Przejdź do głównej zawartości


#Hamas today released further 13 hostages, most of which are children, including two 4 years old.

While some hail Hamas for apparently being the most merciful and humanitarian hostage-taker in the world, let that sink in: you've got adult men and women who take 4 years old kids as hostages...
Collage of the hostages released today
There is no excuse for this and no one should be praising hamas.

Just as there was no excuse when the IDF used children of a similar age as human shields and got called to international court on war crimes for it (And refused to show)..

In the end anyone taking **either** side as the good guy is morally corrupt. The hammas are evil, the IDF is evil, full stop.
> In the end anyone taking **either** side as the good guy is morally corrupt. The hammas are evil, the IDF is evil, full stop.

Would you be willing to admit that one side is worse than the other?
Absolutely, as the invaders and occupiers the Israel side is significantly worse morally.

@kravietz
Well, at least you're not saying that they're the same, I guess.
At this point its not relevant that the Israelis are the worse... they both commit war crimes and terrorism... Debating what murderer and torturer is the nicer one has little interest to me.

But if you insist then yea, the one who started the fight,a nd did so with a mass genocide is very clearly the worse of the two, regardless of what the other side did after being occupied.

If i break into someones house and chain the whole family up in the bathroom and punch them in the face every day, and they respond by kicking me in the balls when they get the chance, I'm still the worse one, I cant be praised for "taking the high oad and not kicking them in the balls" when im the one who came in, took over their home, and locked them into a small bathroom. It doesnt make kicking me in the balls right, but it does clearly make me the wrong one as the theif and initial abuser.

@kravietz
@freemo

You seem to have a lot of good ideas about the war. So let’s assume you’re Israel, it’s 7 October, you woke up to the barrage of rockets from Gaza and Hamas fighters slaughtering Israeli civilians. What’s you plan?

@realcaseyrollins
I would issue a public apology for invading a country that wasnt mine and occupying it for 80 years and commiting genocide, war crimes and terrorism. I would also state that palestine has done the same and neither of us are right. I would then offer a complete withdrawl of Israel from the region, a dissolution of the state under the condition that 1) all hostages are returned 2) all israelis are allowed an appropriate amount of time to leave the country and 3) any israelis that decide to stay who were born on the land be granted citizenship in Palestine and an equal vote.

Once palestine agrees and the hostages released I would dissolve the state and leave.

Now in all reality neither me nor anyone has complete control to decide the situation. So in any practical sense that will never happen, nor am I expecting it to. But youa sked what I would do if i had control and that would be it.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo
I would dissolve the state and leave.

Okay, sounds like a great plan indeed. Plans like this are the main reason why the war is now going on for 80 years, and Hamas continuously wrecks any agreed actual peace plans.

@realcaseyrollins
Your response makes absolutely no sense.. If you dissolve the state and leave there is no state to have a war WITH... so no the war didnt continue for 80 years because of ideas like this, that makes no sense.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

But postulating 10 million people who built the whole country for several generation does make sense?

@realcaseyrollins
In my scenario the israelis still own whatever they own and live there. They just are under the government that actually owns the land, palestine. As I said one of the conditions is anyone born ont he land is allowed to stay and given citizenship, this also assumes they retain whatever private land they own so long as they bought it fairly from the palestinian that owned it.

Obviously any infrastructure that exists through theft does not make sense to be allowed to keep.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

I think the realism of your plan is best assessed through Hamas position on Holocaust and best illustrated the number of Jews living in Gaza.

@realcaseyrollins
Not sure why any of that matters.. its their land, they did nothing to deserve loosing it and were simply invaded. So until the occupying force leaves and especially when they are the ones overpowered and forced into ghettos,then there is absolutely no chance for the Israelis to be the good guys.

The whole "but we built up the area after we stole it and killed everyone" is a pretty damn poor excuse for why they should keep it.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

Your statement "it's their land" is exclusively based on 1947 as an arbitrary cut-off date. If Palestinians "were invaded" by Jews, then what in your opinion happened to Jerusalem in 1187?

I won't even comment on your postulate that the extremely antisemitic policy of Hamas "doesn't matter", because it's precisely the part that makes your plan so detached from reality.

@realcaseyrollins
Your statement “it’s their land” is exclusively based on 1947 as an arbitrary cut-off date.

Not at all, that is not how I determine whose land it is.

I determine whose land it is by who can show the longest multi-generational ties to the land. If you can show you were born on the land and lived there for the last 20 generations its your land… some guy who has some 1000 year old claim to the land he cant show a clear right of ownership to then it isnt his land.

If you can show you are the direct descendant and prove it with paper work of someone 1000 years ago taking your land from you, and you can show specifically what plot of land you owned, then yea, that land should be yours. Virtually no individual jew can do that. In fact most jews are so intermarried they cant even say they have any connection to the jews at all other than it being a religion they practiced for multiple generations. But to connect them as inheretors of land from 1000 years ago, not even remotely close.

Meanwhile the palestinians, most of those show they have lived on that land and have a clear chain of ownership for hundreds of years.
If Palestinians “were invaded” by Jews, then what in your opinion happened to Jerusalem in 1187?

Something that has nothing to do with modern times and no one can even show any heritage connection to those events on either side, soits irrelevant.
I won’t even comment on your postulate that the extremely antisemitic policy of Hamas “doesn’t matter”, because it’s precisely the part that makes your plan so detached from reality.

I am glad you are refusing to comment on something I never said or even remotely implied… smart move.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

> I determine whose land

Well, except the very concept of "land ownership" is a social construct and in the society populating Palestine and Israel nobody cares about how you "determine the ownership" using carefully cherry-picked criteria.

The reason why I mentioned this was to point out that the question of "whose land" can be seen in two semantic spaces, which are largely exclusive:

* legal, in which case you need to base your analysis on the international law, which includes all peace agreements signed by Palestine, latest being 1993 Oslo Accord, which makes your proposal of "dissolution of Israel" irrelevant, except for some specific extrajudicial land takeover by settlers
* moral, in which case you can go as far back as you wish, but granted complex history of Middle East you loose on each Muslim conquest of Jerusalem (there were many of them) — using the very arguments you raised against "Israeli occupation"! — and you also loose ultimately on the *first* Muslim siege of Jerusalem simply because Islam appeared 600 years after Christianity and that was several thousands after Jahwe religion

In any case, you can't honestly pick and mix from these semantic systems.

> Virtually no individual jew can do that.

But Palestinians can?

> comment on something I never said or even remotely implied

I pointed out at, if that needs clarification, that no Jews live under Hamas rule, which is kind of obvious, granted their viciously antisemitic stance.

Which makes your whole plan unrealistic as on the hypothetical dissolution of Israel we would immediately witness the largest pogrom in history.

You said "it doesn't matter".

@realcaseyrollins
Well, except the very concept of “land ownership” is a social construct and in the society populating Palestine and Israel nobody cares about how you “determine the ownership” using carefully cherry-picked criteria.

Sure its a social construct, but the criteria I picked is more or less the criteria the world uses rather consistently. Plus it makes logical sense. Much more so than your idea of “well 2000 years ago some people who might be remotely related to me were here”
The reason why I mentioned this was to point out that the question of “whose land” can be seen in two semantic spaces, which are largely exclusive:

I;d argue botht he legal and the moral are fairly well addressed by the typical standard I put forth. You are the citizen of the land you are born to. Your ties to the land are based on how many generations of birth that may go back as well.
In any case, you can’t honestly pick and mix from these semantic systems.

I didnt, legally I made clear there had to be a clear chain of ownership and/or presence on the land to claim to be the owner, and whoever can show the earliest form of this wins. And morally the rules are largely the same, whoever is born there, is part of there, that is the natural default.
But Palestinians can?

Yes absolutely. After spending 2 years in the region I can tell you almost every pallestinian, well a lot anyway, have a very proud heritage. In their living room it is common to show a family tree of all the family members born in that house and on that land. They often love to show you their papers and family history and are quite proud to show their ties to the land over many hundreds of years.

Jews on the other hand rarely can show ties to the land, the overwhelming majority can only show ties through an invading force in modern history and can not show a natural connection to the land. You do have some palestinian jews of course who can show ties to the land, but even then it is as a palestinian who is a jew, not as an israelite. Which would give them a right to palestinian citizenship and a home but not an argument for a jewish state.
I pointed out at, if that needs clarification, that no Jews live under Hamas rule, which is kind of obvious, granted their viciously antisemitic stance.

Then a jew has two options… 1) dont stay if you dont like the region, especially if you are the invader .. or 2) stay and change things.

When a country has crime and hates a certain group thats not an excuse to commit genocide and take over. It is an excuse to clean up your society and try to eliminate the hammas to create a unified country for all palestinians, both jewish palestinians and arab.
Which makes your whole plan unrealistic as on the hypothetical dissolution of Israel we would immediately witness the largest pogrom in history.

Not if the jews left, which is what most would and should do… I mean maybe you shouldnt commit genocide on the natives if you dont want to be hated as a people, that would be a nice first place to start.. and now that the hatred is there you can leave, or you can take the risk to try and stay and make things right.. but the risks and the unfortunate nature of that choice has no one to blame but you (the israelis) for committing genocide in the first place.

Its like saying “but if they stop committing genocide then everyone might hate them and be violent towards them”… sure… the answer to that isnt to let them continue to commit genocide.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

> 2) stay and change things.

You can't "change things" if you're dead, which state is consistent with the Hamas' policy towards all Jews.

@realcaseyrollins
Sure you can. in fact dying for a cause tends to cause much greater change than surviving it.. we call those martyr.

And yea, people might die, and that is sad.. but they also created the hate towards them directly via their actions.. they killed to make people hate them, so while i dont want to see violence against them I also wont use the fact that they are hated for murder as an excuse to allow them to murder.

When you are responsible for creating hatred, violence, and crime, partly due to the very poverty you intentionally inflict, then there are consequences. Cleaning up crime even in america results in a lot of cops dying, that is just part of the process to fix things, so if you dont want cops dying create a society that has less violence rather than complaining about a society being violent when you are the one who made that happen.

Remember the Hamas didnt exist prior to the israel invasion. Also remember several Israeli terrorists groups arose pre-israel long before the hamas even took shape.

@realcaseyrollins
I am honestly somewhat astonished at this take.

> And yea, people might die, and that is sad.. but they also created the hate towards them directly via their actions

> When you are responsible for creating hatred, violence, and crime, partly due to the very poverty you intentionally inflict, then there are consequences.

People supporting genocide against Palestinians could very easily say the same thing.
@realcaseyrollins

They can, and they wouldnt be wrong. I have said many times the hamas doing what they did was a stupid move as it generated hate agains tthem and weakened their cause... dont commit war crimes, it makes people hate you... and that hate is not unjustified.

As I've said both sides are wrong and deserve to be hated. One is just more wrong than the other as the invader.

@kravietz
@freemo

You call it "stupid", they call it compliance with their political program. Faced with such a massive misjudgment on your side, I'm quite curious how you would describe mass killings that would follow the hypothetical dissolution of state of Israel — probably "silly" would be a suitable word?

Also note it wouldn't apply exclusively to Jews. In Gaza #Hamas was killing equally Palestinian supporters of peace with Israel, atheists, gay people and their political opponents from Fatah, women who slept with men before marriage (but not men, it doesn't count as adultery) and a dozen of other categories of Hamas law offenders. I suppose you would happily score all these deaths as "martyrs" and just move on.

@realcaseyrollins
> You call it "stupid", they call it compliance with their political program. Faced with such a massive misjudgment on your side, I'm quite curious how you would describe mass killings that would follow the hypothetical dissolution of state of Israel — probably "silly" would be a suitable word?

No not silly, wrong.. but you lie int he bed you make. If you dont want to be killed by the natives then dont try to exterminate the natives for 80 years. While them trying to kill you is wrong, it should be **expected** as a consequence of your actions. The fact that you were given the choice to leave is quite humane. I'd expect and want most to leave, as well they should since they should have never came as an invading force in the first place.

If i run intop china with a gun and mass murder 1000 people I shouldnt be surprised when a mob tries to kill me in retaliation. Its still wrong, but expected.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

> If i run intop china with a gun and mass murder 1000 people I shouldnt be surprised when a mob tries to kill me in retaliation

Good, we're coming into some understanding. What if it's not China but Israel and it's not 1000 but 1400? 🤔

@realcaseyrollins
There is no israel, only an occupied palestine.. they cant run into israel they can only shoot invaders on their land.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

Palestinian officials from PLO who signed Oslo don't see it this way.

@realcaseyrollins
Oh wonderful now you can mind read what palestinian officials really thought.. I am impressed.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

Okay, if you want to go this path — what if the deeds ancient Palestinians had were signed by officials who didn't really believe in granting them the ownership of these plots?

@realcaseyrollins
As with all law, if something is signed under threat of violence it is invalidated.

So yes if you can show there was a jewish owner to the land first, can prove that owner was forced to transfer the deed, and a person can show a direct chain of inheritance right from that jewish owner, then in that circumstance they would have a right to claim the plot.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

Arafat and other fat cats from the PLO/PAA billionaire club didn't really look like they're under duress. Especially those living in Quatar.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

> Not if the jews left, which is what most would and should do

Does your peace plan also involve all non-indigenous residents leaving USA? That would be at least consistent.

@realcaseyrollins
I would apply the same rules to the USA yes, but the way you summarized it is **not** what I suggested for israel. Again no one is required to leave.

If it were to be applied to the USA then the US government would dissolve and the native american government would be the default. All people who choose to stay born on the land would become citizens and all people not born on the land may be allowed to stay at the discretion of the new government.

Since we would all be citizens in the new government we could all vote collectively on how or if we want people not born on the land to be treated and if they will be granted residence or not. It is very likely such a vote (Which would largely be non-natives as natives are a small portion of the population) would allow the immigrants to stay.

In the case of israel the same would happen but since the palestinians are in much greater numbers the vote in the new unified nation would be more fairly split between the two, and thus would have some concern for the jews who remain baked in as a result, since they are a huge portion of the vote.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

> Again no one is required to leave.

Of course, only if they want to survive. No pressure.

@realcaseyrollins
Right, just as those born in high crime areas can either leave, or stay and risk their lives to try to fix the place... that is your choice and a risk we all take.

The difference is the israelis would have to live with hatred they created and is justified (though not the violent acts that may result)... for other people they are stuck in an area of violence with little to do with anything they did.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

So the two 4 years olds takens by Hamas "created hatred" and now they have to live with it?

Good they don't have to be sacrificed to Baal, you're truly generous person.

@realcaseyrollins
No but their parents did, and those parents were very irrespoinsible for invading a country, murdering tons of people and then having a 4 year old child they bring into a war zone **they** created... IT does **not** justify the hamas taking those kids, but it absolutely is a consequence of their parents choices that they were well aware of when they made it.

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo

> those parents were very irrespoinsible for invading a country, murdering tons of people

You just absolved Israeli bombing of Gaza 👍

@realcaseyrollins
@freemo To be fair to him I think he said it's fine because we treat the Native Americans better than #Israel treats the Gazans.

I don't think that position makes much sense, but that's what I gleaned from his argument.
@realcaseyrollins

No its not "fine" but it is much better... no id apply the exact same rules... but the population difference here would have very different results... With the natives having control the americans that are left would still be te overwhelming majority of the vote since we all would have citizenship still under the rules if we chose to stay.

In israel the vote is more fairly split so the nation would need to find bigger compromises int eh voting booth. But ultimately both groups interests would be more evenly represented there.

@kravietz
Wait so are you primarily calling for Palestinians to have voting rights in #Israel?
@realcaseyrollins

OTher way around, jews have voting rights in palestine, and all the land becoems palestine.

A better way to view it though is to say neither government would truly exist anymore and a new government would form that includes both groups with voting rights..

While these may sound like different things they are effectively the same. A government reflects the wishes of its citizens through vote. So by having one voting body the government would become representative of both groups and as such wouldnt really be one or the other anymore.

@kravietz
I mean...this just sounds like a semantics game that does nothing but makes Jews angry TBH. It would be far more reasonable at this point to allow Palestinians to participate in the existing Israeli government than build something new from the ground up.
@realcaseyrollins

But that was the point of Palestinian Autonomy Authority enacted in 1993 Oslo Accord.

There *is* an existing Palestinian government. Except in Gaza it was overthrown by a 2007 armed coup by Hamas who killed hundreds of PAA officials and supporters.

Israel already has Arab members of Knesset, and there's a good dozen of them, from several Arab parties. One of them, Ahmad Tibi, was even an adviser to Arafat.

@freemo
@kravietz 🦇
Also:
you've got adult men and women who (in retaliation to above) bomb the city, resulting in the deaths of many 4-year-old children....
@miklo

I'm not in a position to advocate for Israeli armed forces operations, so I can only reiterate the question I originally asked to Freemo.

It's 7 October and you wake up in Israel to the barrage of Hamas rockets and their fighters slaughtering civilians in their houses. What would be your response and what would you do differently being on the place of Israel?
@miklo “not be a fucking bibi netanyahu who bet on hamas for decades” would be probably the best answer, perhaps “act on credible intelligence you had” would be useful too; other than that, it's pure whataboutism on your part, and i quite enjoy (not) watching you stan for collective punishment just because it's israel doing it. (and knowing how incensed you'd be if it were the russians.)
@mawhrin

Ukraine does not have a state policy of eradicating Russia and Russians, Hamas does. Ukraine did not invade Russia, massacring civilians, Hamas did.

And I’m not apologising for collective punishment. My question just highlights the incredibly complex situation Israel is in, facing a violent and persistent enemy who at the same time is shielding itself with civilians.

This is why I ask: what would you do differently?

“Not acting on intelligence” is one story of dubious authenticity. Neither it excludes the 7 October attack. “Not being Netanyahu” is even more vague. By the way, Netanyahu came to power after 2005 Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza which was followed by… Hamas armed coup in 2007. What did you say then? “Don’t be such as Ariel Sharon”?

@miklo
@miklo it's not that complex, really. don't do collective punishment, don't do ethnic cleansing, don't do apartheid, don't encourage illegal settlements, don't create environment where violence is the only response left, don't bet on your ability to stop terrorists from doing terrorism especially when you're a corrupt piece of shit. find a partner to talk, and if there isn't one, work on building environment where a potential partner can be found.

hamas terror attacks didn't materialise in a void.

one would think that the good friday agreement could give a good few ideas, if the history of bibi's own party and memory of irgun's violent roots are not enough.
@mawhrin
hamas terror attacks didn’t materialise in a void.

No, they didn’t. In July there were protests against Hamas (!) going on in Gaza. And then, even worse, Israel liberalised entry rules for Palestinians working in Israel. Hamas just had to do something, especially after their last year’s visits to Moscow.

Okay, I know what you meant. You could be more specific when talking of “ethnic cleansing”, because there’s thousands of Arabs and Muslims living in Israel. You speak of “apartheid”, probably meaning the humiliating border checks. Except each of these measures are a direct response to Hamas attacks, in which they used Palestinian civilians to blow up themselves among Israeli civilians or attack them with other weapons:

https://agora.echelon.pl/notice/AcES6EoCN52M3Xq1MO
don’t encourage illegal settlements

Israel did just that in 2005, they even forcibly removed illegal Jewish settlers. Hamas paid back with an armed coup in Gaza:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza

@miklo
@mawhrin

Also, I’ve dissected the story of Netanyahu “betting on Hamas” recently with someone else who used it. It comes out it’s based entirely on that Netanyahu allowed Gaza to received money through Israel because this way, Netanyahu argued, they will have at least some degree of control that it’s actually spent on humanitarian projects. If the didn’t allow the funding, he’d be bashed he’s “starving Gaza”. If the allowed it, the same people are bashing him “he’s funding Hamas”.

@miklo
@flere-imsaho @kravietz 🦇
I'm not far from assuming that this has been the plan of the far right that has been in power in Israel for years: "breed" Hamas in the Gaza Strip in order to first politically divide the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank and then patiently wait (ignoring intelligence) for something similar to what happened on October 7 to have a sufficient excuse to raze Gaza to the ground. We'll see in a few months if that's how it ends.
If international law was violated, it should be up to an international governing body to bring down the punishment.
The UN **caused** the problem, while I expect them to be responsible for fixing it in reality they wont.

@realcaseyrollins @kravietz
Generally agree although I don't think anyone should be intervening into the affairs of #Israel and #Palestine except for international governing bodies such as the #UN.
@freemo

By the way, they already had a ceasefire on 6 October. Guess who broke it 😉 And after the current ceasefire started at 07:00, Hamas fired rockets at Israel at 07:15. So good luck.

@realcaseyrollins @freepeoplesfreepress
Also its very od you support international law and are ont he side of ISrael, one of the biggest violators.

Hell the UN just ordered a ceasefire with 2/3 vote on october 17 due to both sides attackign civilians and ISraels response was to have a tantrum about the UN and then ban any UN representatives from ever entering ISrael.

Not to mention their history of attrocities they refuse to go to court for.

@freepeoplesfreepress @kravietz
I am not sure you did explain it... in fact im rather confused how you can disagree at all.. like they dont even pass laws or decrees, they talk, and then some small set (or large) number of countries may sign a thing.There are no rules on votes needed or anything like that that would even resemble a law. When they vote it is basically "who wants to sign this thing" and sometimes the condition for signing may be a threshold number of votes, but its decided on a per-discussion basis and non-signing countries are never obligated, explicitly so.

@freepeoplesfreepress @kravietz
> It is up to the individual countries to choose to act or not when the UN decrees a thing.

I disagree, although I have already explained why.
Agreed, which is why the fact that Israel has been called to international court multiple times on war crimes, human rights violations, and terrorism is so damning. More so since they refuse to defend themselves in court.

So in that regard I wish the UN would act.

But they wont because there is no international law, there is no enforcement, they cant act, they arent a government. It is up to the individual countries to choose to act or not when the UN decrees a thing.

@freepeoplesfreepress @kravietz
@freemo

The first paragraph displays an amount of ego that entirely justifies all fringe logic that follows 👌

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
Thats highly inaccurate. As someone who was not only living in israel at that time but working closely with a famous top-level israeli general and advisor who deals closely with the conflict I am well informed on the situation, I mean I should be bombs were going off all around me too.

They werent firing at eachother at that moment, shortly after ISrael had initiated an attack where they had retaliated and then stopped.

But two parties not firing on eachother is not the same as a cease fire agreement.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
Thats some selective memory you had... you asked me what Id do if I was god, and pointed out on several occasions what I'd do as a god is very different than what is practical or a real solution.

But you care more about appearing smart than actually having an honest conversation it seems. No surprise given your last comment.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
@freemo

Well, that train has been long gone on my side since you postulated removal of 10 million people from Israel and dissolution of the country 😉

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
The fact that you think being directly connected and informed by the generals involved, and physically there when it happened equates to "ego" has totally destroyed any chance that I could take you seriously.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
@freemo

No, I did not ask about your god-like fantasies. I asked what would you do differently if you were Israel on 7 October. Here it is, verbatim:

https://agora.echelon.pl/notice/AcExvFJdLK9OybLOSm

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
No you said “If I was israel” not “in control” and in my response I made very clear I was answering as someone who had complete ability to do anythign regardless of if it is practical. In my response to your question (As you can see in that link) says that very disclaimer, as I knew you’d try and cheat like you are now:

My exact words:
Now in all reality neither me nor anyone has complete control to decide the situation. So in any practical sense that will never happen, nor am I expecting it to. But youa sked what I would do if i had control and that would be it.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
The very first words of my last response were:

> No you said “If I was israel” not “in control”

So take a guess...

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
@freemo

I am respectful. And clearly was a miscommunication.

My original question was: what would you do differently on the position of Israel on 7 October.

And I meant a practical scenario, not a fantasy one, which is where the misunderstanding clearly was.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
Look we started out pretty respectful, and both of us are going off the wrong end here.... lets take a step back. I got no issue with you, obviously there was a miscommunication, its not a big deal, now its clarified so regardless of what you wanted me to mean or what you thought I meant we both know what we meant to say now, no big deal.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
@freemo

Ok, so in parts 2-3 that sounds very much like the hypothetical plan for Gaza reportedly discussed by Israel with Arab countries. That clearly is possible and reasonable way for permanent peace.

Item 1 kind of happened in 2005 during Israel's unilateral withdrawal from Gaza, and was punished for that by Hamas, but let's assume with UN peacekeeping mission that would work.

Now, the hard part. You postulated this:

> would however do so with extra care not to kill civilians

Sounds great in general, but what *exactly* that "extra care" would mean in practice, granted Hamas turned Gaza into one huge fortress with military infrastructure embedded into civilian objects, specifically with the intent of maximizing civilian losses during any Israel operation.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins
The practical one is the same one I told casey rollins… If i were in charge of israel the first thing I probably would do is

1) give back significant land that is more disputed as a apology
2) invade pallestine completely with the intent of taking over the government. I would however do so with extra care not to kill civilians even if that meant taking a reaasonably higher risk for my troops, again in a gesture
3) Install a temporary transitional government, perhapse ask the UN to oversee it for neutrality reasons. The intent would be to get democracy in place, and get rid of the hammas population or those who are violent in general. This may take several years
4) During the transitional government you slowly remove the fences and form formal relationships with palestine
5) and this is most important, once things have stabalized in a decade (and you promise this upfront) they get full autonomy of bother their land and the land given in #1 (which would transition to them pro rata anyway)
6) At the end of the process once the radicalized element is removed you promise them a choice, and its completely up to them, a) they can dissolve their country and become full citizens of israel or b) you can continue as your own country and go your own way.

I think #6 is also important because since it was their country first they should get the choice of a one state or two state solution.

But the other points are important to understand that these solutions need to ensure the safety of everyone, so it has to be a process.

@freepeoplesfreepress @realcaseyrollins