• homoludens@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      Thanks. So Israel handed out work permits and “allowed suitcases holding millions in Qatari cash to enter Gaza through its crossings since 2018, in order to maintain its fragile ceasefire with the Hamas”.

      That’s sounds a bit different from “Netanyahu didn’t just let the attacks happen, we also know he funded Hamas, and has wanted the attack to use as casus belli so he could do some fucked up war crimes of his own.”

      I’m not denying that he’s employing a “divide and conquer” strategy, that a lot of his doing is making the conflict worse, that’s he’s using the opportunity to do a lot of damage etc. But it’s not that he funded Hamas because he wanted the attack to happen (at least the article doesn’t prove that).

      • NoneOfUrBusiness@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        It’s not that he wanted this particular attack to happen (this article doesn’t prove that, as you said). It’s that he’s been allowing Qatari money to flow into Gaza, knowing full well it’s Hamas getting it. As for the fact that Netanyahu wanted to do warcrimes… Well just look at what he and his cabinet say.

        • The Snark Urge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          7 months ago

          Funded versus allowed, I oversimplified maybe but to a statesman it amounts to the same thing imo.

          • Empricorn@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            Netanyahu didn’t just let the attacks happen, we also know he funded Hamas

            Objectively false, you can’t dispute that.

            Also, even if it was the only distortion, “funded” vs “allowed” mean completely different things, even in that specific context. I’m not being pedantic either; words mean things, especially in such a complex situation.

            To be clear, I’m not fully on either side because both Hamas and Israel have done horrible things. But your “oversimplification” is really misinformation and has to be called out as such.

          • Saik0@lemmy.saik0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            7 months ago

            HAMAS is the ruling Palestinian party in the Gaza strip. If Netanyahu didn’t allow money to pass over the border into Gaza, everyone here would be frothing at the mouth that Israel isn’t allowing money into Gaza to fund hospitals! I’m not defending Netanyahu… but I don’t see a situation that couldn’t be spun against Israel.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        You can’t ever prove that last part. But knowing he had the intelligence and still moved troops away is pretty indicative of a decision that the Israelis in those towns were expendable.

    • Endorkend@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      It’s interesting to me that that has to be repeated so often. It’s really not a little known fact.