This is just analyst opinions. The New Yorker actually interviewed a Hamas leader and got them on the record. He claimed that Israel left them no choice; non violent protests had failed and asking the UN for help failed, and moderate voices were ignored by Israel, meaning only violence was left.
this post was submitted on 13 Nov 2023
65 points (77.8% liked)
World News
39082 readers
3421 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
this explanation for the motive and the intentions described in the article are not mutually exclusive things
No choice but to build a future with billions of dollars of yearly aid.
In a country with one of the highest population per square kilometer, that is under a full embargo, can't govern themselves, can't import concrete, wood and other essential materials, which had a 50% unemployed rate.
Gaza wasn't a paradise sitting on aid money, it wasn't a developing country that needed some help, it was an open air prison.
750M of aid per year just from the UNWRA. Billions more in aid dedicated to specific tasks (like the EU's water pipeline project). And the government that was planning to execute an offensive war couldn't build even one public bomb shelter?
Citation needed.
You're correct it's 750M not billion. Phone typo on my part.
So the only option left was to slaughter unarmed civilians. Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind. The better option was to hit military targets but who cares I guess, tit for tat is all we get
Obligatory fuck IDF and Bibi
Thanks for pointing that out, I linked and quoted it below.
“It’s the first time I can remember that Hamas has become so prominent on a global scale,” Katz said. “So many people have already forgotten Oct. 7 because Hamas immediately changed the discussion. It put the focus on Israel, not themselves. And that’s exactly what they wanted.”
LOL Hamas didn't change the discussion, Israel did. I came into the news on Oct 07 with "Fucking Hamas" vibes, but that very quickly changed to, "Wow OK, Israel isn't fucking around." then "Woah Israel OK, maybe use a little more care there, I get that you were attacked but -- WOAH ISRAEL WTF ARE YOU DOING?"
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/what-was-hamas-thinking
As recently as 2020, Hamas committed to participate in Palestinian national elections; this plan fell apart not because of Hamas but because of the Western-backed Palestinian Authority, whose leaders denounced Israel’s refusal to allow elections in East Jerusalem.
Had these apparent gestures of compromise all been part of a ruse to buy time while Hamas prepared a brutal assault? Abu Marzouk insisted that these efforts at negotiation and coexistence had been genuine. He blamed Israel and the Western powers for thwarting Hamas’s overtures. He told us, “We rolled down all of the pathways to get some of our rights—not all of them. We knocked on the door of reconciliation and we weren’t allowed in. We knocked on the door of elections and we were deprived of them. We knocked on the door of a political document for the whole world—we said, ‘We want peace, but give us some of our rights’—but they didn’t let us in.” He added, “We tried every path. We didn’t find one political path to take us out of this morass and free us from occupation.”
There is some evidence to support Abu Marzouk’s narrative. In recent years, Hamas had appeared willing to coexist with the Jewish state. But, as Abu Marzouk acknowledged to us, Hamas also never abandoned core demands such as full Palestinian independence and the right of all Palestinian refugees to return to their homeland. Nor did the group relinquish its weapons. “But we didn’t mislead anyone,” he told us. “We never hid these slogans.”
Never read such bullshit before - those whiny ass Hamas bitches justifying butchering all those civilians.
If you were Hamas, what would you have done differently to obtain rights and privileges for the Palestinian people?
Lemmy is the only place where I see people being like “butchering civilians is okay as long as it was done to further their goal”. It’s real weird to see that kind of rhetoric not only accepted but upvoted.
I’m sure if I hung out on the extremist right sites, there would be that kind of stuff about Israel. That’s kind of the thing though, it’s really starting to feel like Lemmy is an extremist place and I could see it petering out because of that.
I feel like part of a shrinking minority that’s not cool with mass killing civilians no matter what. I’m a strong supporter for an independent Palestine but I don’t see how killing civilians is leading to that. To me it seems like that only gave Israel the opportunity to unleash massive violence of their own, and they’re clearly far better at it.
I know a lot of you don’t see violence or violent rhetoric as taboo, and I guess I’m not really trying to get you to stop saying it. It’s just kind of sad to see, and I do think it’ll turn Lemmy into one of those sites regular people avoid because it’s too extreme. I don’t even know why I typed this comment, perhaps I don’t like the way Lemmy is sliding and felt the need to comment on it while it’s still in that early stage Voat feel.
Lemmy is the only place where I see people being like “butchering civilians is okay as long as it was done to further their goal”. It’s real weird to see that kind of rhetoric not only accepted but upvoted.
Understanding why Hamas might feel they are justified isn't the same as thinking it's OK. I don't condone what Hamas did - but I absolutely condemn how far Israel is going in response.
I also object to the idea that wanting Israel to stop is akin to antisemitism.
The comment I responded to was basically “what else could they have done?” To most people that’s condoning.
And the logic of “they feel it’s justified” could be extended to Israel as well. It’s clear that a lot of people think that Hamas butchering civilians means Israel can too. Doesn’t make it right either.
And well, why don’t you condemn just as strongly Hamas’s killings, or understand why Israel might feel they’re justified? That’s kind of what I mean— there’s these little slants, as if to say “at least they’re not the other side”.
Call me sensitive or whatever but I don’t like the violent undertones I get here (not your comment, Lemmy in general). Repeating Hamas’s justifications for slaughter is no better than repeating Israel’s, and imo drags down the general quality of any discussion
Fair enough but I'll keep my reply short for now -
We all know agree that Hamas are terrorists. Of course I condemn the attack, but I don't expect terrorists to behave in a way I'm happy with.
But Israel holds far more power and has more options. They are the vastly superior entity by every metric. They are also a member of the United Nations, and can reasonably be expected to conduct themselves better than acknowledged terrorist groups. Israel had a great justification to respond to the attack. They don't have a justification for going as far as they are.
Quoting myself from earlier -
Hamas didn't change the discussion, Israel did. I came into the news on Oct 07 with "Fucking Hamas" vibes, but that very quickly changed to, "Wow OK, Israel isn't fucking around." then "Woah Israel OK, maybe use a little more care there, I get that you were attacked but -- WOAH ISRAEL WTF ARE YOU DOING?"
Yeah, that about hits my opinion, too.
"Israel has the right to defend itself", but their actions fly far in excess of defense at this point.
I think a lot of people don't think it's good or OK, but more like: "what did Israel fucking expect?". It is what it is. It seems hypocritical to act so offended when Hamas kills a thousand Israelis, when my country happily pays Israel to kill multiples of that number of Palestinians.
I think it’s what you are seeing. Most people on Lemmy.world don’t post or comment with regularity. The ones that are more vocal tend to be more extreme. From my observations, the extreme rhetoric is the minority. To contrast, go to r/worldnews on Reddit. This place is tame in comparison.
I think they were talking about you.
Is Lemmy forcing them to be here? You can close the app at anytime.
I don't know what that has to do with anything. But alright. It was just kinda funny that they called you out, and you just kept on as if you were actually informing them about something.
I tend to stay away from extreme rhetoric. I’ve learned my lesson. ;)
Gotta keep that mask on, I guess.
If they only wanted to make the most extreme statements:
https://allthatsinteresting.com/thich-quang-duc-burning-monk
The difference compared to Hamas is, this monk sacrificed only himself.
If they wanted to turn it down a notch, they could have started with daily Demonstrations with thousands of people for starters.
They already tried to peacefully protest. Your suggestion is self immolation? Is that what you would do, or would you direct your anger outward?
So are you honestly pretending that Hamas didn’t send hundreds of suicide bombers into Israel before the blockade by Israel was imposed? This blockade was in return protested against by Hamas backed Protesters and those protests turned violent often.
The primary reason for the blockade is Hamas, so that the terror organization doesn’t get even more weapons than it already has.
Would YOU let a terror organization in your backyard gain access to weapons and military equipment that has vowed to wipe you and your people of the face of the earth?
And since you asked: No, I would never turn my anger outward like that. Never.
The motivations and methods of Hamas does not negate the fact that a peaceful protest March did take place. Meaning, the people of Palestine have tried peace. They were shot and maimed, even children. Let me ask you, if all 2.2 million Palestinians declared themselves Hamas, would you advocate for wiping them out?
You don’t even try to have a discussion and are not answering questions. Your Strawman arguments are quite lame.
You only want to paint the picture that poor Hamas had no other choice but to maim and kill civilians.
I end this „discussion“ at this point
So much hate, for what?
This is the best summary I could come up with:
In Beeri, a kibbutz town overrun by Hamas on Oct. 7, one dead fighter had a notebook with hand-scrawled Quranic verses and orders that read, simply, “Kill as many people and take as many hostages as possible.” Others were equipped with gas canisters, handcuffs and thermobaric grenades designed to instantly turn houses into infernos.
The evidence, described by more than a dozen current and former intelligence and security officials from four Western and Middle Eastern countries, reveals an intention by Hamas planners to strike a blow of historic proportions, in the expectation that the group’s actions would compel an overwhelming Israeli response.
Some militants carried enough food, ammunition and equipment to last several days, officials said, and bore instructions to continue deeper into Israel if the first wave of attacks succeeded, potentially striking larger Israeli cities.
Hamas was willing to accept such sacrifices as the price for kick-starting a new wave of violent Palestinian resistance in the region and scuttling efforts at normalizing relations between Israel and Arab states, according to current and former intelligence officials and counterterrorism experts.
To obtain detailed intelligence, Hamas deployed cheap surveillance drones to generate maps of the Israeli towns and military installations within a few miles of the $1 billion barrier system that Israel built to wall off Gaza.
Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden expected a furious American response after the attacks on New York and Washington, Katz said, and he welcomed what he believed would be a violent, global confrontation between the Muslim world and the West, with Islam ultimately prevailing.
The original article contains 3,215 words, the summary contains 258 words. Saved 92%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!