Quote:
Originally Posted by Sephiroth
Where are you going with this stupid speculation?
The corollary to your argument is that Israel should not have attacked Hamas because they would only have to do it again with its successor terrorist organisation.
What you should have said is that post-Hamas, a solution to the Gaza situation will be needed. Of course, that's impossible because the Israeli Ultras have embedded themselves in the West Bank and they are also part of the Israeli government.
So, is terrorism the answer? Is it a justifiable 'last resort'? It's a vicious circle. But the terrorism must be punished.
|
Realistically, Hamas or a successor terrorist group cannot be eliminated but can be heavily disrupted. The Israeli government wanted revenge for the 1,400 death and some of the Palestinians will be no different in seeking revenge for the 13,000+ deaths in Gaza. Violence begets violence whether it's in the name of Hamas or another organisation. Thus, the tragic vicious circle continues.
So, if Hamas cannot be eliminated the logical conclusion to this is to resolve the territorial issue (unlikely in the short or even medium term) and to minimise the threat of incursion into Israel by better intelligence and security (more realistic).
Your penultimate paragraph is sensible.