“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.”
“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.”
This is just analyst opinions. The New Yorker actually interviewed a Hamas leader and got them on the record. He claimed that Israel left them no choice; non violent protests had failed and asking the UN for help failed, and moderate voices were ignored by Israel, meaning only violence was left.
Thanks for pointing that out, I linked and quoted it below.
No choice but to build a future with billions of dollars of yearly aid.
In a country with one of the highest population per square kilometer, that is under a full embargo, can’t govern themselves, can’t import concrete, wood and other essential materials, which had a 50% unemployed rate.
Gaza wasn’t a paradise sitting on aid money, it wasn’t a developing country that needed some help, it was an open air prison.
750M of aid per year just from the UNWRA. Billions more in aid dedicated to specific tasks (like the EU’s water pipeline project). And the government that was planning to execute an offensive war couldn’t build even one public bomb shelter?
Citation needed.
You’re correct it’s 750M not billion. Phone typo on my part.
this explanation for the motive and the intentions described in the article are not mutually exclusive things