• brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Hamas did start the attack

    If you think history started on the 7th of October, maybe.

    I just feel like this is a more nuanced issue

    Genocide is bad.

    • RedditRefugee69@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I just think it’s worth noting that Hamas does call for the destruction of Israel. You can’t discount one set of lost lives for another. The only real victims here are non-Hamas Palestinians

      • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Hamas calls for a two state solution along 1967 borders.

        Not that it matters: genocide is bad, regardless of what the people being genocided believe.

        • RedditRefugee69@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Here’s the reading I can find. US Gov CFR

          I’m not finding anything explicit about the destruction of Israel being a Hamas goal which is interesting. I wonder if anyone else can find that source. I would love for that not to be the case

          • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            So, two points

            1. I don’t understand why you’re going to a website of the USA intelligence apparatus - an apparatus that is currently participating in a genocidal war against Hamas - in order to learn what Hamas calls for. Why not look at what Hamas themselves say?

            2. Why are to adopting the default position that they do call for the destruction of isreal and then asking for sources that prove otherwise? Seems like the people making the claim should be able to provide their source, and if they can’t, they should maybe be asking themselves why they believed it in the first place.

            Though, again, it’s not really relevant: genocide is bad.

            • RedditRefugee69@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              I’m honestly not. I want to learn, especially in times like these where the information warfare is so tough on both sides. These were just the only more academic sources I could find. I’m not saying “I’m right until you prove otherwise” just trying to crowd source research

              • brain_in_a_box@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Well that’s fair enough.

                When it comes to the official stance of Hamas, I would suggest looking at their 2017 Charter. Notably item 20:

                1. Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded, irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus.
                • RedditRefugee69@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  That is interesting and thank you for the primary source reference! I’m trying to interpret the 1967 border phrase with the “complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea”. Is that just referring to the Gaza Strip and West Bank, not either or? Otherwise, the big concerning phrase is the “rejection of the Zionist entity”. It also seems by that last sentence that they want the total dismantling of Israel, but to compromise internally within Palestine, they’re willing to accept merely the 1967 line