this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2024
250 points (98.1% liked)

World News

39041 readers
2827 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

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.

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 !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I really think there are two different aspects to the classification of the threat. It’s actually pretty analogous to the Afghanistan War.

First, neither Al Quaeda nor Hamas represent an existential threat to their opponents. The US hasn’t really faced a believable existential threat since the collapse of the USSR, Israel hasn’t really faced one since the 80s. Countries in Eastern Europe face an existential threat from Russia. And so on. Killing 1200 (or 3000) people, no matter how brutally or unjustified or evil it seems, it does not threaten to destroy the state of Israel. It is, of course, now an existential threat to Netanyahu, which is one reason why it’s being pursued with such enthusiasm.

The second aspect builds from the first and questions whether the solution pursued by Israel (and the US) were both efficient (ie proportional to the threat so as not to divert attention and resources from other threats) and effective. They have to be expected to achieve specific and measurable goals and timelines.

The ability to pull off an Oct 7th might have been equally well but more efficiently and effectively with intelligence and commando units, and Israel would have been given free rein by most of the planet to do so.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 0 points 5 months ago

Tbf the US was doing just fine in Afghanistan until Bush literally let Bin Laden just walk away because he wanted to make a show of the Northern Alliance capturing him and turning him over.

From that point forward it was a saga of willful ignorance to the fact that Pakistan would literally do everything to make the mission harder because the US wanted a stable Afghanistan that doesn't let the Taliban come back and Pakistan wanted an effective zone of no governance that can't raise claims on Pashtunistan and Balochistan.

Israel are just being a bunch of weenies too afraid to develop a strategy to enter the tunnels to actually pursue any of the goals they claim they're after while quarantining refugee camps from entryways into the tunnel system to seal anyone hiding or rallying down there off from being able to just hop out and pretend to be civvies at the end of the work shift.

Israel could easily have turned this into a point to point clear and capture operation on the tunnels since it's so blatantly obvious that Hamas is hiding in there with the hostages, but they aren't doing that because that would require actually using Israeli troops and Israeli troops are slowly turning more and more mutinous towards the current regime.