Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[hector13]

Hamas also posted videos on social media over the course of the last three years of them and their allies training for the attacks.

[Bumber]

Honestly, why wouldn't he do it?

Because he could get about the same benefit for thwarting a massive terror attack without the drawback of having let over a thousand Israelis die on his watch?

"Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence."

And even having taken the threat seriously, unless the IDF was going to launch a pre-emptive strike in Gaza (which I'm sure you'd've loved,) it would've had to be countered as it happened, which was an uncertain date a year later.

[hector13]

I don’t think it would be malice more than it’d be unbridled ambition, though I guess that would depend on if you were referring to the dead Palestinians or the dead Israelis.

He also wouldn’t get the credit for foiling the attack, the security services would.

Regardless of the hows and whys, he’s using it as an excuse to toe his “I’m the only one that can protect you from Hamas” schtick, which he’s built his career on. What’s a few thousand Palestinians to make political stock?

[Strongpoint]

Strange then, if the IDF, one of the most capable militaries in the world, is somehow facing such a dire existential threat from some massive, well-equipped and resourceful opponent

Because they tolerated a hostile de-facto independent country and let it grow in power believing, in hubris, that their high-tech military will keep them safe. The conspiracy theory of the Israeli government allowing it is growing strong but hubris is a way simpler explanation.

Yes, Israel did perform hostile actions against this country like a partial blockade (no more severe than the American blockade of Cuba. Just compare how many Cubans can visit USA to work and how many residents of Gaza could do the same. Or how much American goods reached Cuba legally) and occasional military strikes.  But it wasn't nearly enough to prevent this country from growing in strength and preparing for exactly this kind of war for ~15 years.

This de facto country received serious international support from the West (various charities that did help HAMAS) and from Iran\Russia\Qatar\etc who provided more direct support to boost their military strength.

In the end, by 2023, Gaza was stronger militarily than most other countries of a similar size. If you pit the army of Gaza against the army of Latvia - Latvians would be steamrolled.


After the October 7th attack, Israel is done with tolerating independent Gaza. It went to war with the purpose of eliminating this independence. The larger and better-equipped country will win it. But it is impossible to win a war of full conquest against an enemy willing to resist without bringing considerable destruction.

[lemon10]

Malice in the context of the quote just means intentional shittyness, so if he let it happen on purpose it would totally count.

And even having taken the threat seriously, unless the IDF was going to launch a pre-emptive strike in Gaza (which I'm sure you'd've loved,) it would've had to be countered as it happened, which was an uncertain date a year later.

The translated document, which was reviewed by The New York Times, did not set a date for the attack, but described a methodical assault designed to overwhelm the fortifications around the Gaza Strip, take over Israeli cities and storm key military bases, including a division headquarters.
Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. The document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse in paragliders, on motorcycles and on foot — all of which happened on Oct. 7.

They knew Hamas's plan of attack, even if they didn't know the exact date increasing security at those locations would have been trivial, albeit expensive.
They could have also sent their spies to try to figure out the date so they would have been ready.

[Schmaven]

As time goes on and more is revealed it seems more and more likely Bibi deliberately allowed the attack to happen to facilitate his other goals. I mean, put yourself in Bibi's position. Bibi just received this report. Bibi was deeply unpopular with his people. Bibi was under investigation for corruption. Bibi knows what kind of a boost wartime leaders usually get. And Bibi has no limits or qualms to what he would do to stay in power. Imagine how easy it would be for this report to just slip off the table, saying it's not feasible. So simple.

Honestly, why wouldn't he do it?

Because that would be quite an evil thing to do.  That goes way beyond corruption to allow the death of 100s of your own people.  And I don't think someone in his position would be that evil.

I think it's more likely that he receives many such intelligence reports, and most do not come to fruition, so he had no way of telling that this would be the one they went with.  Especially given the ambitious scope of it.  No one can prepare for everything.  Incompetence seems the most likely explanation.

[hector13]

Malice in the context of the quote just means intentional shittyness, so if he let it happen on purpose it would totally count.

And even having taken the threat seriously, unless the IDF was going to launch a pre-emptive strike in Gaza (which I'm sure you'd've loved,) it would've had to be countered as it happened, which was an uncertain date a year later.

The translated document, which was reviewed by The New York Times, did not set a date for the attack, but described a methodical assault designed to overwhelm the fortifications around the Gaza Strip, take over Israeli cities and storm key military bases, including a division headquarters.
Hamas followed the blueprint with shocking precision. The document called for a barrage of rockets at the outset of the attack, drones to knock out the security cameras and automated machine guns along the border, and gunmen to pour into Israel en masse in paragliders, on motorcycles and on foot — all of which happened on Oct. 7.

They knew Hamas's plan of attack, even if they didn't know the exact date increasing security at those locations would have been trivial, albeit expensive.
They could have also sent their spies to try to figure out the date so they would have been ready.

They could also have listened when Egypt told them about something big going down in the days leading up to the attack.


@Strongpoint

I don’t know why I bother, but here goes.

The Israeli blockade of Gaza is in no way, shape, or form similar the US embargo of Cuba. From the Wikipedia page:

Despite the existence of the embargo, Cuba can, and does, conduct international trade with many countries, including many US allies; however, US-based companies, and companies that do business with the US, which trade in Cuba do so at the risk of US sanctions.[11] Cuba has been a member of the World Trade Organization since 1995.[12] The European Union is Cuba's largest trading partner, and the United States is the fifth-largest exporter to Cuba (6.6% of Cuba's imports come from the US).[13] The Cuban government must, however, pay cash for all food imports from the United States, as credit is not allowed.[14]

Israel controls the land, sea, and air of Gaza, and was happy enough to deny basics like food, medicine (both of which are allowed to be traded with Cuba and the US), fuel, and water into Gaza, with catastrophic results.

Also, Latvia has modern military equipment, some of which they even donated to Ukraine.

What the situation in Cuba and Latvia have to do with Gaza is beyond me though; regardless, Gaza is not a “de facto” country, don’t be absurd. We already went over the surveys in which a majority of Palestinians don’t like Hamas, but Hamas are an authoritarian terrorist regime, they regularly abuse people who speak out against them. Let’s not get back into the whole “group versus subgroup versus individual” thing, please. Hamas /=/ Gaza

As time goes on and more is revealed it seems more and more likely Bibi deliberately allowed the attack to happen to facilitate his other goals. I mean, put yourself in Bibi's position. Bibi just received this report. Bibi was deeply unpopular with his people. Bibi was under investigation for corruption. Bibi knows what kind of a boost wartime leaders usually get. And Bibi has no limits or qualms to what he would do to stay in power. Imagine how easy it would be for this report to just slip off the table, saying it's not feasible. So simple.

Honestly, why wouldn't he do it?

Because that would be quite an evil thing to do.  That goes way beyond corruption to allow the death of 100s of your own people.  And I don't think someone in his position would be that evil.

Oh, my sweet summer child… history is littered with examples of leaders allowing their people to suffer just so they could cling on to power.

[Strongpoint]

Gaza is not a “de facto” country, don’t be absurd

In my books, a country is an area with clearly defined borders that has an independent government. And independent here is not controlled or ruled by anyone else (not one who needs no assistance or who is not influenced by others, those are different kinds of independence) .  Gaza has clearly defined borders, HAMAS rules in Gaza, and HAMAS is independent. It makes it a de facto country. And there is nothing absurd in it. The only reason why it is not just a country - lack of international recognition or even desire for such recognition.

We already went over the surveys in which a majority of Palestinians don’t like Hamas

Since when do people disliking the government stops it from being a government?

Also, Latvia has modern military equipment, some of which they even donated to Ukraine.

And yet I consider HAMAS far more deadly force than the Latvian army. It is larger, more professional, better trained...



I understand that evil punitive action against insurgents fits the anti-Israel narrative better. But it is a war between a strong country and a weak country and should be treated as such.

[pr1mezer0]

It's hard to believe the creators of Pegasus were in ignorance. And reasons can be found to maximize the damage, we know now.

[hector13]

Israel was able to completely blockade Gaza, so never mind de-facto or de-jure independence, Gazans under blockade were de-dead or dying as a result, and the only thing that ended that barbarity was pressure from the international community.

Speaking of which, international recognition for Palestine doesn’t have anything to do with how Israel is choosing to prosecute the war.

What is internationally recognized is that Gaza and the West Bank are occupied territories, including the Supreme Court of Israel, at least as far as the West Bank is concerned. You can’t be both occupied and independent.

Regardless, I’m sure you’ll forgive me for taking their word over yours.

The stated war goal is to eliminate Hamas, not raze Gaza, or “remove Gazan independence” which doesn’t exist anyway.

I’ve got no interest in painting Israel badly, they manage that fine on their own. Even the US is telling them be more careful with their targets, and to avoid critical infrastructure.

Since when do people disliking the government stops it from being a government

You were conflating Hamas and Palestinians again. It’s important to point these fallacies out. Like when you make things up to support a position, or try to equate completely different things.

And yet I consider HAMAS far more deadly force than the Latvian army. It is larger, more professional, better trained...

Based on…?

Quick Google suggests Hamas has 25k members, Latvian forces, including reserves, number ~50k, plus an annual budget of a touch under €1 billion, so… yeah. Your personal opinion doesn’t necessarily gel with reality, like with Gazan independence.

I highlight this only because of how ridiculous it is; it still has nothing to do with Gaza.

[Strongpoint]

Israel was able to completely blockade Gaza, so never mind de-facto or de-jure independence

*rolls eyes* It only proves a hostile action of Israel against Gaza it doesn't change the fact that Gaza is a de-facto country. I gave a rather detailed explanation of how I define a country

You can provide an alternative definition of a country or show how my definition is contradictory or something. What you said isn't even related to my argument.

Show me a definition of a country that says that it can't be blockaded. Please, explain to me, what characteristics of Gaza make it not a country.

What is most important, what Israel does is not an anti-terrorist operation. It is an invasion into a hostile territory controlled by hostile forces. Technicalities of whether Gaza is a country are secondary because even if it isn't, the nature of the war is equivalent to a war between countries.

[feelotraveller]

In remembrance, a decade old report - Environmental Nakba

[hector13]

Addressing your argument would mean accepting its premise, which is patently ridiculous.

Technicalities of whether Gaza is a country are secondary

Do you ever get tired of moving the goalposts?

the nature of the war is equivalent to a war between countries.

As has every war that’s ever been waged in the history of the world. That doesn’t make your argument any less wrong.

Israel doesn’t recognize Palestine, that’s… basic. In their eyes Gaza isn’t independent, no matter how much you strain philosophy or rhetoric, they aren’t fighting to remove Gazan independence because they don’t accept it as a possibility.

[Starver]

(Posts occured since the point at which I was replying... Consider this point perhaps overtaken...)

I think I've already said, elsewhere, that I think Hamas's plan had gone "horribly right". A pyrrhic victory, of an operation, except that they might yet be utterly happy with the way the world is divided (tacit supoort for Israel is comparatively down, in the West, even if it's still there are various levels; everyone who was already pro-Palestine is likely even more anti-Israel, and... despite or even with the retaliatory losses, it justifies their cause at least as much as before, and far better than if their incursions had failed).

Much of the same may be true for Israel, albeit differently. Knowing/suspecting something was going to happen, those in charge may indeed have been willing to see the operation go ahead. Either to be smashed, or to justify (at least to those most in line with their thinking) the (counter-)incursion that was politically not quite in their grasp of possibilities beforehand. Yes, hostages were taken some (many?) were lost, as well as the other deaths... loss of some soldiers who were in the way of the steamroller that they might (or might not) have had an inkling of... but it adds to the message of "Palestinians can't be trusted!" and "There can be no peace with those people!". Pyrrhic defeat, as it were. (and then they go on the offensive and it gets messy).

But, to the true believer of either extremist end of the confrontational philosophy, "it's all good", You can't make an omlette (...etc), right?


It's everyone else that gets caught up in it. Or finds themselves at the other end of a complately different fuse that a spark from this conflagaration drifts off and lights the end of, seemingly unrelated. (The victims of the Parisian attack, we just had, although whether the same person would have popped up later or not (having history with the idea of doing something like this) at the next opportune time (if it had not been one just now) is a question that's hard to answer. Though we can be sure that the "Strong Pillar" training was going to lead to something, and may yet have those awaiting their turn to have their own go, in their own way.)

[anewaname]

...
 Do you seriously believe that HALF of all residential buildings in Gaza are terrorist bases?
...

In a stretched version of the "Israeli" perspective, I do believe this. The Hamas network is going to be very disbursed and their tunnel network will not be interconnected. There would be numerous caches and secondary tunnel exits, and the best places for those exits are in/near crowded buildings, where cargo could leave one tunnel system, travel under cover (within a building), and then enter another tunnel system or be deposited in a cache. And who in Gaza wants to inform the Israeli about their neighbor's odd foot traffic after the years of harms done? How many would actively support camouflaging suspicious activity even if they are not willing to fight? You know those fierce Ukrainian babushkas? You can bet there are Palestinian babushkas also. Some not-quite-Hamas haulers sleep with their family, some not-quite-Hamas supplies are stashed over here, this business owner leaves food packages out for someone he never met or talked to, etc. If it isn't happening in this building, it is happening in the next building, even if what is happening doesn't involve a tunnel or weapons.

Gaza is an urban jungle with deep soil layers, so digging is easy. The populace is going to be supportive of resistance groups, through inaction if not action. There is a reason Israel resorted to what is effectively carpet-bombing of the urban-jungle. Gaza is a mini-Vietnam.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

As a related example from the USA, people involved in low-level trafficking (presumably of drugs) were using large apartment complexes in cities to hide their activities and travel routes, entering and exiting the buildings through different portals, but also sometimes swapping off the cargo to another courier or putting it in a drop location. It obscured the activities enough that the police demanded/coerced the building owners to install cameras at entrances so they could subpoena the videos.

=========

As time goes on and more is revealed it seems more and more likely Bibi deliberately allowed the attack to happen to facilitate his other goals. I mean, put yourself in Bibi's position. Bibi just received this report. Bibi was deeply unpopular with his people. Bibi was under investigation for corruption. Bibi knows what kind of a boost wartime leaders usually get. And Bibi has no limits or qualms to what he would do to stay in power. Imagine how easy it would be for this report to just slip off the table, saying it's not feasible. So simple.

Honestly, why wouldn't he do it?

Because that would be quite an evil thing to do.  That goes way beyond corruption to allow the death of 100s of your own people.  And I don't think someone in his position would be that evil.

I think it's more likely that he receives many such intelligence reports, and most do not come to fruition, so he had no way of telling that this would be the one they went with.  Especially given the ambitious scope of it.  No one can prepare for everything.  Incompetence seems the most likely explanation.

Let us presume Bibi was not evil enough to do this... Did you notice that when he lost voter support due to corruption charges, that he accepted voter support from the far right groups (those people "who want someone to give them the authority to hurt others")? He gave them jobs within the administration that include the authority to exert control and make decisions, including to delay, discredit, or ignore the intelligence reports that the IDF was presenting to the government, and to influence what is happening in the West Bank. These "religious nationalists" believe that no one except their ideological herd is "clean before god", meaning that they would have considered it perfectly okay to warn their friends and family in the Hamas-targeted areas and to let the rest suffer from the Oct 7th attack, because it would be "for a good cause", or "god's will", etc.

The IDF is strong and effective even after 50 years, because the people understand the risk of Israeli's position as a nation. Incompetence is the less-likely explanation, and obstruction within the administrative government is the more-likely explanation.

======
EDIT:
@feelotraveller
excellent article, clarifies things I suspected/expected.