[Sephiroth]

Originally Posted by jfman

Israel is shooting itself in the foot everywhere. Destroying Hamas as a byproduct of the systematic destruction of Gaza isn’t (in my view) acceptable. It opens up the hypocrisy of the West, it’s weakened our authority around the globe and ultimately led to a series of events where we’ve strengthened Iran’s standing in the region.

The only hope, and it’s slim, is for someone better than Netanyahu to win the elections and seek a constructive dialogue with its neighbours. As ever, nobody is questioning the right to make a proportionate response to terrorist actions. Radicalising more people has inevitable outcomes, as do the pourous borders in Europe and the UK.

Of course, nobody will question whether the victims of future terrorist attacks condemned Israel enough or who they voted for. Those are preposterous notions we simply would not apply to anyone else, anywhere in the world.

Israel is shooting itself in the foot everywhere. Destroying Hamas as a byproduct of the systematic destruction of Gaza isn’t (in my view) acceptable. It opens up the hypocrisy of the West, it’s weakened our authority around the globe and ultimately led to a series of events where we’ve strengthened Iran’s standing in the region.

For a start, and perhaps you were trapping me into saying this, the destruction of Gaza is a by-product of attempting to destroy Hamas. Sure, the collateral damage doesn't like being destroyed but it has cheered Hamas on; so what do those people expect?

I'll ask again: How should Israel go about destroying Hamas?

As for "Iran's standing in the region": It is a pity that you make your argument so shallowly. Iran is widely disliked in "the region". Sunni/Shia stuff not to mention the destabilising proxy warfare promoted by Iran. However, we probably both agree that Trump's war, having left the despicable Iranian regime in place, has left Iran still being feared by reasonable people.

"Hypocrisy of the west" has always been part of your mantra and is irrelevant to this topic unless the "west" only means the USA.

The only hope, and it’s slim, is for someone better than Netanyahu to win the elections and seek a constructive dialogue with its neighbours. As ever, nobody is questioning the right to make a proportionate response to terrorist actions. Radicalising more people has inevitable outcomes, as do the pourous borders in Europe and the UK.

We sort of align here. Netanyahu's departure, if replaced by a moderate might well (I hope) give a better deal to the West Bank. But the fight against Hamas/Hezbollah will remain a necessity. You have not acknowledged this, and I suspect this is a sign of irrational prejudice.

Of course, nobody will question whether the victims of future terrorist attacks condemned Israel enough or who they voted for. Those are preposterous notions we simply would not apply to anyone else, anywhere in the world.

Talk about tuning things upside down: If I've understood you right the victims of future terrorism should be blaming Israel; at least that's how it reads. If it should read otherwise, then it makes little sense of meaning and in any case "preposterous notions".