quixoteFinally found it. The cartoon I saw that summarizes my feeling about the Hamas-Netanyahu disaster:
Bob Wyman@quixote I would like to see more discussion of how Israel should have responded to October 7. While many, including me, argue that their actual response was excessive, it is much harder to describe how they should have responded.
Janis@bobwyman @quixote That's because most people have zero background in tactical operations.
My HOA does a better job with our moles, you know, the blind, marginally fuzzy ones that also live in a tunnel system. Compelling the entire planet to the edge of our seats in anticipation of WW3 really, really wasn't it. You can't say there wasn't a better way than that, even without the 35,000 lives lost and the flattening of an entire local culture.
You can say this: none of it was the women.
filobus@bobwyman @quixote there's no right answer to this question, because when you put yourself in a messy situation you find yourself in a messy situation and that's all. But you can as always not decide to kill population en masse, and don't worsen the situation in general. React, not overreact, like in a mafia slaughter
In parallel, starting a process of analyzing all the errors they made from Rabin death on
In parallel, starting a process of analyzing all the errors they made from Rabin death on
@bobwyman A theoretical exercise, not practical.
If Israel's goal was eradicating Hamas with minimal civilian casualties:
1) build a sturdy "tent country" in the Sinai (??) for 2,000,000 people.
2) bus civilians there, carefully, with attention to special needs.
3) (Hamas fighters would avoid the convoy so they stay out of Israeli hands?)
4) With their human shields gone, fight Hamas in Gaza without destroying every building.
BUT doesn't address the human shield hostages. Needs work....