When Hamas launched the October 7 attack, likely with backing and advise from several countries that host and back Hamas, it knew that there would be an Israeli response. It assumed if it took enough a hostages then it could somehow force talks to go on for years...while it benefited.
It's important to understand that Hamas has been able to carry out massacres and attacks for three decades because each time it does it, it relies on the international community to quickly rush to make sure there is a ceasefire. So the process is:
Hamas is the "tool" that was found by some in the international community in the late 1980s and early 1990s to prevent peace and it was always on hand to be picked up to attack Israel whenever there was any sign of peace. They reach for the "tool" each time, during the Oslo process, in the Second Intifada...after Disengagement etc.
It's so obvious because Disengagement was an opportunity to help Gaza thrive...but the international community and other backers of Hamas reached for their tool to have Hamas take over Gaza. No one reached for the tool of peace and moderation, which would have been easy to reach for.
October 7 was planned as a major moment for Hamas, it would committ an unprecedented massacre, then hold hostages for years to bring in billions more for its tunnels in Gaza and then use the hostages to gain more influence in the West Bank. When Abbas passes, Hamas would swoop in...it would make itself a "tool" again to be picked up to take over Ramallah for its patrons and benefactors abroad.
It's important to understand also that Hamas believed on October 7 that there was a time limit to Israel's reaction...Israel would be allowed to "run wild" for a few weeks...and then there would be a ceasefire and deal and the war would stop so Hamas can replenish its thousands of rockets and start a new war the next year or two.
This is the model for Hamas. Start a war, bring ruin on part of Gaza...use the rebuilding of Gaza to construct tunnels and arsenals...start a war, bring ruin, reconstruct tunnels...
It's important to understand that Hamas did this because in past wars it didn't lose very many fighters. Usually 100 to 1,000 fighters and then it would replace them. All the destruction caused by Israeli bombs can be rebuilt and Hamas contractors make the money doing reconstruction and for each dollar that comes half of it or something like that goes to Hamas and tunnels.
In fact each war was a "win" for Hamas because for each building hit by an IDF bomb, Hamas can then openly build a tunnel underneath as part of "reconstruction"....it doesn't even had to hide that it replaces whole ruined areas with new terror infrastructure, enhanced and embedded in new civilian homes. Fully integrated. As militaries say "5th gen"...
And Hamas always benefits from war because when there are civilian casualties it can use this to bring the ceasefire faster and bring condemnation of Israel. Hamas has its connections abroad via its allies and partners who mobilize protests and activists. In the May 2021 conflict with Israel there was a dry run to mobilize attacks on Jewish communities abroad, for instance.
So we have to understand how Hamas thought on October 6. It believed it would use the hostages to bring itself power in Ramallah. It believed that after a few weeks the war would end and it would thrive.
Now, four months in, it knows that it has not been able to get Israel to do a ceasefire, but it watches the UN and it knows the votes are getting closer. It is being advised by its host country to hold out a little longer. Hold out in Rafah and then filtrate back to northern Gaza and return to power.
Hamas also knows that quietly, behind the scenes many international organizations prefer its rule in Gaza. For instance they speak about Hamas police as "law and order" and if there aren't Hamas gunmen to guard the humanitarian aid they are displeased...they feel secure when Hamas is there. It's their partner.
The idea that anyone but Hamas could or would control Gaza is worrisome to many international stakeholders there. Hamas has been their loyal partner for decades. Hamas police are the ones they work with. In areas without Hamas they call it "lawless"....in essence Hamas is the preferred authoritarian they want.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The IDF released a report on the failure of October 7 to defend Kibbutz Nir Oz. The report is worse than expected. It shows the IDF didn't defend this community at all, and only arrived at 13:10, more than six and a half hours after the attack began. Hamas and other terrorists had already come and left, they had complete control of the place and could do basically whatever they wanted. There was a small local security team from the community, but it was overwhelmed.
The small community was massacred; 47 people murdered, 76 kidnapped.
Jpost; "October 7 probe: IDF only arrived in Nir Oz after Hamas terrorists left because it was 'far away'" jpost.com/israel-news/ar…
The Golani Brigade's 51st Battalion was defending the sector, but it was understrength. The IDF completely failed to plan for or even apparently think about how to defend this community. It's strange because one assumes the IDF wouldn't have behaved this way in the north or the West Bank. Something about Hamas in Gaza cast a spell over Israel and its defenses such that this border was almost treated like a peace border.
According to Ynet "The battalion had 182 combat soldiers and 57 support personnel in the northern Eshkol region, prepared for an infiltration scenario from a single point without warning. Near their base, Judy and Gadi Weinstein were preparing for their 6:06 a.m. morning walk, unaware they would be Nir Oz’s first victims that day."
Articles like this illustrate the corrosive nature of how media use the term “disinformation” as a stand in for actually covering things on the ground or reporting what happened
Here you have an entire article that admits 800 people were killed, the article claims that some old videos were repackaged and some people falsely reported that others were killed…but where is the evidence that the “disinformation” led to “intensified” violence? Do they mean the information that was provided to SNA-backed militias who went on a rampage in Latakia? No. They don’t even mention them
The one place that rumors and propaganda did influence killing was in the attacks by the militias in response to the pro-Assad attacks. But this article doesn’t seem to unpack that or discuss it. It doesn’t even seem to interview people on the ground. Because western media have been encouraged to discuss “disinformation” as a stand in for actual reporting
This became their main talking point the day before the Bibas children were buried. This is what these people came down to.
No words.
Note, they don’t say they will do the minute of silence, they just want to add the whataboutism. There is a reason they trotted him out the day before the burial to do this.
Never forget
A quick thought on this. Where was this talking point on October 8 when there were 38 dead children as a result of the Hamas massacre? What was Daniel Levy's talking point on that day?
The thing is that on October 8 you don't see this talking point about a minute of silence. It's only a day before the Bibas funeral that they trotted this out. And note they don't include the other 38 children killed on October 7. It's all about doing "whataboutism" because the Bibas funeral is in the spotlight. For a year they never mentioned the Bibas family, only now, in order to downplay and whatabout the tragedy.
For many years there was a subset of critics of Israel who would say things like "I want Israel to reflect my liberal/progressive values." And they expected to take part in a discussion where reasonable people would say "well I can understand that, let's debate Israel's policies, I understand why you feel uncomfortable with some of them." They posed as being inside the tent of Israel discussions, merely objecting to Israel's "policies." And they were taken at face value by moderates and centrists.
Some of these types of people would even come to Israel, they'd spend most of their time with Palestinians, or at unrecognized beduin villages, or supporting African refugees. They posed as just wanting Israelis to support their progressive causes.
Then came October 7 and these folk were all silent. They never posted one photo of hostages, never had any empathy for Shani Louk or Naama Levy, they never wanted their "social justice" faith to mention the hostages...their "social justice Passover" never mentioned those held in Gaza. It never mentioned the Bibas children.
What is further surprising about kidnappinig and murder of the Bibas children, and now the decision by Hamas to lie about returning the body of Shiri Bibas, the mother, is the way Israel has always been surprised at every turn of events, always reacting.
Israeli officials have vowed to avenge the latest Hamas action; but the fact is that since Oct. 7 Israel has always been reacting. Israel was taken by surprise by the Hamas attack. Shiri, Yarden, Kfir and Ariel Bibas were kidnapped from Nir Oz.
The family were alive when they were kidnapped. Israel now believes that the children were killed in November. However, that means that during October the baby Kfir and toddler Ariel were alive. Between October 7 and 27 four adults were released by Hamas; two American women and two elderly women. However there was seemingly no priority put on getting the Bibas children out of Gaza. Why?
One thing that has interested me a little since the hostage deal began, is the lack of interest in the freed hostages or the victims such as the Bibas children, among self-defined progressive Jewish circles in the US. I mean groups such as rabbis involved in human rights or academics or social justice activist types and commentators. It's a small, niche group of outspoken people, but symbolic.
What I see is a collective silence from them, a decision apparently to never post images of the Bibas children, never post images of women hostages or Hamas parading emaciated male hostages. Basically anything related to hostages who are Jewish and Israeli is considered something they won't discuss or empathize with or post about.
It's hard to quantify because most of these people have left this platform but some of them still post elsewhere and you can look at their posts since mid-January and see. Is it a collective decision since Oct. 7 in most of these groups to never mention Jewish victims of Hamas crimes?