domain:nature.com
Arnaud
23hr ago
Then your definition of victory is narrow and unsuited to this conflict, or any other of the many interminable conflicts that clutter up the history books, there are kinds of victory other than those which are absolute or permanent.
Degrading or destroying Hamas reduces the danger posed by Gaza substantially, the remaining population can be as unruly as they like, if they lack the equipment, networks or know-how of how to turn ther discontent into military force then they simply are not a threat, not in the short to medium term at least. Sure they might eventually overcome these shortcomings and become an actual threat again in the long term, but in the meantime Israel can enjoy peace and security, which is absolutely a win.
This all assumes that the Gazans decide that yes, they really are going to learn nothing from this whole experience and just repeat the exact same mistakes that lead to them being bombed flat for 0 gain, which I really don't think is guaranteed. Yes the Gazans aren't going to come out of this experience overflowing with love for Israel, but I can't imagine they'll be very happy with Hamas either, or anyone who has the really bright idea of triggering an unwinnable war over what amounted to a very violent PR stunt. By all accounts Palestinians before the war had a delusional perspective on the conflict and their chances of victory against Israel, vastly overestimating their own population and vastly underestimating that of the Israelis, there is a chance that this conflict might knock some sense into them.
You are implying the people in question were simply deranged and hated jews for being jews. Which is a sort of backhanded otherization rhetoric that would not fly in any other context. Most principally for being an obvious lie. But also for just being silly. Denying others a theory of mind to make your case just means you don't have a case.
Historically, this is just not true. And more pertinent to the topic, sometimes it's not their own nation that's doing the deciding. Acting like the predicament many jews found themselves in during WW2 is any worse than that of many civilians in the aforementioned nations is invalid.
You can't both be a citizen and also exempt from service to the nation if the concept of a national is supposed to hold any relevance. This rings especially loud after decades of diversity propaganda where everyone is touted as an equal national. If your alleged co-nationals are hoarding passports they certainly do have a different view on the nation and their membership. If you want to verbalize recognition for that fact using hyperbolic thought ending rhetoric... fine. But you are certainly not looking for rational discourse when doing so.
More options
Context Copy link