Hamas strike on Israel - Threadbans in op - mod warning in OP updated 19/10/23

There is not just a binary choice between, Palestinians just accepting their lot in life on one hand and then fighting a war, through violence that don't and can never hope of winning.

There is a choice inbetween Jihad/Hamas and just giving up.

But what they do need to do is give up on violence. Giving up on violence is not giving up.

Why should they give up the violence when they are met with violence from settlers at all times?

Land/houses stolen from them all under the protection of the IDF.

Kids snatched by THE IDF and held for months without trial.

Innocent people killed by settlers again all under the watchful eye and protection from the IDF.

Can't fish for a living, can't farm for a living, can't walk down a fùcking street becasome IDF guy has decided that this week Palestinians are banned from there.

Yes Hamas should give up the violence but for them to do that Israel needs to make concessions too, as well saw with the peace process in NI it wasn't an overnight thing, BOTH SIDES need to start talking, BOTH SIDES need to stop the killing because there will never be peace until BOTH SIDES make concessions and recognise that BOTH SIDES have the right to a land they can call their own.

The non violent route in the west Bank is definitely not working. Is a slow death of any possibility of Palestinian statehood

Israel defends itself when attacked.

If you look at all the wars it has faced, they have always been initiated by other parties and belligerent.

That is why fighting a war or using violence against Israel is stupid. It has always failed, so why continue?

Hamas and the PLO/PLA should take note. 75 years of failure, time to move on.

Thanks for the links as they back my claim.

Your links show that there was violence before Ghandi and after Ghandi. But for the most part, India's independence movement led by Gandhi was achieved using non-violent means, hence why he is so revered.

It is kind of odd, that there are so many of you wanting to paint Ghandi as violent while supporting violence used by Palestinians (its the only thing they have left you say), but decrying violence from Israel.

Another bit of hypocrisy.

If you want me to lay out a detailed white paper on how non-violence is going to solve all issues for Palestinians, I am not going to do that for you, as I can't.

But one thing is true.

Their strategy for the past 75 years of using armed struggle and violence has failed. This is a fact. So perhaps they need to try something new and look beyond violence.

If the only retort to that is, well violence is the only thing they have left, then you just admit that the Palestinians have no future.

See above.

Armed struggle and violence have failed.

They need to drop the antisemitism, hate, guns and rockets.

Only hope for the future and the future of their children.

I have never made that argument. Please quote me.

What I am saying is that on any rational, logical or objective measure, Palestinian and Arab violence towards Israel has been a disaster. It is self-evident.

For example, the war could be over in one hour, if Hamas surrender and release all the hostages. It is that simple.

I think that the figures are now that just under 700 civilians died on October 7th. About 1200 Israelis in total. Obviously the number should have been zero. It is posited on here many times that such figures warrant and excuse the subsequent actions and killings by Israel in Gaza.

I think it is fair enough for someone to have that opinion if they want. All I'd ask for them is to be consistent. Lets ignore the fact that some of the people killed on that day were killed by "friendly fire" either through confusion or chaos, or as a result of the Hannibal Directive, and instead attribute all of them to Hamas.

Now, the thing is, to get 1000+ Palestinians killed by the IDF before 7th October, you only have to go back 3-4 years. So my obvious question for those excusing and justifying IDF action in killing tens of thousands since Oct 7th is what would the 1000+ Palestinians killed in the 3-4 years leading up to that day justify for Hamas? My position is that I don't think either justifies any more killing. But there are many who think it justifies for one side only and not the other.

The playing pitch (for want of a better term) is not level. There is no way that the likes of Hamas could have sustained a 3-4 year long campaign killing Israelis at the same rate that Israelis were killing Palestinians. Is your issue, vis-a-vis "how they chose to fight", predicated on the fact that they did it in one day rather than over time? I don't see how spreading the killings over time really make that much of a difference. If the most salient issue is the murder of the 1000+ people (which I think it should be) then shouldn't the same apply to the 1000+ Palestinans killed leading up to it.

The thing is that I only took the 3-4 years immediately preceding Oct 7th so that the numbers would be around the same. Once you start including 4/5/6/7 years etc, then you begin to dwarf the Oct 7th number in any case.