The article accuses Israel of potentially committing war crimes in its conflict with Hamas, focusing on a siege on Gaza, airstrikes harming civilians, and evacuation orders. It criticizes the U.S. for not condemning Israel’s actions and emphasizes the need for diplomatic solutions. The piece argues that Israel’s approach could backfire politically and suggests that there’s no military solution to the conflict. It calls for the U.S. to exercise influence to deter such actions, asserting it’s in the interests of both the U.S. and Israel to prevent further civilian casualties and maintain regional stability.

  • breakfastmtn
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is such a bizarre conspiracy theory. Netanyahu will be remembered as being asleep at the wheel for the worst attack on Israel in its history – and the worst massacre of Jewish people since the Holocaust. His political career, built almost solely on his ability to protect Israelis from exactly this kind of attack, is almost certainly over. His ability to obstruct his corruption trial is too. That’s extreme risk, no reward and really makes no sense at all.

    “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.”

    • rambaroo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Netanyahu openly admitted to enabling Hamas in order to delegitimize other Palestinian groups. It’s not even a conspiracy theory it’s just a fact.

      • breakfastmtn
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Though vile, encouraging strong extremists relative to moderates to divide Palestinians and discredit the idea of Palestinian government is not remotely the same thing as conspiring to murder thousands of your own citizens for political gain.

        (Also, he didn’t openly admit it. There’s an unconfirmed report that he said that during a 2019 meeting. Others close to Netanyahu have said that was basically the policy whether he said it or not.)

        • bobalot@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          https://archive.md/APxHn

          I think the claim that this was Netanyahu’s strategy is a bit stronger than you think.

          This is solidly documented. Between 2012 and 2018, Netanyahu gave Qatar approval to transfer a cumulative sum of about a billion dollars to Gaza, at least half of which reached Hamas, including its military wing. According to the Jerusalem Post, in a private meeting with members of his Likud party on March 11, 2019, Netanyahu explained the reckless step as follows: The money transfer is part of the strategy to divide the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Anyone who opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the transfer of the money from Qatar to Hamas. In that way, we will foil the establishment of a Palestinian state (as reported in former cabinet member Haim Ramon’s Hebrew-language book “Neged Haruach”, p. 417).

          In an interview with the Ynet news website on May 5, 2019, Netanyahu associate Gershon Hacohen, a major general in reserves, said, “We need to tell the truth. Netanyahu’s strategy is to prevent the option of two states, so he is turning Hamas into his closest partner. Openly Hamas is an enemy. Covertly, it’s an ally.”

          It has certainly backfired on him.

          Normally, buffoons being caught out by their buffoonery would be funny but it cost the lives of ~1000 civilians.

          • breakfastmtn
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I don’t disagree! I wasn’t disputing that it was his policy, only that he’s openly admitting it.

            • bobalot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              All good, mate. Wasn’t having at you.

              I do think he has openly admitted to his colleagues according to those articles.

    • PugJesus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know, I really think it’s a mix. A relatively small attack would have had a similar rallying effect without commensurate vitriol towards the ruling party. It may have been that Netanyahu believed, or chose to believe, that the impending attack would not be nearly so large or vicious as it ended up - another metaphorical bottle rocket barrage that he could use to distract from his other authoritarian undertakings.

      But I do agree that any conspiracy that asserts that the current Israeli government was looking for hundreds of Israeli deaths is deluded. Clearly, they did not see or chose not to see the scale of the coming attack.

      • breakfastmtn
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        But in this world, Netanyahu would have to trust Hamas to stage a small attack so much that he’d have the military stand down and give them free reign for like 16 hours. Absurd. Not to mention they were already getting small attacks from Gaza and regular violence in the West Bank from the crisis they created that has spiralled out of control. Again, extreme risk for no reward. And the most certain outcome would be gaining nothing and losing his power, legacy, and freedom when caught (if he wasn’t executed for treason).

        In people’s imaginations massive conspiracies are easy to pull off. In the real world, conspiracies that would necessarily involve dozens to hundreds of people (and multiple branches of government) don’t stay secret for long – especially when they’re catastrophically fucked up. It takes just one chatty Kathy, one drunk brag, one guilty conscience, one failed attempt at blackmail, one low-level conspirator who wants a book deal to topple the house of cards. Humans are nearly as bad at conspiring as they are at assessing risk.