas thrives in chaos; starve them of it by giving people a reason to reject them. Bombing alone hasn't worked in 20 months - why double down on failure? Your "military solution only" stance isn't tough; it's a recipe for more bodies and more blowback. Step up and demand better.

---

1) Hamas has refused any ceasefire that doesn't leave them in power and has conditioned full release of all of the hostages on Israel also releasing thousands of Hamas militants back into Gaza. Any cease fire that leaves Hamas in power in Gaza and strengthens them by adding thousands to their numbers is a non-starter with Israel. Any cease fire has to include Hamas disarmed and out of power in Gaza. No peace broker exists who can deliver that.

2) There is no such "neutral third party" in position to execute this one. Israel can't go back to letting aid in with weapons in it or that immediately gets diverted to Hamas. If Hamas still exists, the aid will have to be defended by military force.

3) No problem with this one. Gaza needs a stable government that is not Hamas or otherwise Iranian backed.

4) Reconstruction is great and needs to happen, but should be funded largely by the Gulf states that funded much of the terrorism against Israel. Supplied need to be overseen by Israel to make sure they are not diverted to rebuilding tunnels or rockets like concrete and water pipes were in the past.

5) Israel has given up a lot of territory and has been slapped in the face with rockets and suicide bombs for their trouble. Expecting them to give up strategic high ground like the Golan Heights with an Islamic extremist junta ruling Syria is a non-starter. The Palestinians need to accept that they are negotiating from a position of weakness and take what they can get without making land grab demands that will scuttle any possible deal.

Bottom line is that all of this is delusional hopium fueled dreams until Hamas is forcibly disarmed or agrees to lay down their arms and walk away. As long as Hamas stays in power as a military opponent in Gaza, none of the above has any hope of coming to pass.

jaborch99 said:

---

dmart90 said:

---

What precent of the people Gaza support Hamas and their tacticts?

I'll hang up and listen.

---

You want a number? Polls from the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) in 2024 show Hamas support in Gaza has dropped to around 35-40% for their tactics and governance, down from peaks of 60-70% post-October 7, 2023. Support for the October 7 attacks specifically has also tanked, sitting below 40% now. Meanwhile, over 60% of Gazans back a two-state solution or negotiations for peace. These aren't my feelingsthese are data points from credible sources on the ground. But let's not kid ourselves: Hamas still has a grip because desperation, fear, and a lack of viable alternatives keep people tethered to them. That doesn't mean every Gazan is chanting for jihad. Painting them all as Hamas fanboys is lazy and ignores the reality of a population trapped between a terrorist regime and a crushing military response. If you want to know why Hamas still has any support, look at the blockade, the bombs, and the lack of a political horizonthose are the fertilizers for extremism, not some inherent Palestinian bloodlust.

---

Even if this was true. I don't care. Israel has every right to protect its citizens. Palestinians should have been more careful about who they elect and allow to keep in power. They are FAFO for that idiocy.

Gallup poll. 9% of Americans 18-34 support Israel's actions in Gaza.

According to Bannon, among MAGA under 30, there is very little support for Israel.

We may soon conclude that Netanyahu was able to maintain his power, but at the expense of the loss of world opinion and America's support. "Win" the battle, lose the war.

https://archive.is/9raio

People under the age of 30 were propagandized by academia.

Anybody who cannot see who the obvious bad guy is here should lose their entitlement to vote, as they are incapable of rational thought.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Hamas and 10/7 had widespread support until Israel went in and wrecked their ****. They've supported terrorism for decades because it didn't come with real, lasting consequences, but now that it finally hurts all of a sudden they don't like it.

---

This is 100% correct.

Here's the simple truth - most of the countries around the world (including us) have shown they are not interested in really solving this problem. The world has sent BILLIONS in aid to Gaza.

Quote:

---

From 2014-2020, U.N. agencies spent nearly $4.5 billion in Gaza, including $600 million in 2020 alone. More than 80% of that funding is channeled through the U.N. agency for Palestinian refugees, who make up three-fourths of Gaza's population. Some 280,000 children in Gaza attend schools run by UNRWA, which also provides health services and food aid.

---

Here's the AP article with more info:
https://apnews.com/article/business-middle-east-israel-foreign-aid-gaza-strip-611b2b90c3a211f21185d59f4fae6a90

Over the last 20 years, estimates are that more than $40 BILLION has been sent, in aid, from around the world. Where has all the money gone? Tunnels and bombs to terrorize Israel. How much private money has been raised to support "the cause"?

Since 1997, the US has considered Hamas a terrorist organization. Hamas won the 2006 Palestinian legislative elections and assumed administrative control of Gaza Strip and West Bank. THEY ELECTED A TERRORIST ORGANIZATION to run their government.

"Exiled" Hamas leadership has lived, high ff the hog, in London, Paris, and other cities around the world. Even though everyone knew that:

• They were part of a terrorist organization
• They were raising money for said terrorist organization.

If the rest of the world was serious about solving this problem - they would have acted very differently. But now that Israel is crushing them - and rightfully so - people are up in arms.

Come on, man.

Quote:

---

According to Bannon, among MAGA under 30, there is very little support for Israel.

---

Well according to President Trump, Bannon has lost his mind and doesn't know jack. So excuse me for not caring what a Lib says about Bannon's take on what MAGA supports.


The entire Arab world is calling for the Hamas terrorists to end this war. That is unprecedented. Yet we still have American Libs and the Fake Right Podcaster brigade on the pro-terrorist side. Crazy times!

And you have two contradicting strains here:

1) There is no starvation at all. It's all fake news.

2) Let them keep starving.

You all need to try and stay on the same page for your message to be effective.

And yes, Trump said that starvation is real and happening. But everyone knows (including his supporters) you can't trust a single word that comes from his mouth.

Yep. The problem is that the world has assumed palestinians' propensity for violence is driven by poverty or oppression. It's not. They're just hateful, spiteful people. Probably why the far left latches onto them so well despite all the homophobia, misogyny, xenophobia, etc. Regardless, they treat gaza like a liberal parent treats a child: They validate their feelings, tell them they can do no wrong and their bad behavior is justified, and then try to mollify them. Then they're shocked when their kid remains a little ****.

All the billions of dollars and millions of pounds of food and supplies have some nothing to change opinion or attitudes there. They remained hell bent on the murder of all Jews and the destruction of Israel regardless of whatever they were given and however easy their lives were made. What finally started changing things? An ass whooping instead of a coddling. Discipline can sometimes be an ugly thing, but sometimes it's necessary to get the message through: Accept the two state solution, drop the terrorism, and move on, or else.