They aren't a threat anymore? One of the major complaints from the people shooting civilians with fighter jets is that Hamas had rocks stockpiled.
Don't be ridiculous. Hamas even has their own rocket production facilities nowadays, according to themselves. They even bragged about that they now have the Ayyash missile, with 250km range, enough to hit targets everywhere in Israel, and that they have more underground tunnels than the communists had in the Vietnam war.
3500 missiles were fired at Israel so far. 90% were intercepted by the iron dome (impressive). If they hadn't been intercepted, let's just interpolate and say that the death toll in Israel would have been 120, not 12. Not so very assymetrical, especially considering that Israel at least tries to hit military targets, with sadly many civilian collateral. Hamas doesn't warn where they are going to strike. Hamas does 'encourage' it's civilians to stay despite warning and be meatshields.
Don't get me wrong.
I oppose Israeli settlement behaviour.
I oppose extreme religious right zionism (and islamism for that matter).
I am saddened by the segregation of the Gaza. But cannot see any other way (except for the termination of Hamas, and those that create it) at this time to defend Israeli civilians from (suicide) attacks sponsored by extremists who want to drive every last jew from Israel into the ocean, such as happened before the segregation.
I can understand (and even support) peaceful protest against all of those, from humanitarian perspective.
I can agree that Israeli police using stun grenades and rubber bullets against rioters throwing rocks, molotovs and fireworks is a bit excessive (hey, Israeli police, learn from us Dutch and just use a water cannon).
I cannot however accept Hamas firing military grade missiles in response to Israeli police using non-lethal force (said stun grenades and rubber bullets) to disperse not-so peaceful protesters, even if they do hide in front of a mosque (imagine: if some football hooligan rioters were to retreat to church grounds somewhere in Europe, throwing bottles and fireworks at the police, and the police dispersed them using water cannons and batons.. Would we say 'the police attacked a church' or would we say 'police dispersed a riot?).
I support Israel's right to defend itself against that, and strike to eliminate that threat for hopefully years to come, so peace can have a chance (not that I am overly optimistic on that matter).
https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/hamas-heeft-meer-en-betere-wapens-dan-eerder-maar-de-ijzeren-koepel-omzeilen-lukt-nog-niet~be25e272/?utm_source=link&utm_medium=app&utm_campaign=shared%20content&utm_content=freehttps://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/de-ondergrondse-stad-van-hamas~b4242a9e/?utm_source=link&utm_medium=app&utm_campaign=shared%20content&utm_content=free