"At war with Hamas (only) /Liberate Gazans from Hamas" Argument
- Ariel Avidar
- 6 days ago
- 5 min read
Updated: 3 days ago
At War with Hamas Only Argument
Our next flawed argument is that which says, Israel is at war with Hamas, not with people of Gaza. Israel predates Hamas. Hamas was created to fight Israel. So if your argument, Israel, is that you're only trying to defeat Hamas, then the obvious question will be, what about pre-Hamas? Why was there no peace with the "peace-loving" Palestinians then? Therefore, Israel must be the obstacle. Israel doesn't want the two-state solution.
Most Israelis are surprised that the West and even Netanyahu have harped on this narrative, this Hamas narrative. Now, if we go back to May of 2023, May of 2023, okay, May, June, July, August, September, October, six months. If we go back only to May, PIJ shot over the course of four days, 1,500 rockets at Israel. That's hundreds of rockets a day. Israel asked Hamas not to get involved.
And in return, Israel did not target the Hamas rocket launchers, which obviously are aimed at Israel nonetheless. But Israel did not target the rocket launchers. Israel then praised Hamas's restraint. And Israel assessed from this, and this did not age well, Israel assessed from this that because Hamas did not get involved in May, therefore, Hamas is not interested and was not interested in escalating the conflict. It was sufficiently deterred. It did not want to get involved.
To say that this was by design, it's probably giving Hamas too much credit. But we have to remember, this is a very savvy enemy. They have, Hamas has, PIJ for that matter, in Gaza, they have zero tanks, zero airplanes, zero helicopters. And they're facing the fourth strongest army in the world. That's at least according to US news and world reports. And they have been able to do this for half a year now, using international pressure and of course, the hostages.
Hamas has no offensive capabilities. All they have are the rockets. These rockets, which are a medieval technology. They have no propulsion to drive them, no guidance to aim them, and no warhead to explode. Now, there was one picture, there's several pictures, but one picture that was particularly notable, where a Hamas rocket had hit a building in the south. It hit maybe the second floor, let's say. And the window, just below where the rocket hit, the flowers did not burn, the flowers, the flowerpot did not move.
So it tells us, the technology, the rockets, they are throwing hot metal. And this group, these groups are now negotiating publicly in the world, are holding their own for six months against the fourth strongest army in the world.
There's no Hamasville, there's no island that sits off the coast of Gaza. There is PIJ, there is Fatah, there are the Al-Aqsa martyrs, there's ISIS, there's the Muslim Brotherhood. So the idea that Hamas has come in and conquered Gaza, which is the idea that's being used in the West, in the narrative by the United States, is a logic trap, as we discussed above. Heading right into the two-state solution.
But the reality is, it's a complete fallacy. Atrocities in Gaza, in Israel, in Palestine, date back well before the state. They date back to the Balfour Declaration, to the Hebron massacres in 1929. The difference here, this time, is not necessarily in the atrocities. It's in the GoPros, it's in the social media.
But the point is, before there was Hamas, and after Hamas, there are different groups, and they have different acronyms, and there's a different alphabet soup that they use. The electoral support in Gaza for Hamas is well documented. It's documented in the voting booths. It's documented in their textbooks. It's documented in the streets, in their reaction.
And it's documented by the fact that six months into the war, six months into Israel bombarding Gaza, and there is no uprising, any other group, any other place, should say, "get these hostages out of here, get Hamas out of here, they are causing tremendous destruction, whether directly, indirectly. Get them out."
But the point is, the people support them. The people agree. So why does the West harp on this idea that everyone in Gaza is peace-loving, but for Hamas, we would have the ability, the route to a two-state solution? But for Israel, we would go right through to a two-state solution.
And the problem is, as we know, the ignorant Westerner projects his own values, and he thinks every problem could be solved with a new iPhone, and a new Tesla, and that it's an economic issue. But it's not. It's a religious conflict.
Now, this includes Israelis, Israeli leadership. Gantz, for example, work-permit-Gantz, also believes that the more work permits he gives, the more likelihood he can have peace and quiet. Again, it's misunderstanding the problem. It's putting a band-aid on a headache. It doesn't make any sense.
Now, worse is that these concessions are seen as offensive by the Palestinians. The Palestinians believe their land has been stolen. They've been taught that for generations.
Now, imagine if I steal your car, and then I say to you, you know what, I'm going to let you borrow this car once a week. And even worse, I'm going to tell everyone, look how nice I am. Look how generous I am, because I'm lending you my car.
Now, I'm not saying right or wrong in terms of the arguments, but I want for Israeli leaders to understand how this is perceived worldwide. This is how it looks.
Liberate Palestinians from Hamas Argument
There's a similar offshoot to this argument, and it says this. It's a beauty. It says Israel is fighting to liberate the Palestinians from Hamas. Now, I've heard this one in the media as well.
So the Palestinians and the West, many of whom believe at this point, that Israel is a bunch of baby killers. They're committing genocide. They are apartheid. And now Israel is arguing to them. Yes, but all of this is for you. I am trying to liberate you. I am doing it all out of the goodness of my heart, because I care about you and want you to be free.
Overall, we have to drop these flawed arguments. We, Israel, have to drop these awful arguments. They damage Israel's credibility. They're disingenuous. They're seen that way by the entire world.
The truth is, the response to October 7th doesn't require a tricky justification. Israel was attacked. It had been attacked in the past, and it will be continued to be attacked in the future unless it acts. Period.
Comments