“Hamas’s broader plan [was] one that analysts say was intended not just to kill and capture Israelis, but to spark a conflagration that would sweep the region and lead to a wider conflict.”

  • dumdum666@kbin.social
    152·
    1 year ago

    “It’s the first time I can remember that Hamas has become so prominent on a global scale,” Katz said. “So many people have already forgotten Oct. 7 because Hamas immediately changed the discussion. It put the focus on Israel, not themselves. And that’s exactly what they wanted.”

    • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
      156·
      1 year ago

      LOL Hamas didn’t change the discussion, Israel did. I came into the news on Oct 07 with “Fucking Hamas” vibes, but that very quickly changed to, “Wow OK, Israel isn’t fucking around.” then “Woah Israel OK, maybe use a little more care there, I get that you were attacked but – WOAH ISRAEL WTF ARE YOU DOING?”

      https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-was-hamas-thinking

      As recently as 2020, Hamas committed to participate in Palestinian national elections; this plan fell apart not because of Hamas but because of the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, whose leaders denounced Israel’s refusal to allow elections in East Jerusalem.

      Had these apparent gestures of compromise all been part of a ruse to buy time while Hamas prepared a brutal assault? Abu Marzouk insisted that these efforts at negotiation and coexistence had been genuine. He blamed Israel and the Western powers for thwarting Hamas’s overtures. He told us, “We rolled down all of the pathways to get some of our rights—not all of them. We knocked on the door of reconciliation and we weren’t allowed in. We knocked on the door of elections and we were deprived of them. We knocked on the door of a political document for the whole world—we said, ‘We want peace, but give us some of our rights’—but they didn’t let us in.” He added, “We tried every path. We didn’t find one political path to take us out of this morass and free us from occupation.”

      There is some evidence to support Abu Marzouk’s narrative. In recent years, Hamas had appeared willing to coexist with the Jewish state. But, as Abu Marzouk acknowledged to us, Hamas also never abandoned core demands such as full Palestinian independence and the right of all Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland. Nor did the group relinquish its weapons. “But we didn’t mislead anyone,” he told us. “We never hid these slogans.”

      • dumdum666@kbin.social
        1515·
        1 year ago

        Never read such bullshit before - those whiny ass Hamas bitches justifying butchering all those civilians.

        • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldEnglish
          98·
          1 year ago

          If you were Hamas, what would you have done differently to obtain rights and privileges for the Palestinian people?

              • dumdum666@kbin.social
                41·
                1 year ago

                So are you honestly pretending that Hamas didn’t send hundreds of suicide bombers into Israel before the blockade by Israel was imposed? This blockade was in return protested against by Hamas backed Protesters and those protests turned violent often.

                The primary reason for the blockade is Hamas, so that the terror organization doesn’t get even more weapons than it already has.

                Would YOU let a terror organization in your backyard gain access to weapons and military equipment that has vowed to wipe you and your people of the face of the earth?

                And since you asked: No, I would never turn my anger outward like that. Never.

                • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  32·
                  1 year ago

                  The motivations and methods of Hamas does not negate the fact that a peaceful protest March did take place. Meaning, the people of Palestine have tried peace. They were shot and maimed, even children. Let me ask you, if all 2.2 million Palestinians declared themselves Hamas, would you advocate for wiping them out?

                  • dumdum666@kbin.social
                    22·
                    1 year ago

                    You don’t even try to have a discussion and are not answering questions. Your Strawman arguments are quite lame.

                    You only want to paint the picture that poor Hamas had no other choice but to maim and kill civilians.

                    I end this „discussion“ at this point

          • thrawn@lemmy.worldEnglish
            84·
            1 year ago

            Lemmy is the only place where I see people being like “butchering civilians is okay as long as it was done to further their goal”. It’s real weird to see that kind of rhetoric not only accepted but upvoted.

            I’m sure if I hung out on the extremist right sites, there would be that kind of stuff about Israel. That’s kind of the thing though, it’s really starting to feel like Lemmy is an extremist place and I could see it petering out because of that.

            I feel like part of a shrinking minority that’s not cool with mass killing civilians no matter what. I’m a strong supporter for an independent Palestine but I don’t see how killing civilians is leading to that. To me it seems like that only gave Israel the opportunity to unleash massive violence of their own, and they’re clearly far better at it.

            I know a lot of you don’t see violence or violent rhetoric as taboo, and I guess I’m not really trying to get you to stop saying it. It’s just kind of sad to see, and I do think it’ll turn Lemmy into one of those sites regular people avoid because it’s too extreme. I don’t even know why I typed this comment, perhaps I don’t like the way Lemmy is sliding and felt the need to comment on it while it’s still in that early stage Voat feel.

            • electric_nan@lemmy.mlEnglish
              01·
              1 year ago

              I think a lot of people don’t think it’s good or OK, but more like: “what did Israel fucking expect?”. It is what it is. It seems hypocritical to act so offended when Hamas kills a thousand Israelis, when my country happily pays Israel to kill multiples of that number of Palestinians.

            • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
              53·
              1 year ago

              Lemmy is the only place where I see people being like “butchering civilians is okay as long as it was done to further their goal”. It’s real weird to see that kind of rhetoric not only accepted but upvoted.

              Understanding why Hamas might feel they are justified isn’t the same as thinking it’s OK. I don’t condone what Hamas did - but I absolutely condemn how far Israel is going in response.

              I also object to the idea that wanting Israel to stop is akin to antisemitism.

              • thrawn@lemmy.worldEnglish
                62·
                1 year ago

                The comment I responded to was basically “what else could they have done?” To most people that’s condoning.

                And the logic of “they feel it’s justified” could be extended to Israel as well. It’s clear that a lot of people think that Hamas butchering civilians means Israel can too. Doesn’t make it right either.

                And well, why don’t you condemn just as strongly Hamas’s killings, or understand why Israel might feel they’re justified? That’s kind of what I mean— there’s these little slants, as if to say “at least they’re not the other side”.

                Call me sensitive or whatever but I don’t like the violent undertones I get here (not your comment, Lemmy in general). Repeating Hamas’s justifications for slaughter is no better than repeating Israel’s, and imo drags down the general quality of any discussion

                • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
                  21·
                  1 year ago

                  Fair enough but I’ll keep my reply short for now -

                  We all know agree that Hamas are terrorists. Of course I condemn the attack, but I don’t expect terrorists to behave in a way I’m happy with.

                  But Israel holds far more power and has more options. They are the vastly superior entity by every metric. They are also a member of the United Nations, and can reasonably be expected to conduct themselves better than acknowledged terrorist groups. Israel had a great justification to respond to the attack. They don’t have a justification for going as far as they are.

                  Quoting myself from earlier -

                  Hamas didn’t change the discussion, Israel did. I came into the news on Oct 07 with “Fucking Hamas” vibes, but that very quickly changed to, “Wow OK, Israel isn’t fucking around.” then “Woah Israel OK, maybe use a little more care there, I get that you were attacked but – WOAH ISRAEL WTF ARE YOU DOING?”

                  • Whimsical@lemmy.worldEnglish
                    2·
                    1 year ago

                    Yeah, that about hits my opinion, too.

                    “Israel has the right to defend itself”, but their actions fly far in excess of defense at this point.

            • TokenBoomer@lemmy.worldEnglish
              24·
              1 year ago

              I think it’s what you are seeing. Most people on Lemmy.world don’t post or comment with regularity. The ones that are more vocal tend to be more extreme. From my observations, the extreme rhetoric is the minority. To contrast, go to r/worldnews on Reddit. This place is tame in comparison.