This is very simple, straightforward logic where’s the gap you’re insisting exists?
The gap is you thinking whatever they achieved with the “pretext” will not disappear with the last hamas members surrendering.
What are you doing here if not defending Israel?
I’m merely pointing at elephants in the room. What hamas have been doing was a mistake and a lost opportunity for Palestinians.
Yes - I’m defending the group I called monsters
Defending hamas you mean? Yes, I don’t see why anyone would do that if not for the sake of hoping they would do more useless attacks, instead of doing something meaningful in current situation.
You’re going to need to explain your logic on this one.
IDF: we need to kill hamas terrorists.
Hamas: gotta hide ourselves and let them kill Palestinians instead.
You: Israel wants to kill Palestinians, not hamas. Hamas better hide themselves.
Still not seeing it?
You’ve complained about Hamas - WHY THE FUCK HAVEN’T YOU STOPPED THEM?
So this is why I haven’t been seeing any discussion where people like you condemned hamas terrorists attacks in past years? Because by your logic you need to be able to do something to correct the situation in order to be allowed to condemn it? I see. But then not getting what are you trying to achieve here.
I’ve drawn a pretty clear comparison between the actions of Israel and one of the most uncontroversially evil groups in history (particularly to Israelis). I’ve invited you to point to a meaningful difference between one of the greatest evils in history and the group you’re defending, and you’ve failed.
Let’s start with the fact that nazi didn’t need to construct the “pretext” that would rely on a group (that they’ve put in power) that would attack them with useless missiles. They’ve just attacked. Meaningful difference.