By Henri Astier BBC News


Israel has suggested that the long-term aim of its military campaign in Gaza is to sever all links with the territory.

Israeli Defence Minister Yoav Gallant said that once Hamas had been defeated, Israel would end its “responsibility for life in the Gaza Strip”.

Before the conflict, Israel supplied Gaza with most of its energy needs and monitored imports into the territory.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There’s a big difference between resisting a regime that’s harming you and carrying out violence against the people long after.

    The Vietnamese also fought against US soldiers when they were invading their homes.

    But they don’t go beheading US citizens afterwards, do they?

    I’m exclusively talking about the notion of terrorism against civilians, not about resistance against the agents of active oppression.

    • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yes, Israel is currently oppressing the people of Gaza as I said. It’s basically a big open air concentration camp.

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The civilians are?

        Was 9/11 was justified against the people of NY because of the actions of the US government oppressing peoples in the Middle East?

        And the discussion was on multi-generational commitment to violence, not whether or not there’d be resistance to oppression in the here and now.

        Multi-generational commitment to violence is quite anomalous in history as I was saying.

        Resistance against opposition oppressive military is not, and extensively patterned throughout history.

        • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not too familiar with 9/11, I’m not American and it wasn’t a big deal here. It’s probably bad to target civilians exclusively in every situation but those terrorist groups usually crop up due to oppression and despair.

          No, it’s not. Like multi generational attempts at fighting your oppressor are very prevalent in history, even in my country Estonia the people here were enslaved for like 600 years after the crusades here and there were numerous uprisings, one that is celebrated to this day is when Estonians rose up and set fire to a huge amount of mansions owned by slave owners. Same for native Americans in the US, they fought for like 300 years.

          • kromem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            So you’re saying that given the suggested trend that after the USSR fell, most ethnic Estonians were carrying out terror attacks against the Russian immigrants moved in during Soviet occupation in retribution of the persecution and deportation which occurred during those years?

            While they were denied political influence and the ability to vote in representatives, they weren’t exactly lined up against a wall and shot. Why do you think that was?

            Same for native Americans in the US, they fought for like 300 years.

            And how’d that end up going for them? Every instance where a number of civilians were killed was used to justify retaliatory attacks that far exceeded the attacks being retaliated against.

            Just as 9/11 was used as justification for an overkill response that negatively impacted many civilians who had nothing to do with the attacks.

            Not exactly a great strategy.

            There are instances of violent groups taking violent actions spotted throughout history, but far less instances where entire populations were taking part in violent retributive attacks - which was the original proposal - that broadly Palestinian youths today are going to grow up to be the next Hamas attackers tomorrow.

            And that simply isn’t the case. People resorting to hyperviolence in mass numbers are a minority occurrence outside of very specific conditions where their own survival depends on their mob participation.

            The majority of Palestinians surviving the current human rights violations by Israel will likely go on to focus on living beyond the present experiences much as the majority of Holocaust survivors did the same instead of going around beheading random Germans. That generation didn’t tend to care for them much, but it wasn’t worth sacrificing the life they and less fortunate loved ones fought so hard to preserve.

            • FluffyPotato@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              That’s not even slightly what I said, I have no idea how you misread that. The USSR occupied Estonia for like 60 years but before the first Estonian republic Estonians were slaves and they fought against the slavers over that period of like 600 years. Including burning down residences of said slavers. During the USSR occupation we had groups that attacked the USSR as well, you can look up the forest brothers. But you wanted multi generational so the 600 years of slavery prior seems like a better example.

              You were saying this kind of resistance is an anomaly but as I said it’s not. During oppression people tend to rise up against their oppressor, that seems like the general trend. It’s sometimes effective and sometimes it’s hopeless but if you leave that as the seemingly only option for a group of people you are going to get terrorist groups with extreme views. Israel will most likely now kill a ton of civilians making even more terrorists because it’s the only recourse for the people there.