Comment by voisin
1 year ago
I refer in my comment to the impact to non-Hamas Palestinians. Eliminating the terrorist organization of Hamas is not controversial (at least in my mind), but the civilian casualties to regular Palestinians seems to be indefensible (again, at least in my mind)
Problem is no one will take refugees from Gaza even temporarily. If countries would the death toll would be much less. The reason Egypt doesn't is because Hamas has links to and provides support for Islamic terrorists groups involved the Sinai Insurgency. I think that hope had been that over time since 2007 Hamas would moderate and act more rationally. Instead the opposite has happened.
So the combination having to destroy Hamas and the unwillingness of other countries to take refugees is terrible for hapless civilians.
> Problem is no one will take refugees from Gaza even temporarily.
Problem is history shows "temporary" displacement tend to become permanent displacement (AKA Ethnic cleansing) under the current settler-apartheid regime ruling Israel, so other countries understandably refrain to abet ethnic cleansing.
I agree the worst thing that could happen is displaced Palestinians from Gaza refusing to go back to where other people have decided they have to live because otherwise it'd be ethnic cleansing.
> Problem is no one will take refugees from Gaza even temporarily. If countries would the death toll would be much less.
Why should other countries bear the burden and costs for a problem that is overwhelmingly a consequence of the actions of the Israeli state in general, and the current far-right government in particular?