Columbia University has fallen

[putnam6]

Fair question.

Me: Netanyahu needs to go (broken record, I know).  Then, in his place, leadership which is at least willing to accept even the "concept" of Palestinian statehood (forget the boundaries for a moment).  Gantz is this person (I believe).  He's not a liberal, and he is a hardliner (former IDF general).  Israel as a culture doesn't respond well to radical change right away (this is not a slight on Israel, many cultures are like this), but Gantz is a man of reason, and he's good at diplomacy.  He's not the final solution, but he's a step in the right direction.  Israel won't get all the way there with him, and Israel should NOT roll over on any of this (that has never been my point).  Israel has the higher moral ground, but only a little bit.  They have the higher moral ground only in that they never let terrorists infiltrate their masses.  Beyond this, Israel is the aggressor.  But Israel can use this higher moral ground as a position of strength in negotiations (not to 'win' but to maintain dignity and sovereign ground).

From there, Hamas will not disappear overnight.  This would be foolish to believe, but their strength will be diminished daily as both sides obey the terms of their agreement.  Again, it won't happen overnight, but in time the Palestinians will see that their greater destiny is in sovereign land, not through terrorist insurgency, and thus Hamas will be increasingly isolated.  Israel can 'save face" by not yielding to terrorism via the internationally accepted rules of engagement over terrorism, and respond (RESPONSIBLY) accordingly. 

Hezbollah will always be a threat to the state of Israel, but they should not be confused with Hamas.  They have different agendas.  Hezbollah is not going away anytime soon, they are too well funded by Iran, but again, they are not Hamas.  Hamas, in time, becomes an outsider.  Palestinians have a homeland (however big or small that is), and they risk losing it in the eyes of the international community by welcoming terrorists into their mix.  In other words, now they have something very valuable to lose, whereas today they have nothing to lose (other than bodies).

This would be my suggested approach based on my fairly thoroughly researched posture on the culture, the people, the religions, the history, and the region.

It will be interesting to hear other viewpoints.  I wonder how they could be anything other than...kill them all.

I try to never complain about something without at least an idea of a reasonable alternative.

I will look forward to other replies.

Thanks for the response FCD. 

Here's my concerns

history has shown sometimes when a Muslim or Islamic state shows softening toward Israel, there is usually a snap-back response.

Anwar Sadat was assassinated because of his softening stance toward Israel, we can weave that 10/7 was because Israel did this or that, but many believe it was the Saudis's softening and wanting to work on normalized relations with Israel that was the impetus for 10/7. 

After 9/11 I can see both sides, I could see it possibly manipulated by Israel, but damn FCD Hamas and atleast some Gazan citizens went barbaric AF 10/7 regardless of Bibi's involvement. I can't forget the hostages I can't forget those 4 girls man. I don't care if Bibi orchestrated all of it. He didn't chop people's heads off with a hoe he didn't kidnap women and children. For them to be rewarded with statehood as a direct result irks the hell out of me. Furthermore Im not sure inserting a Palestinian state into the situation makes it more or less stable, regardless of where it's located, if it's right next door to Israel they will join in concert with Hezbollah to irritate and attack Israel forever. Just as they are doing now, hell we are lucky AF that more countries didn't jump in or Israel would have had major problems right now.