I don't trust Hamas any further than I can throw them.

What does 'total victory' in the war look like? Under what circumstances would Hamas be unable to retreat and rearm?

Complete demilitarization of Gaza monitored by international guarantors. PA, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people taking control. Any attempt to rearm harshly punishable by law.

This, not the mythical genocide, not the mythical land grab, not the mythical Kushner hotel properties, has been Israel's goal since 2005. The sooner this happens, the better it will be for the Gazans.

And if Hamas never formally surrenders? How do you establish that Hamas is out of power and out of Gaza?

That was your question, wasn't it?

because Jihadists don't surrender..

Resist them or embolden them?

Actually, it has always been on Jihadis.

They know how to deal with their own. And how.

"And if Hamas never formally surrenders? How do you establish that Hamas is out of power and out of Gaza?"

If Hamas never surrenders, what would make them surrender to the Saudis and the Arabs who pay them to be intransigent?

Sure, they know how to deal with their own, and how badly it may end up for them. That's why they wouldn't touch that pile of shit with a ten foot pole.

And if not the Saudis and the Arabs, who will send in the Saudis and the Arabs?

Both sides agree to a ceasefire if they get a bunch of prisoners and the hostages are released?


Is there anything about Hamas being in power in the agreement?

Hostages are th only leverage Hamas has. The fewer there are, the weaker Hamas gets.

It's a start. Hamas will end up a loser. To what extent and by what means is largely up to them.

Then why haven't they done it?. They haven't done it because it would cost them too much and they aren't willing to do that. Hopefully the truce works.

Or maybe you didn't.

Either way, "They haven't done it because it would cost them too much" is one of the more ridiculous speculations ever. There may be scores of reasons why they haven't done it, and neither you nor I are aware, or may ever be of even half of them. What I can say with some certainty, "cost too much" is way off to suggest as a halfass plausible reason why.

But you seemed to.

And, being woefully insufficient, this item is thus not included in what constitutes "total victory".

But in your words... whatever. Like I told you many times before, I am not interested in responding to what you think I think. I have a far more reliable and authoritative source on the subject. Me.

To this question.

speak easy (10,873 posts)
5. "So they can retreat and re-arm"
Reply to Archae (Reply #2)
Tue Jan 14, 2025, 09:21 AM

What does 'total victory' in the war look like? Under what circumstances would Hamas be unable to retreat and rearm?

Hamas out of power and out of Gaza, militarily and politically.
Reply to speak easy (Reply #5)
Tue Jan 14, 2025, 09:39 AM

Complete demilitarization of Gaza monitored by international guarantors. PA, the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people taking control. Any attempt to rearm harshly punishable by law.

Beastly Boy (11,505 posts)
31. No, in my words, return of hostages is woefully insufficient for "total victory".
Reply to Eko (Reply #29)
Tue Jan 14, 2025, 10:14 PM

And, being woefully insufficient, this item is thus not included in what constitutes "total victory".

anything I said implies keeping the hostages?

Once again, you are asking me about something you think I said, while completely ignoring what I said immediately after quoting what I said.

No, keeping the hostages is not acceptable under any circumstances, total victory or not. It does not figure into the calculus of total victory. This is what "return of hostages is woefully insufficient for "total victory" means.

Obviously, this doesn't mean that if they kept the hostages but everything else happened would be a total victory for Israel. It is literally the exact opposite. It means that the condition you are proposing and falsely ascribing to what I said or implied is WOEFULLY INSUFFICIENT to achieve total victory. It means that if this condition is not met, there can be no further talk of total victory.

This is quite self-evident. Understanding this is not such an insurmountable intellectual undertaking. Why then does the question that presumes Hamas keeping the hostages even enter your mind? It never entered mine, no matter what you think I think.

I am tired of explaining every fallacious argument you concoct. Give it a rest already.

So,

Obviously, this doesn't mean that if they kept the hostages but everything else happened would be a total victory for Israel.

It's as if you haven't read what you just read.

By all means, continue with this circus for as long as you wish, but don't expect me to participate.

"It (hostages) does not figure into the calculus of total victory"
and then
"Obviously, this doesn't mean that if they kept the hostages but everything else happened would be a total victory for Israel."
It doesn't figure into the calculus of total victory but if it doesn't happen then there is no total victory.
Most people would figure that is something happened or didn't happen (hostages being released and hostages not being released" and that changed the result (total victory or not total victory) then it does figure into the calculus of that result.
Like I said, always fun to talk with you.

They have been dictators since 2007.

That is a recipe for a forever war. What Jihadist group has ever surrendered? al-Qaeda? ISIS? al-Shabaab? Boko Haram? They will never surrender. I can see the Saudi/Arab League going into Gaza to establish security. But if the IDF remains it will became a game of Whac-A-Mole.

with Gaza and the West Bank, with the end-game goal of taking it ALL. Create a rabid junkyard dog, allow it to be funded with well over 2 billion dollars in Qatari cash, (plus dog only knows how much additional funding from Iran, Turkey, etc), the odds are high that dog of hate bites its erstwhile Israeli handler.

For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it’s blown up in our faces

The premier’s policy of treating the terror group as a partner, at the expense of Abbas and Palestinian statehood, has resulted in wounds that will take Israel years to heal from

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years-netanyahu-propped-up-hamas-now-its-blown-up-in-our-faces/

For years, the various governments led by Benjamin Netanyahu took an approach that divided power between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank — bringing Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to his knees while making moves that propped up the Hamas terror group. The idea was to prevent Abbas — or anyone else in the Palestinian Authority’s West Bank government — from advancing toward the establishment of a Palestinian state. Thus, amid this bid to impair Abbas, Hamas was upgraded from a mere terror group to an organization with which Israel held indirect negotiations via Egypt, and one that was allowed to receive infusions of cash from abroad.

snip

Most of the time, Israeli policy was to treat the Palestinian Authority as a burden and Hamas as an asset. Far-right MK Bezalel Smotrich, now the finance minister in the hardline government and leader of the Religious Zionism party, said so himself in 2015. According to various reports, Netanyahu made a similar point at a Likud faction meeting in early 2019, when he was quoted as saying that those who oppose a Palestinian state should support the transfer of funds to Gaza, because maintaining the separation between the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza would prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.

snip

They were Israel's 'eyes on the border' - but their Hamas warnings went unheard

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-67958260

Apparently, Dumpy disagrees with Bibi, and so do millions of Israelis.

They accept it, until they don't. Meanwhile they regroup, rearm, reinforce.

POS scum.

Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2025, 05:45 PM - Edit history (1)

No hostage returns? Continued suffering of the 2 million-plus non-combatant population in Gaza?

Re-arming is going to take a while with tunnels from Egypt largely destroyed, Hezbollah in retreat, and Iran wounded.

It's time. It's past time.

No cease fire, no hostages returned, continued suffering of Gazan civilians. And add to it complete annihilation of the State of Israel.

The way things are going for them, they cannot sustain this insanity. So they are negotiating for time in exchange for hostages. It is going to take a while, and this is the main reason that they are at the negotiating table at all.

All parties to the conflict are aware of this. Like you suggested yourself, none of it will stop rearming of Hamas. It will merely "take a while" before the insanity returns. Israel is willing to pay such high price being extorted from them by hostage takers only because they want the hostages back.

It's time.

On January 20? 🙄

Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2025, 09:41 AM - Edit history (1)

the ruling right wing coalition may vote to delay the ratification past Jan. 20.

And the world blames Israel when Hamas breaks the deal.

reported as "pre-emptive" strikes. That is what the western media reports

I think we're done speaking.

Still pushing that line of BS I see.

There's time for cynicism later.

Last edited Tue Jan 14, 2025, 10:37 PM - Edit history (1)

Whatever Hamas is getting is ransom for releasing the hostages they kidnapped, to end the abuses they are suffering as we speak.

Nothing changes. In 2011, Israel allowed 1,000 prisoners, including Sinwar, to be released in exchange for one hostage. Then when it goes bad, they cry to us.

Netanyahu probably delayed this to help Trump win.
Exact same deal was gonna be struck in May 2024. But it fell apart. (Because I guess..elections)
Now Trump can't send arms over to bomb Gaza into slithereens..... And can't seize Gaza for his mythical resort.