— Musings —10.15.2023 06:56 AM
Hamas’ historic miscalculation
Hamas expected Hezbollah to join them. They believed Arab nations would offer rhetorical and material support – and global jihad, too.
None has happened. Hamas’ attack on Israel will turn out to be a mistake of Biblical proportions, which they’ll soon be contemplating in Hell.
From what I can see, a bunch of the rhetorical support has been in Canada.
True. But for the most part they are fringe Leftwing parties and goof balls. Annoying, yes. But only the neo-Nazis are father from actual power.
One of the fringe left wing parties(which actually overlaps with a lot of goof balls) is keeping Justin in power though. Respectfully, it’s a problem.
Warren,
I’m still worried about Hezbollah. Given that their very existence depends almost solely on Iran, there is still the possibility that the Iranians will eventually give them their marching orders. So far, a few infiltrators have been killed and only a few rockets have been fired. Let’s hope that’s the end of it but as the old saying goes, hope is never a strategy.
They’ll be contemplating it in Hell alongside a whole lot of innocent Palestinians who aren’t even being given an option to get out.
Don’t get me wrong. Hamas must be destroyed for what they have done. They cannot be tolerated any further. But we have become awfully accepting of the collateral damage that is to come here. Some even seem to be reveling in it.
I can’t claim to have answers for the Middle East. Half the people on both sides will settle for nothing less than the total eradication of the other. As such, supporting any government activity on any side in that conflict feels incredibly gross.
Jason: Your comments are along my line of thinking. I see shades of Afghanistan here. Israel and its allies want to march in and destroy Hamas with technological superiority and are morally justified in doing so. No question or dispute on that.
But what exactly does it mean to destroy Hamas? When can it be said that this has been achieved? The problem is that this terrorist government seems to have its claws in the day to day secular realities of the local population. In the same way the Taliban did.
An American General was on TV last night saying that the local Gazans would give up the Hamas locations and assist Israel because they would want the siege lifted. All I could think is that this guy has lost his marbles. That obviously isn’t going to the response of typical Gazans. Further, isn’t it obvious that Hamas fighters will attempt to escape through the humanitarian corridors? How can that be controlled? It can’t.
Even worse, Israel is surrounded by enemies who might be more prone to react with the West / NATO more occupied by Ukraine. There are no wise calculations available to any side at the moment.
aptly put “I can’t claim to have answers…” I would say Far MORE than one half (the Arab-Palestinian terror groups) subscribe to an outright removal of the Israeli state. To my knowledge Israel has not subscribed (till now) to the death of any Arab nation, just the terrorists.
I’d also say that one side seems to resort to terror the other to a very stout defence.
Seems to me the Israelis do a whole lot of responding to attack.
Phil,
It’s not just the weather that’s delaying the move into Gaza. They can’t wait for too long but quite obviously, the IDF is trying to mitigate to some extent the possibility of civilian casualties. But war is messy and missiles/shells do go astray. So we will see some unintentional civilian deaths.
“Maybe God himself is lost and needs help,
Maybe God himself needs all of our help,
Out along the road to peace.” – Tom Waits.
For they have sown the wind, and now they shall reap the whirlwind- Hosea: 9.7/ Air Marshall Arthur “Bomber” Harris.
PJH,
Excellent. However, it’s rather ironic that in some quarters, Harris was considered a war criminal for the leveling of cities. But as we all know, the victors never get to experience war crimes trials. I don’t know if I would personally go that far but I would at least want to hear out the case in favour of it before reflexively dismissing it.