I am genuinely curious. If we can agree that Hamas and Palestine will need to make changes so as to put it aside for a second, what is it that Israel needs to change?

This is something I want to know more about. I've heard that a number of plans for peace made it very far, only for Hamas to back out and reject the plan at the end. I wonder what their rationale was/is.

Do you think people that voted that government in are complicit?

Israel's right to exist and acknowledgement of Jerusalem as the capital is so fundamental in this equation that nothing will work if this isn't the base of the agreement.

For example, let's say Israel today is ready to say yes to a 2-state solution. You know what it means to be a state right? You have the right to control your borders, you have the right to trade and do whatever you want with your neighbors, etc. So in theory once Israel ceases to control Gaza/West bank borders, Iran & other Jew haters can flood the region with weapons if Palestine is willing. Palestinians have to basically have a resounding and clear show that this won't happen with the surrounding Muslims being guarantors. But how do you expect this to happen when literally 28 muslim countries refuse to acknowledge their right as a country?

Why would Israel expose themselves like that? The ball has been in the Muslims & Palestinians court for quiet a while. So many of us want to completely ignore this fact.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Oct 16 2023 02:21pm

Not all, thus it's hard to know exactly how much are truely supporting the whole process of "self fuelled terrorism": I guess many are just afraid (fear is strong, especially for those living inthere), badly informed, or "brainwashed" (victimization, religion...).

Nice double standards.

You fell for it.

It's a difficult situation as an outsider, I think. Because on one hand you have legitimate concerns raised by the Palestinians and they clearly identify specific actions taken by Israel that are a direct cause of suffering (ie. the blockades, the illegal settlements, etc.). And then Israel has valid concerns because Hamas is not simply advocating for a two-state solution, but rather wants to eliminate Israel as a whole and return to the borders of a 'historical Palestine' or may concede to go with the 1967 borders, but that likely is only out of a desire for pragmatism rather than making peace with the 1967 borders. Meaning that it gives them greater autonomy, resources, and proximity for the continuation of Jihad.

I would venture a guess that most Palestinian civilians would be open to the 1967 borders so long as Israel also makes needed changes; however, there's likely the extremists among them who would reject that plan. These are the same people most predisposed to use of violence, and now Palestinian civilians find themselves caught between Israel and Hamas.

Hamas cannot draw support from a population that has a stable life, Hamas must bomb israel to draw israeli bombing in return. they need to be bombed to keep the attention on Israel. they need the people to believe that it is only Israel's fault they can't leave, they can't build up, etc.

to the people of Gaza, because of Hamas propaganda, they only reason they're stuck with no support is Israeli hate.

Gaza may be a prison, but Hamas are the guards, not the IDF.

That kind of goes to the 'security guarantee' part of the equation. It used to be somewhat branched off and counted as a separate issue, but its part of both the "Israel's right to exist" and "Palestines right to sovereignty" at the same time. The idea that for Israel to agree to a two-state solution, they must be guaranteed Palestine won't arm itself as a hostile power on its doorstep from its Arab allies- but for Palestine to exist as a sovereign entity it has to have a right to its own security and policing and even a plausible standing army. The two state solution was always such a pipedream that the minutia were never worked out but supposedly it could have emulated post WW2 Japan with Israel having an oversight of Palestinian arms but allowing them to grow eventually into their own power again.

This is the issue that got completely thrown out the window, lit on fire, shot and poisoned and exposed to a cosmic gamma ray burst isolated entirely in a beam aimed directly at its forehead. There is no imaginable world in the next century where Israel could possibly agree to any Palestinian entity existing with its own force of arms on Israel's doorstep. Until last week, Israel's qualms over the militancy of Palestinians was largely theoretical. That is to say, they've had terrorist attacks, low level shootings and car rammings and widescale barrages of impotent rockets, they've had historical wars, but the idea that a Palestinian army could pose an existential threat to them instead of just being a relative nuisance- that was just the predictions of doomsayers. Who turned out to be right.

Imagine the dumbfucks unable to properly make a difference in-between: