The BBC has seen and heard evidence of rape, sexual violence and mutilation of women during the 7 October Hamas attacks.
WARNING: CONTAINS EXTREMELY GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE AND RAPE
The BBC has seen and heard evidence of rape, sexual violence and mutilation of women during the 7 October Hamas attacks.
WARNING: CONTAINS EXTREMELY GRAPHIC DESCRIPTIONS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE AND RAPE
Kind of throws a monkey wrench in the whole “Just leave Gaza” mentality you see so often.
I mean, everyone hates Hamas but it’s a scooch more complex than that. I don’t think “leaving” Gaza involves a 16 year blockade and control over their electricity, water, and telecommunications. And it ignores the West Bank.
I’m not siding with fucking Hamas but everyone reducing this to the atrocities on Oct. 7 had better be under 25. It’s annoying the fuck out of the old people who remember a time before Rihanna and the MCU.
Hamas had money to make significant changes in infrastructure and they spent that money arming themselves.
Since that didn’t happen, I think getting that put together is basically the bare minimum Israel can do after leveling the country. “you break it, you fix it” should be an absolute minimum standard here.
I’ve supported a 2 state solution since I was old enough to learn about this in the early 90s.
I’m starting to think funneling money meant for Gaza through Hamas was a bad idea. I wonder what idiot prime minister of Israel made that decision in order to weaken the Palestinian Authority. https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/
You seem to be wanting to have an argument and I’m not sure why?
I apologize, I wasn’t intending to argue with you. The tone didn’t come through how I intended.
I’m frustrated by seeing the same simplistic debates over and over again but you didn’t make one of those arguments. I was just on a rant.
I think it is still more complex than that.
Under a two state solution (and where we assume that Palestine was able to stand up infrastructure and weren’t dependent on Israel or Egypt or whoever else): Hamas would likely be their government. They have been the de facto and de jure leadership of Gaza since the mid 2000s and were a very strong force going back to the 90s. And while there are a LOT of indications that they largely accomplished that through back channel support by Israel (push out the less radical PLO), they also received support from other Arab nations who would prefer Israel to not exist.
And you don’t need to be in an open air concentration camp to foster evil like this. Hamas were straight up using ISIS/ISIL “tactics” with their systematic gangrape and mutilation of women and civilians. You can argue that the Islamic State came to power because of Russian (and later US/Coalition) meddling, but it is worth remembering they were specifically founded to engage in assassinations and ethnic cleansing of Shia muslims.
And speculation is that Iran are supporting the Islamic State and that Iran supported Hamas in these attacks.
Under a two state solution? I think the border would have been more fortified. But raids are a thing and the IDF already treated the perimeter around Gaza like a military crossing.
It is undeniable that Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians nurtured an environment in which young men would radicalize. But we have seen this same kind of radicalization in nations that Israel hasn’t touched in decades (or ever). And most of the “tactics” and players are the same, regardless of which city they are based in.
So I guess I don’t think things would change. We would still have the IDF bombing Palestine into non-existence over claims of stopping Hamas. We probably would have less pushback (it is not Israel’s responsibility to provide fuel and power to a sovereign country) but the events of the past month or so would likely be playing out the same. In large part because any attempts to pretend the 7th had anything to do with Palestinian Independence are ignoring what Hamas actually is.
This isn’t speculation so much as straight up fact.
Absolutely agreed.
While I think a lot of our “what ifs” (even though I agree with you) are ultimately meaningless, I think the value of this right here cannot be overstressed.
Israel had no responsibility to provide power or water to Gaza, full stop. They certainly had no responsibility to provide it once they’d declared war. Palestine being a fully independent country ideally would have put unique pressure on Hamas from existing allies (read: Iran) to actually feed, provide water/power for, and even seek investment (though, obviously, hostile Iranian investment).
From a purely humanitarian standpoint, I see this as an absolute win. Whether it would have truly helped, who knows. My money is where yours is, on no, it wouldn’t have helped.
Please note: Had Israel, “Just left Gaza”, anytime in the past forty Years, Oct. 7th would never have happened. Sadly despite all the claims of having pulled out of Gaza and the West Bank, all they really did was withdraw the troops from their Concentration Camps.
I very strongly disagree with this. Israel had completely pulled out of Gaza years before Oct 7
False. They still controlled all movement in and out, and all imports/exports. At no point did they do anything but pull their soldiers out of their concentration camps.
So like, leaving Gaza.
Also Gaza isn’t a concentration camp. It’s a nation that is distrusted by all of its neighbors for sponsoring terrorism.
No amount of weird hyperbole is going to make you correct here.