At the time Israel and Egypt imposed the blockade, there probably wasn't a better option to protect against extremist attacks. Unfortunately, the deprivation and economic hardship caused by the blockade have helped radicalize a new generation of largely unemployed young men -- who, granted, might have ended up radicalized anyway. And the blockade clearly failed to achieve its main goal of preventing Hamas from amassing arms to attack its neighbors.
The lesson: Sometimes even your best option is doomed to failure.
It's probably good to also look at success/failure in relative terms, and not judge it solely on one failure.
It's been 16 years since the strong tightening of that border, and it's probably fair to say that there are whole lot of buses and cafes that haven't been blown up in Israel because of it.
While it contributed to Gazan anger -- fairly or unfairly -- Hamas and many (most?) Gazans believe the only solution to their problems is the eradication of every Jew between the river and the sea. If, over the last years, Iran had the unfettered ability to send weapons to Hamas fighters, October 7 could have been magnitudes worse.
Here's an interesting article regarding the territorial legitimacy of the Palestinians: https://canadafreepress.com/article/modern-palestinians-are-not-descended-from-ancient-philistines-implications. I still do not believe that the Israeli intelligence wasn't fully aware of the oncoming attack and someone within the government decided that an obvious reason to finally to root out Gaza was going to be worth the sacrifice that would result from standing down, as awful as it was going to be.
I'd steer clear of that theory unless and until there's evidence to support it. It's outrageous to think that the Israelis would be complicit in a horrifying and traumatic anti-semitic massacre right out of the Holocaust. The insinuation seems to have originated with Charlie Kirk, who based it on "gut instinct." Gimme a break.
How else would you explain the total breakdown of perhaps the best intelligence agency in the world? The fact that apparently zero forces took action while the massacre was taking place? I'm not saying the idea isn't horrific, just that I can believe that someone decided that the potential sacrifice to rid Israel and the world of one of the primary weapons of the Deep State, Hamas, was justified. A process that is currently taking place. I think that similar decisions have had to be made throughout history, again as horrific as they might seem, Hiroshima and Nagasaki for one prime example. Pearl Harbor perhaps being another.
Unless new evidence emerges, I'd chalk it up to the fallibility of even the best intelligence agencies. It's my understanding that the IDF responded as quickly as they could given that they were taken by surprise. Horrific things happen, and sometimes it's comforting to think there's a hidden design, that powerful people are secretly pulling the strings. But powerful people are often just as clueless as the rest of us. Sometimes history is just chaos and folly.
The idea that Israel let this happen is being pushed by some of the same anti-semites who claimed (falsely) that "the Jews" knew about 9/11 in advance. They were wrong then, and there's no evidence that they're correct now.
On a side note, how can Hamas be construed as a weapon of the "Deep State"? I've never heard that notion before.
My sense is that the massiveness of the attack had to involve extensive training with lots of people and the Israelis have to have a lot of CHS's in Gaza just to keep track of what's up. They're getting their information about where all the Hamas operatives are now in order to be killing as many as they are. On 911, yes on the CIA knowing. "Jews"? C'mon.... As to Hamas and the Deep State, I think it's pretty well accepted by the "alternate media" that Hamas, along with BLM, Antifa, and many other thug groups are the "enforcers" of the Deep State. Seemingly different causes, same people.
At the time Israel and Egypt imposed the blockade, there probably wasn't a better option to protect against extremist attacks. Unfortunately, the deprivation and economic hardship caused by the blockade have helped radicalize a new generation of largely unemployed young men -- who, granted, might have ended up radicalized anyway. And the blockade clearly failed to achieve its main goal of preventing Hamas from amassing arms to attack its neighbors.
The lesson: Sometimes even your best option is doomed to failure.
It's probably good to also look at success/failure in relative terms, and not judge it solely on one failure.
It's been 16 years since the strong tightening of that border, and it's probably fair to say that there are whole lot of buses and cafes that haven't been blown up in Israel because of it.
While it contributed to Gazan anger -- fairly or unfairly -- Hamas and many (most?) Gazans believe the only solution to their problems is the eradication of every Jew between the river and the sea. If, over the last years, Iran had the unfettered ability to send weapons to Hamas fighters, October 7 could have been magnitudes worse.
Here's an interesting article regarding the territorial legitimacy of the Palestinians: https://canadafreepress.com/article/modern-palestinians-are-not-descended-from-ancient-philistines-implications. I still do not believe that the Israeli intelligence wasn't fully aware of the oncoming attack and someone within the government decided that an obvious reason to finally to root out Gaza was going to be worth the sacrifice that would result from standing down, as awful as it was going to be.
I'd steer clear of that theory unless and until there's evidence to support it. It's outrageous to think that the Israelis would be complicit in a horrifying and traumatic anti-semitic massacre right out of the Holocaust. The insinuation seems to have originated with Charlie Kirk, who based it on "gut instinct." Gimme a break.
How else would you explain the total breakdown of perhaps the best intelligence agency in the world? The fact that apparently zero forces took action while the massacre was taking place? I'm not saying the idea isn't horrific, just that I can believe that someone decided that the potential sacrifice to rid Israel and the world of one of the primary weapons of the Deep State, Hamas, was justified. A process that is currently taking place. I think that similar decisions have had to be made throughout history, again as horrific as they might seem, Hiroshima and Nagasaki for one prime example. Pearl Harbor perhaps being another.
Unless new evidence emerges, I'd chalk it up to the fallibility of even the best intelligence agencies. It's my understanding that the IDF responded as quickly as they could given that they were taken by surprise. Horrific things happen, and sometimes it's comforting to think there's a hidden design, that powerful people are secretly pulling the strings. But powerful people are often just as clueless as the rest of us. Sometimes history is just chaos and folly.
The idea that Israel let this happen is being pushed by some of the same anti-semites who claimed (falsely) that "the Jews" knew about 9/11 in advance. They were wrong then, and there's no evidence that they're correct now.
On a side note, how can Hamas be construed as a weapon of the "Deep State"? I've never heard that notion before.
My sense is that the massiveness of the attack had to involve extensive training with lots of people and the Israelis have to have a lot of CHS's in Gaza just to keep track of what's up. They're getting their information about where all the Hamas operatives are now in order to be killing as many as they are. On 911, yes on the CIA knowing. "Jews"? C'mon.... As to Hamas and the Deep State, I think it's pretty well accepted by the "alternate media" that Hamas, along with BLM, Antifa, and many other thug groups are the "enforcers" of the Deep State. Seemingly different causes, same people.
What took Hamas etc so long to react to "blockade" since 1973 war?
Why now vs years ago?
& assult was planned & coordinated
56 years to wait??