danielbenzvi1

Israel is not an ethno state. About 21% of citizens are Arab. They vote, sit in the Knesset, have served on the Supreme Court, and hold full formal civil rights.

There are also other factually wrong things in your comment, but let's leave it at that.

I wish that was the natural path, that seeing the damage would turn people back toward reconciliation. But for now, most Israelis don’t see a viable partner on the other side to reconcile with.

This is a very dire situation. We’ve come to realize there are millions, perhaps tens of millions, across the region whose worldview includes the elimination of the Jewish state, and they are very committed to it. We can’t and won’t wage war on whole populations as that is not in our blood. Nor can we realistically change their beliefs in the foreseeable future or find something to offer that would produce lasting peace.

So today our choices feel grim and limited. That is why many Israelis believe we must: 1. Be excellent at predicting attacks and when necessary, strike first to disrupt them 2. Impose a very heavy cost on anyone who contemplates attacking us, so others think twice 3. Remain stronger and more capable than everyone around us

It’s a terrible place to be, and it’s not the future anyone hoped for. But until there’s a credible, sustained shift in the region, a process that would likely take generations of committed leadership, many here see little alternative.

The idea that simply empowering the PLO would have produced peace ignores the reality of what happened when they were empowered. After Oslo, Israel handed over cities in the West Bank and gave the Palestinian Authority control in Gaza. Instead of building the foundations of a peaceful state, the PLO leadership became riddled with corruption, failed to create functioning institutions, and tolerated or even encouraged waves of violence. The Second Intifada, launched under the PLO’s watch, was one of the bloodiest chapters in the conflict and shattered Israeli trust in their willingness or ability to deliver peace.

Moderates in Israel have shrunk because for decades, every attempt at compromise seemed to end in more violence rather than peace. From the Oslo years and the Second Intifada, to the Gaza withdrawal and repeated rocket wars, many Israelis came to believe that “giving ground” only brought terror closer to their homes. The sense is that moderation was tried, failed, and cost lives.

On top of that, politics and demographics shifted rightward, and October 7th reinforced the belief that peace is not realistic in the near term. For many Israelis, moderation no longer feels like a safe or responsible option- it feels like a risk their families can’t afford.

Let me turn the mirror around a bit. If numbers or incidents turn out to be false, exaggerated, or stripped of context, would you also self-reflect and consider that you might have been tricked into spreading lies - at the expense of Israelis whose lives are also on the line?

Of course, militaries make mistakes and sometimes issue wrong statements, just as governments everywhere do in the fog of war. The Rafah paramedic case you cite is tragic, and investigations matter. But a single flawed or retracted statement doesn’t prove a systematic policy of “lying” or “massacre” just as one instance of misconduct in any country’s army doesn’t automatically invalidate its overall values or procedures.

if we’re going to judge Israel by its errors, we should also weigh the context in which those errors happen (urban warfare, Hamas embedding itself in civilian areas, use of ambulances to smuggle fighters or weapons, etc.). And we should also judge Hamas by its admitted policies - deliberately targeting civilians, embedding in hospitals, rejecting coexistence.

If we’re honest, both of us need to be open to the possibility that our sources and interpretations can be incomplete or biased. Real reflection means asking hard questions in both directions - not only of Israelis, not only of Palestinians.