What Israel should do…

[Bugsy McGurk]

A ground war in Gaza now seems pointless and counter-productive. They have already bombed the beejesus out of Gaza. Thousands of strikes. Retaliation in spades.

But, we hear, the IDF has to invade in a ground war to “kill the Hamas.” Well, we sure don’t know how many Hamas will be killed. Just like we don’t know how many Israeli soldiers and hostages will be killed in a ground war. Nor do we know how many new Hamas-like extremists will result from an Israeli ground war. And what happens “after,” whatever the “after” is? Perpetual occupation by IDF forces?

The ground war seems pointless. No one is able to identify the end game. So what to do instead (or soon, now that the ground incursions have begun)? How about this…

First, announce that the blockade will end, in whole or in part, when all hostages are released. Food, water, electricity, medicines etc. flow in when the hostages come out. Then, create a no-mans land surrounding the entire Gaza border at least a mile wide. Level everything within that zone, and heavily stage IDF forces there, making it impossible for Hamas or anyone else to invade Israel again.

Rockets? Announce that any rocket launches will result in immediate, severe bombardment of the point of launch. Incentivize the Gaza residents in those areas to expose the bad guys. The iron dome will serve as the backdrop.

The goals would be met. Hostages back. More attacks prevented. Humanitarian disaster in Gaza avoided. End game established.

Better than a ground war, no?

 

[PhilFish]

A ground war in Gaza now seems pointless and counter-productive. They have already bombed the beejesus out of Gaza. Thousands of strikes. Retaliation in spades.

But, we hear, the IDF has to invade in a ground war to “kill the Hamas.” Well, we sure don’t know how many Hamas will be killed. Just like we don’t know how many Israeli soldiers and hostages will be killed in a ground war. Nor do we know how many new Hamas-like extremists will result from an Israeli ground war. And what happens “after,” whatever the “after” is? Perpetual occupation by IDF forces?

The ground war seems pointless. No one is able to identify the end game. So what to do instead (or soon, now that the ground incursions have begun)? How about this…

First, announce that the blockade will end, in whole or in part, when all hostages are released. Food, water, electricity, medicines etc. flow in when the hostages come out. Then, create a no-mans land surrounding the entire Gaza border at least a mile wide. Level everything within that zone, and heavily stage IDF forces there, making it impossible for Hamas or anyone else to invade Israel again.

Rockets? Announce that any rocket launches will result in immediate, severe bombardment of the point of launch. Incentivize the Gaza residents in those areas to expose the bad guys. The iron dome will serve as the backdrop.

The goals would be met. Hostages back. More attacks prevented. Humanitarian disaster in Gaza avoided. End game established.

Better than a ground war, no?

How is that better than ground war? Isn't Hamas known for positioning its missiles in places like neighborhoods, and schoolyards and hospitals and the like. Yes I believe it is well known for doing that. That's kind of what brings us around and round over the decades.

It's not hard to figure out what Israel is going to do. They're going to pummel Gaza to dust. It's really kind of obvious

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

How is that better than ground war? Isn't Hamas known for positioning its missiles in places like neighborhoods, and schoolyards and hospitals and the like. Yes I believe it is well known for doing that. That's kind of what brings us around and round over the decades.

It's not hard to figure out what Israel is going to do. They're going to pummel Gaza to dust. It's really kind of obvious

I set out my reasons why my proposal is better than a ground war. It better meets the objectives I outlined.

Responding with “pummel Gaza to dust” may be satisfying, but it doesn’t address what I said, and it doesn’t meet the objectives.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

And another factor to consider…

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/10/27/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-israel-us-invasion.html

 

[PhilFish]

I set out my reasons why my proposal is better than a ground war. It better meets the objectives I outlined.

Responding with “pummel Gaza to dust” may be satisfying, but it doesn’t address what I said, and it doesn’t meet the objectives.

There is already a 1 km border.

I wasn't looking for satisfaction I was simply stating what Israel is going to do in my opinion.

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

There is already a 1 km border.

I wasn't looking for satisfaction I was simply stating what Israel is going to do in my opinion.

They have pretty much pounded Gaza into dust already. My suggestions don’t relate to that, but are possible alternatives to a ground war/occupation.

The question is what they should do, not what one thinks they will do.

 

[PhilFish]

They have pretty much pounded Gaza into dust already. My suggestions don’t relate to that, but are possible alternatives to a ground war/occupation.

The question is what they should do, not what one thinks they will do.

They should eliminate Hamas from gaza, which is what they're doing foot by foot, tunnel by tunnel

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

They should eliminate Hamas from gaza, which is what they're doing foot by foot, tunnel by tunnel

You do know they’re not going to be able to eliminate all 40,000 Hamas, right? And that even trying to do that in a ground war will result in untold deaths of IDF soldiers and hostages. And that the nightmarish effort in a tunnel-riddled urban area, along with the continued humanitarian disaster, may “create” 10 extremists for each Hamas killed. And that such a “plan” says nothing about what happens “after,” whenever and whatever that “after” might be.

Seems like a pretty shoddy “plan” to me.

 

[PhilFish]

They have pretty much pounded Gaza into dust already. My suggestions don’t relate to that, but are possible alternatives to a ground war/occupation.

The question is what they should do, not what one thinks they will do.

I believe we've already covered that. There is already a buffer zone monitored by the IDF. Israel historically has responded to missiles launched from Gaza territory, to The misfortune of everyone. So you're advocating essentially for what already exists, a repeat of the same. We also know historically that Gaza is victimized by Hamas because they place their missiles in residential areas. So more of the same

 

[PhilFish]

You do know they’re not going to be able to eliminate all 40,000 Hamas, right? And that even trying to do that in a ground war will result in untold deaths of IDF soldiers and hostages. And that the nightmarish effort in a tunnel-riddled urban area, along with the continued humanitarian disaster, may “create” 10 extremists for each Hamas killed. And that such a “plan” says nothing about what happens “after,” whenever and whatever that “after” might be.

Seems like a pretty shoddy “plan” to me.

The Israelis are already employing bunker buster type bombs reaching the tunnels below.

 

[PhilFish]

You do know they’re not going to be able to eliminate all 40,000 Hamas, right? And that even trying to do that in a ground war will result in untold deaths of IDF soldiers and hostages. And that the nightmarish effort in a tunnel-riddled urban area, along with the continued humanitarian disaster, may “create” 10 extremists for each Hamas killed. And that such a “plan” says nothing about what happens “after,” whenever and whatever that “after” might be.

Seems like a pretty shoddy “plan” to me.

If you're referring to your own plan, namely allowing Hamas to continue to position its missiles amongst the civilians in Gaza in order to incite an Israeli response when it launches its missiles... And then yeah it is a pretty shoddy plan

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

I believe we've already covered that. There is already a buffer zone monitored by the IDF. Israel historically has responded to missiles launched from Gaza territory, to The misfortune of everyone. So you're advocating essentially for what already exists, a repeat of the same. We also know historically that Gaza is victimized by Hamas because they place their missiles in residential areas. So more of the same

Not really. What you describe has some similarities to certain things I proposed, but they are not the same. To take but one example, the IDF became complacent and did not heavily defend the border. It took them hours to get to the scene. That is the polar opposite of what I propose.

How about the hostages? Tough noogies?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

If you're referring to your own plan, namely allowing Hamas to continue to position its missiles amongst the civilians in Gaza in order to incite an Israeli response when it launches its missiles... And then yeah it is a pretty shoddy plan

You prefer no response if someone fires rockets into Israel? Not me. I think the far better plan, part of the package I laid out, is to announce in advance that any future rocket firings will result in immediate, massive bombing of the area from which the rockets were fired. A truly penalizing disincentive, backed up by the iron dome.

Since you seem to like the full, gruesome ground war alternative, how would you prevent rocket firings after the IDF leaves? Or would the IDF never leave?

 

[PhilFish]

Not really. What you describe has some similarities to certain things I proposed, but they are not the same. To take but one example, the IDF became complacent and did not heavily defend the border. It took them hours to get to the scene. That is the polar opposite of what I propose.

How about the hostages? Tough noogies?

My understanding is that the Israeli Gaza border is one of the most militarized and heavily patrolled areas on Earth. Is it perfect no. Was there at least some pretense towards establishing some more peaceful relations, yes. Did those turn out to be an abject lie on behalf of Hamas, who coincidentally leads the Palestinian government, also yes. It seems now that you're citing complacency and fault finding. Meanwhile the reality is that any in all overtures on behalf of hamas/gaza/palestinians were an abject lie. But anyway, what about the hostages? You're aware that both the American and Israeli governments and others are actively negotiating yes?

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

My understanding is that the Israeli Gaza border is one of the most militarized and heavily patrolled areas on Earth. Is it perfect no. Was there at least some pretense towards establishing some more peaceful relations, yes. Did those turn out to be an abject lie on behalf of Hamas, who coincidentally leads the Palestinian government, also yes. It seems now that you're citing complacency and fault finding. Meanwhile the reality is that any in all overtures on behalf of hamas/gaza/palestinians were an abject lie. But anyway, what about the hostages? You're aware that both the American and Israeli governments and others are actively negotiating yes?

Obviously not. The Israeli Gaza border was SUPPOSED to be “one of the most militarized and heavily patrolled areas on Earth.” It was not. The IDF failed the Israelis who got slaughtered. That much is obvious. It took the IDF HOURS to get there after the assault. My package of proposals would dramatically reverse that, among the other things I laid out.

 

[PhilFish]

You prefer no response if someone fires rockets into Israel? Not me. I think the far better plan, part of the package I laid out, is to announce in advance that any future rocket firings will result in immediate, massive bombing of the area from which the rockets were fired. A truly penalizing disincentive, backed up by the iron dome.

Since you seem to like the full, gruesome ground war alternative, how would you prevent rocket firings after the IDF leaves? Or would the IDF never leave?

No I didn't say I preferred no response if someone fires rocket since Israel. We know historically that rocket firings into Israel have resulted in immediate massive bombing of the area from which the rockets were fired. That's kind of hamas's modus operandi. A disincentive that is existed for a long long time

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

No I didn't say I preferred no response if someone fires rocket since Israel. We know historically that rocket firings into Israel have resulted in immediate massive bombing of the area from which the rockets were fired. That's kind of hamas's modus operandi. A disincentive that is existed for a long long time

Nah, not in the way I propose, as part of the package I propose. Prior to October 7 Israel did not immediately and massively bomb launch areas in the way I have suggested. The IDF was way too complacent across the board.

 

[PhilFish]

Obviously not. The Israeli Gaza border was SUPPOSED to be “one of the most militarized and heavily patrolled areas on Earth.” It was not. The IDF failed the Israelis who got slaughtered. That much is obvious. It took the IDF HOURS to get there after the assault. My package of proposals would dramatically reverse that, among the other things I laid out.

Are you implying that the IDF should have responded in moments? If such a thing occurred here in the United States is the implication that only moments should transpire before a response is effected.

You're looking to fingerpoint and cast blame which is sad given the circumstance

 

[PhilFish]

Nah, not in the way I propose, as part of the package I propose. Prior to October 7 Israel did not immediately and massively bomb launch areas in the way I have suggested. The IDF was way too complacent across the board.

Then you should be pleased with what they're enacting. They are far from complacent now, they are in fact exerting themselves very very proactively

 

[Bugsy McGurk]

Are you implying that the IDF should have responded in moments? If such a thing occurred here in the United States is the implication that only moments should transpire before a response is effected.

You're looking to fingerpoint and cast blame which is sad given the circumstance

No. I described in detail what I propose. Not that “the IDF should have responded in moments,” but that the IDF be present in massive numbers so that they prevent any future raids, not that they respond to them after the fact.

And I’m obviously not looking to “finger point.” I’m proposing changes to what existed before the October 7 attack so that future attacks from Gaza are prevented.