Hacker News Reader

Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

I don't think there's a reasonable way to look at this situation and come away thinking that more Gazan civilians will be alive if Hamas continues fighting.

View on HN

This was not what was being discussed. The question was not about this war in particular. It was about all Gazans (or Palestinians in general) laying down all arms or other resistance to the Israeli occupation. The poster before was ridiculously claiming that Israel would end its oppression of Palestinians if they only submitted, and I was responding to that.

Even still, I do not agree at all that if Hamas stops fighting, Israel would immediately stop hostilities. I think they have proven very clearly, through words and actions, that they are seeking to break the spirit of Palestinians (or at least of Gazans), and to punish them for October 7th. If Hamas surrendered, Israel would just claim that they didn't, that it's either a ruse or that only a handful of the terrorists have surrendered and they need to continue the killing until they can confirm.

My argument doesn't depend on the premise of Israel ending hostilities if Hamas surrenders. I don't think they will. The argument is simply that Hamas's continued hostilities will increase Gazan civilian casualties, which is difficult to argue against.

It's not if Israel continues its killing campaign. At best, I could agree that Hamas surrendering would not increase casualties, but I doubt it would decrease them in any way.

I don't think that's a very defensible argument, but if you really believe that our premises are probably too far apart for it to be productive to keep talking about it. I don't think that Israeli attacks on Hamas installations are proportionate, but I don't think it's a mainstream bit of analysis that they're completely decoupled from Hamas itself.

Again, I would say, the Rule of Lord Farquaad applies.

You could look at West Bank and arrive at a conclusion that laying down arms did not end the occupation, not the colonisation. Neither the different rules for Palestininas and Israelis.

And? Ending the occupation isn't on the table, at least not by Hamas force of arms. Militarily, the conflict has been catastrophic for them. Every day they delay surrender, more civilians will die. Strictly through a military lens, they should end combat immediately.

The alternative argument seems to be that Hamas should sacrifice Gazan civilians to make a moral point. There's a scene in Shrek about that kind of logic.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com