Hacker News Reader

Comment by hackerlight | Hacker News Reader

Build an impenetrable DMZ, keep improving missile defence systems, continue forming alliances with neighboring Arab states, stop settlement expansion in West bank, crack down on settler violence, expel right-wing zealots from positions of power, iterate for 20-60 years, let the next generation figure it out. Get hostages out as a condition of a ceasefire agreement.

Things were looking optimistic during the Oslo talks, I don't see a reason why we can't get back to that state of affairs with enough steady work over a 30-year timeframe.

The alternative, an invasion, is also a multi-decade investment, by the way. You can't just remove Hamas and not occupy for decades if you don't want another Hamas to emerge.

View on HN

Just from a military perspective, I'm not sure defense-only is a viable long-term strategy. Iron Dome's interceptors cost something like 50x more than Hamas' simple rockets, so it ends up being a cheap way for Iran to deplete their enemies' military budgets.

Even ignoring cost, a few percent of rockets get through, and the technological gap is narrowing thanks to Iran. I think the damage could drastically increase as Hamas starts using faster rockets and guidance systems.

So you want the right-wing zealots in power to eject themselves? Or you expect a ground swell of support for left candidates who would tend to favor making peace with an enemy who just attacked you? Best case is that Hamas is completely routed (who knows) and Bibi takes all the flak for the war crimes and what have you. What happens if Israel does what you say but are still suffering attacks? How much antisemitism exists there?

> So you want the right-wing zealots in power to eject themselves?

I want the US to force their hand to stop the invasion. Then Netanyahu's reckoning will come with the Israeli population. Likud needs this invasion to happen to distract the population from accountability. But if the US forces them to not invade, that reckoning can come sooner.

> What happens if Israel does what you say but are still suffering attacks?

That's where the DMZ and continued investment in missile defense comes in. Heck, get some security assurances from the US as part of a ceasefire agreement with Hamas. There should be creative solutions.

There's no such thing as an "impenetrable DMZ" so I don't know why you bring that up. Even the most fortified borders can have gaping holes as the October 7 attack showed. The US can't force anything either. During the Yom Kippur War when the US was a lot more hesitant about giving aid the only result was Israel threatening to use nuclear weapons against the Arab armies.

> There's no such thing as an "impenetrable DMZ" so I don't know why you bring that up.

You know what I mean. I am obviously not claiming that a DMZ can be perfectly impenetrable. I'm talking about one that's actually manned, and one that is significantly better than what is currently in place, to the point that a repeat attack is sufficiently unrealistic.

> The US can't force anything either.

Yes they can. Israel relies on them for their security umbrella and trade relationships. US has an extreme amount of leverage, if only it would use it.

> Heck, get some security assurances from the US as part of a ceasefire agreement with Hamas.

That didn't work for Ukraine.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com