So, there's only one solution: demographic replacement through colonization. The only way to do that in an ethical way is... there isn't one. However, the only way to do that in a plausibly deniable way is to promote self-deportation. That means making living in Gaza impossible, and living literally anywhere else inviting. Israel isn't just trying to push them into Europe, they're trying to push them to literally anyone that will take them, and by any means necessary.
And yet, Hamas is an Israel-created problem, as if Britain had funded the IRA and ensured its competition with more moderate factions.
"The most heavily-defended border in the world" was also overwhelmed by an intrusion of paragliders, motorcycles, and bulldozers lasting over six hours without a meaningful response.
How interesting that the confluence of these factors has permanently closed the window to the two-state solution, precipitating, if you will, a "final solution" to the Gaza dilemma.
And yet, Hamas is an Israel-created problem, as if Britain had funded the IRA and ensured its competition with more moderate factions.
That doesn't change any aspect of the problem. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the IRA got funding from the Labour Party.
"The most heavily-defended border in the world" was also overwhelmed by an intrusion of paragliders, motorcycles, and bulldozers lasting over six hours without a meaningful response.
Don't underestimate your enemies when you have static defenses. You should read about the Yom Kippur War.
How interesting that the confluence of these factors has permanently closed the window to the two-state solution, precipitating, if you will, a "final solution" to the Gaza dilemma.
It's not a confluence of factors, it's a choice. The Israeli Left would probably be happy to let terror attacks and Hamas continue for their own purposes.
Again, just because someone could benefit doesn't mean the entire organization exists at the sole behest of the beneficiary.
It's not a confluence of factors, it's a choice. The Israeli Left would probably be happy to let terror attacks and Hamas continue for their own purposes.
The allegation is not that Israel ordered Hamas, but instead allowed the attack to gestate and take place, therefore obtaining the cri de couer to take care of the Gazan problem, which was why they funded Hamas in the first place.
And yet, Hamas is an Israel-created problem, as if Britain had funded the IRA and ensured its competition with more moderate factions.
"The most heavily-defended border in the world" was also overwhelmed by an intrusion of paragliders, motorcycles, and bulldozers lasting over six hours without a meaningful response.
How interesting that the confluence of these factors has permanently closed the window to the two-state solution, precipitating, if you will, a "final solution" to the Gaza dilemma.
That doesn't change any aspect of the problem. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the IRA got funding from the Labour Party.
Don't underestimate your enemies when you have static defenses. You should read about the Yom Kippur War.
It's not a confluence of factors, it's a choice. The Israeli Left would probably be happy to let terror attacks and Hamas continue for their own purposes.
Again, just because someone could benefit doesn't mean the entire organization exists at the sole behest of the beneficiary.
Well, there you go.
That is not the same as "Israel ordered Hamas to preform an attack on itself to justify a war".
Everybody in the MENA area is benefitting the perpetual conflict. That's why it's allowed to go on.
The allegation is not that Israel ordered Hamas, but instead allowed the attack to gestate and take place, therefore obtaining the cri de couer to take care of the Gazan problem, which was why they funded Hamas in the first place.