Hacker News Reader

Comment by solidsnack9000 | Hacker News Reader

For everyone in this thread hoping for a "Marshall Plan" or other functional aid regime for Gaza, keep in mind that the Marshall Plan began with defeat. It was only with Germany's unconditional surrender that the Allies could establish security and make a plan for the future. Hamas has had many opportunities to surrender and hasn't taken them.

Hitler had many opportunities, as well; but chose not to. Surrender was not a choice the Allies could make for him or for Germany; and it is not a choice Israel can make for Hamas or Gaza.

View on HN

The only path for peace in the Middle East is for Israel to get the same treatment Germany got after WW2. Israel has shown over many decades that it does not respect human life. The mass murders comitted by the Tel Aviv regime leave no other option.

one could argue, that with hamas de facto defeated and now rival gangs rising up to take power, israel could unilaterally ceasefire and hold elections for a new government to run the strip. hamas, if they pop up again, are disposed of with both domestic and IDF forces.

the main problem is that doing so would probably result in the death of the hostages. hamas wants to stay in power, even if gaza is reduced to sand, they will hold onto the hostages until their power, even over nothing but skeletons, is assured.

the IDF could continue to engage on hamas's terms, or it could make the heartbreaking decision to give up on the hostages and focus on saving the innocent gazan civilians.

After all these atrocities, even with Hamas completely gone the hatred for Israel will remain. This war will not stop, only pause.

Imagine all the kids that are growing up in Gaza now, witnessing so much pain, misery and death. How on earth could they forgive Israel, especially as it continues to invade and occupy their territories ?

The Germans did, because they love their children more than they hate their enemies:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_and_expulsion_of_German...

These are very, very different situations. You are comparing nations and cultures that have be living side by side for thousands of years to a 77 year old state (Israel) occupying territory that has been Palestinean for thousands of years.

Israel and Ozzy Osbourne were born on the same year. People that were born after Ozzy, can no longer return to their birthplace, because it is now Israel and they are besieged in Gaza.

> You are comparing nations and cultures that have be living side by side for thousands of years to a 77 year old state (Israel) occupying territory that has been Palestinean for thousands of years.

What difference does that make for 'all the kids that are growing up in Gaza now'? If they're less than 77 years old (which I assume they are, being kids and all), Israel has been their (and many of their parents') neighbour for all of their lives.

International relationships and balances are created through centuries of cultural ties and exchanges. Don't you think it makes a difference if you know that you cannot visit the birthplace of your parents because it has been occupied ?

Israels government doesn't care about the hostages. They could have saved all remaining hostages by just not unilaterally breaking the ceasefire earlier this year.

Ultimately it's Iran's call who takes power in Gaza, as they've been funding various groups based on the willingness to engage Israel - for this reason the PLO originally fell out in favor of Hamas when it softened its stance.

Ultimately it will be

A) Israel who takes power once the population has been exterminated down to a size they can manage.

B) the israeli regime will be overthrown with military force by an international coalition excluding the west.

Currently A seems more likely. It would not be the first successfully executed genocide.

Any comparison between the Palestinians and Nazi Germany is absurd. It's like comparing the Native Americans to the Nazis and asking, "Why didn't they just surrender to the European colonists? They chose to fight to the end, so it's their own fault."

but Arabs colonised the Levant from their native homeland in the Arabian Peninsula.

The Arabs did not replace the native peoples of the Levant. The Palestinians turn out to be even more closely related to ancient Levantine people (including ancient Israelites) than most Israelis are. Levantine peoples started speaking Arabic, the same way that Jews in ancient times stopped speaking Hebrew (except in religious contexts) and adopted Aramaic as their native language.

Not that any of this matters. What happened in the 7th Century CE is not relevant to the question of who the native population was in 1900.

> What happened in the 7th Century CE is not relevant to the question of who the native population was in 1900.

but it does. Jewish people have lived in the area for 3600 years, Arab Abs arrived 1600 years later, violently colonising the Middle East and North Africa Africa and violence in the name of Islam remains a global problem to this day.

Judaism hasn't even existed for anywhere near 3600 years, and most Arabs are just local people who started speaking Arabic in the centuries after the spread of Islam (much like the Jews stopped speaking Hebrew 2000 years ago and adopted Aramaic).

One of the weirdest things about this conflict is that the Palestinians are more closely related to the ancient Israelites than many (maybe even most) Israelis.

There were also people in the German Realm, aiming for negotiations (July-Assassinations, Stauffenberg), but the allies made it clear early on that they don't wanted a peace deal, which led to less support among the conspirators.

It was also the US-Marshall Plan (not the allied) and it was also for Europe not for Germany.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com