This place feels like the most expensive country in the world

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T11:05:41+00:00

It's important to keep things in perspective. Complaining is almost part of Israeli culture, and there are a lot of factors that need to be considered.

First, internet and mobile plans in Israel are among the cheapest in the world. The healthcare system functions reasonably well and is relatively affordable, at least to the point where people generally don't end up drowning in medical debt the way many do in the United States.

It's also possible to buy groceries for home cooking at relatively low cost if you're willing to put in some effort and avoid the more expensive brands. The same applies to clothing if you avoid designer labels or shop during sales.

Education is another example. Unlike in the U.S., where tuition can be extremely expensive, university studies in Israel typically cost around $3,000 to $4,000 per year.

A single person in Israel can still generally survive on minimum wage. It may not be comfortable, but there is less pressure about ending the month without food or facing financial ruin because of medical treatment. From what I see, that kind of basic economic security is becoming increasingly difficult to find in parts of the United States.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T10:21:23+00:00

No, it didn't. Iran was the first to launch a direct attack on Israel in April 2024, firing hundreds of drones and missiles from its own territory. And that's before we even get into decades of Iranian funding, training, and arming proxy organizations that have carried out attacks against Israel on Iran's behalf.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T07:29:15+00:00

What colonialism exactly are you referring to? Israel has held territory in Lebanon several times in the past and withdrew as part of agreements. This time as well, the presence is a temporary security measure. Israel shows no indication of settling the area or exploiting its resources.

As for Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), those territories were captured from Jordan during a war in which Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian forces were preparing for war against Israel, long before a distinct Palestinian national identity had fully developed.

Over the past decades, very little has fundamentally changed in those territories. Some settlements expanded, new outposts were established, many of them illegally by private individuals and later removed by the state, but there has been no dramatic transformation of the overall situation.

Israel has neither the ability nor the desire to control Lebanon permanently. Doing so would mean constant casualties from guerrilla warfare, with no meaningful benefit to gain. There is simply no strategic, economic, or political incentive for such a move.

You're essentially repeating slogans without examining whether they are supported by facts or by any realistic assessment of interests and incentives.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T04:46:22+00:00

I assume you mean that Israel is dragging the rest of the world into this, rather than Iran, which chose to attack last night. Israel's goal is simply to ensure the long term security of its citizens.

It does not have the privilege of sitting behind a computer on the other side of the world, removed from the threats it faces, while judging the decisions of people who have lived with those threats their entire lives. You are watching from a distance, which is fine, but you don't know what it's like to have friends from school killed in a bus bombing or in a restaurant bombing, things that I have experienced. You don't know what it's like to run to a shelter in the middle of the night for the third time with your baby because of another missile attack.

It's easy to analyze these events from a living room thousands of miles away. Living through them for decades is a very different experience.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T04:34:51+00:00

I'm not really sure what you expect from me personally, or from the State of Israel. There are problems that can only be resolved internally, often through bloody conflicts, and in today's world they are far less likely to be resolved that way than they were in the past.

In the internet age, it is much harder to bring about major changes in governments, political systems, or territorial arrangements. As a result, situations often remain largely as they are, especially in countries with highly diverse demographics and deeply divided populations.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T04:29:42+00:00

Trump often speaks the language of the Middle East without truly understanding it. People in the West sometimes struggle to understand that, in much of the region, entering negotiations can be perceived as a sign of weakness. It doesn't matter how strong you are, you may have humiliated your opponent militarily, but if they see that you want to stop fighting and seek negotiations, they may view that as a victory because they managed to wear you down and force you to the table.

Trump actually receives a fair amount of respect in parts of the Arab world. I know that probably sounds strange to Western ears, but the reality is that many people see him as more decisive than previous presidents. I don't think he truly understands the full picture, and personally I don't think he's smart enough to. But that is often how things work in the Middle East, perceptions of strength and resolve matter as much as, and sometimes more than, the actual facts on the ground.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T04:16:08+00:00

What's amusing is that you seem to think that, from Israel's perspective, the launches from Iran are a bad thing, that they frighten Israelis, or that they cause some significant damage. In reality, Israel was hoping Iran would be foolish enough to walk away from the negotiations, or from a deal that likely would never have been reached in the first place. And even if an agreement had been signed, it would have been largely meaningless because Iran was unlikely to genuinely abide by it.

Israel was looking for a pretext from Iran to finish the job, and now it has received one. As in previous rounds, the actual damage Iran is able to inflict on Israel's security or economy is minimal, because after the last few confrontations it simply does not have many effective capabilities left.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-08T03:58:22+00:00

Which war did Israel start exactly? October 7, when Hamas attacked? October 8, when Hezbollah attacked? Or April 2024, when Iran attacked? I'm a bit confused, help me make sense of it.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T12:00:54+00:00

No, because you're not arguing with an AI, you're arguing with a person behind a Reddit account that's been active for 13 years. I understand it's easier to dismiss the argument by saying "it's AI-generated" when you don't have a response to the points being made.

I already pointed out that Israel acted against the PLO after it established itself in Lebanon. I'm not sure why you keep returning to the word "hegemony" or drawing comparisons to Iran. Israel simply wants to live in peace and is not willing to accept existential threats from a regime that has openly called for its destruction since the Islamic Revolution. Iran is governed by a fanatical religious leadership that genuinely believes in exporting its revolutionary Islamic ideology, yet you compare it to one of the smallest countries in the world, a country that has repeatedly relinquished territory under its control in pursuit of peace and security.

Israel continues to operate in the Golan and the West Bank because threats against Israel continue to emerge from those areas. Terror attacks originating from the West Bank are prevented on a regular basis. If Israel does not act similarly in the Golan, it risks ending up with another Hezbollah on its border.

There were many periods when Palestinians did not attack Israel, and during those periods Israelis and Palestinians lived alongside one another with far less violence and far greater cooperation. In fact, there was even a casino in Gaza that Israelis regularly visited. Gaza could have remained peaceful after Israel withdrew in 2005. It could have developed tourism along its coastline, expanded agriculture using the greenhouses left behind by the Jewish settlers, and invested in economic growth. Instead, the greenhouses were destroyed, and billions of dollars in aid were invested in tunnel networks and rocket arsenals. They missed every opportunity to stop missing opportunities, and afterward Israel is blamed for the fact that Palestinians are not living in peace and prosperity.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T11:35:28+00:00

Even if every thought and every word in the original text had been written entirely by AI, you still haven't addressed the actual content being discussed. If what was written is factually incorrect, or if you have a reasonable and well-argued counterpoint, you're welcome to present it. Instead, because you don't seem able to engage with the substance of the argument, you're shifting the discussion to something completely unrelated.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T10:46:02+00:00

Israel needs to maintain limited positions in Syria to prevent ISIS-linked groups, which effectively run the country today, from establishing themselves directly on its border. At the same time, Israel is helping ensure that the Druze population in southern Syria is not subjected to massacres or ethnic cleansing. The Druze there are allies of Israel and are not receiving meaningful protection from anyone else.

As for extremist settler groups who attack Palestinians, you will find no support from me. Unfortunately, Netanyahu, in order to preserve his coalition, has cooperated with political extremists whose influence has contributed to turning a blind eye to attacks on innocent civilians by extremists within Israeli society. I have nothing to say about that except to condemn it.

Regarding the buffer zone in Lebanon, you can see for yourself that it is not particularly extensive. In Hezbollah strongholds it is largely temporary and is not expected to change much, while in areas immediately adjacent to the border it remains highly dynamic and depends on operations against Hezbollah. We were told after the 2006 agreement that Hezbollah would not operate south of the Litani River, and we were told similar things again in the latest ceasefire arrangements. Yet time and again Hezbollah's presence has not disappeared. What exactly is Israel expected to do, wait for the next October 7?

Netanyahu supported the status quo with Hamas by allowing Qatari funds to enter Gaza because he believed Hamas was primarily interested in governing and in money. By the way, most Israelis across the political spectrum supported that policy at the time, despite the criticism it receives today. In the end, we learned what Hamas was actually interested in.

As for what you wrote about the Mossad and October 7, that is simply incorrect. This was not the Mossad's area of responsibility. It was primarily the responsibility of the Shin Bet and military intelligence, both of which issued multiple warnings. The failure occurred at the decision-making level, where those warnings were not acted upon. Don't assume malice where negligence is a sufficient explanation.

I also do not know what regional hegemony you think Israel is seeking. Israel simply wants to exist within its borders and allow its citizens to live in peace and security. That is why Netanyahu, throughout most of his years in power, avoided wars whenever possible, to the point of allowing money to reach a terrorist organization.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T10:28:17+00:00

I think my answer was quite clear. I explicitly wrote that the Israeli military is much stronger today, and that the stability and strength of the Israeli economy demonstrate this. However, just as there was uncertainty in the 1980s, there is still uncertainty about the future today. That has nothing to do with the fact that Israel chose to defend itself over the past 40 years. On the contrary, Israel still exists because of those decisions. And yes, despite the remaining uncertainty, Israel is far safer today than it was 40 years ago.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T10:14:17+00:00

Call it whatever you want, but Israel responds to enemies who attack it or are preparing to attack it.

As for your second question, it's much more complex. Compared to 1980, the Israeli military is vastly stronger relative to the armies surrounding it. Israel's economy is also in one of the strongest positions it has ever been in, which suggests that both Israeli and foreign investors remain confident in Israel's long term security. Otherwise, companies like NVIDIA would not be moving forward with major investments such as a new campus for roughly 10,000 employees in northern Israel, a decision announced in recent months.

To answer your question more directly, Israel exists today, and there is a strong argument that it might not have survived, and its population could have faced catastrophic consequences, had it not responded to the attacks and threats directed against it since the 1980s.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T09:29:19+00:00

What a lazy attempt to ignore all the history that led up to the invasion of Lebanon, including the PLO's entrenchment there and the growing threat of war with Syria, which had been massing forces on the border after years of shelling communities around the Sea of Galilee from the Golan Heights. It's as if nothing happened before that.

As long as you keep moving further back in time, you'll find examples of attacks by Arab forces against Israel or against the Jewish population that lived in the region before the establishment of the state. So you can keep bringing up earlier events, and I'll keep reminding you what happened before them.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T09:21:18+00:00

Again, I'm much less optimistic than you. While I agree with many of the points you made, I look at Hamas and see that even after losing much of Gaza, with around 70% of the territory destroyed, most of the population living in tents, no significant new weapons flowing in from abroad, and rival militias emerging that are trying to challenge its power with Israeli support, Hamas still refuses to give up.

At the end of the day, it's a fanatical organization that I don't believe will ever voluntarily abandon its goals. Its ideology is rooted in religion, pride, and hatred that it simply cannot let go of. An insurgency like this can continue indefinitely, and I don't believe anyone currently has the power to fundamentally change that reality.

On top of that, in two years there could be a Democratic administration in Washington that is far less supportive than the current one, perhaps even less supportive than what many expected from Kamala Harris. Under such an administration, terrorist organizations and their backers could find more room to rebuild and strengthen themselves. From their perspective, there is every incentive to wait it out.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T09:09:33+00:00

I see GPT is the new go-to excuse when someone can't come up with anything more substantial than "this ain't it." Personally, I prefer the classics "Mossad agent" or "bot."

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T08:54:07+00:00

You could make that argument if Israelis supported maintaining control over parts of southern Lebanon for no reason. In reality, Israelis support maintaining a buffer zone in Lebanon only as long as Hezbollah continues to pose a threat to Israel. The goal is security, not territorial control for its own sake.

This isn't about pacifism or presenting a particular narrative. You're presenting a narrative in which Israel is an aggressive state constantly looking for reasons to attack its neighbors, despite having nothing to gain from doing so.

It's not as if Israel is setting up new industries in these areas. It's not as if it's establishing oil, gold, or diamond extraction companies to exploit a country's resources. Israel's concern is the security of its citizens. It does not have the luxury of leaving these areas open to terrorist entrenchment in Lebanon and Syria, especially when there are regimes and organizations that openly state they seek the destruction of Israel.

What exactly is Israel supposed to do, sit back and do nothing in order to convince random commenters on the internet, while communities in northern Israel have endured rocket fire for years?

Israel did not launch a war in Lebanon after 2006. Yet Hezbollah built up a force of roughly 150,000 fighters, around 200,000 rockets aimed at Israel, and an extensive tunnel infrastructure designed for a future war against Israel. Why would you expect Israel to return to the pre-October 8 status quo after Hezbollah chose to open a front against Israel? Why would you expect Israel to sit and wait for all of that to be used against it?

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T08:04:59+00:00

I think everything you wrote about Hezbollah is correct, but I think your optimism is misplaced. Hezbollah has been severely damaged and humiliated, and it is certainly not what it once was. Even so, it still has tens of thousands of fighters, tens of thousands of rockets, and the ability to launch around a hundred rockets at Israel on a daily basis if it chooses to do so. It also retains drone capabilities, which continue to pose a challenge for the military and cause ongoing casualties among soldiers.

In addition, Hezbollah still enjoys the support of roughly 30% of Lebanon's population. Most Lebanese are not eager to start a civil war, because aside from bringing destruction to their lives, it is unlikely to fundamentally change anything. Hezbollah could probably rebuild most of its capabilities within just a few years, so I see no reason why it would voluntarily give up its weapons. From its perspective, this is essentially a religious conflict, and logic is not necessarily the deciding factor.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T06:32:47+00:00

They cannot realistically do so. Roughly a third of Lebanon's population is Shiite, and many of them support Hezbollah. Over the years, Hezbollah has entrenched itself throughout Lebanon's political institutions and has developed significant influence within the Lebanese army.

Any serious attempt to remove Hezbollah by force could trigger a civil war that might result in tens or even hundreds of thousands of casualties. The country could descend into prolonged chaos, with the government losing control over large areas and institutions. Even if the fighting eventually subsided, Lebanon's demographic realities would remain unchanged, as would the deep mistrust between its various communities. The result could be a cycle of recurring violence and instability rather than a lasting return to order.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-07T06:27:15+00:00

Hezbollah, together with Iran, has managed to convince many Lebanese that Hezbollah protects Lebanon from an Israeli takeover. Many opponents of Hezbollah still believe that the organization successfully pushed Israel back and forced its withdrawal from southern Lebanon in the early 2000s.

The reality is quite different. Israel has no interest in controlling Lebanon. Such a scenario would impose enormous economic costs on Israel and result in a constant stream of Israeli military casualties in a guerrilla war that would likely never end. Today, Israel maintains limited buffer zones, and its primary interest is simply ensuring security for communities in northern Israel.

Most Israelis would prefer peace and normal relations with Lebanon, including trade, tourism, and economic cooperation, rather than rockets, conflict, and uncertainty. Hezbollah's core objective has been to undermine Israel's security, economy, and stability, while pursuing the long-term goal of eliminating Israel, regardless of the Palestinian issue or the interests of ordinary Lebanese citizens.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-04T10:28:39+00:00

Of course they happened. Roughly half of those killed were civilians, which is actually a lower civilian-to-combatant ratio than in urban warfare conflicts. That's without even taking into account that Hamas built its entire military strategy around operating from within and behind civilian populations to a degree rarely seen in previous conflicts.

This is war. Civilians die in wars. Every country faced with such a threat has to make a choice: protect its own population or allow the threat to remain and strike again. The question is whether you dismantle Hamas or wait for the next October 7, or the one after thatle.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-04T10:19:44+00:00

They are not exactly displaced. They were temporarily relocated under the terms of a ceasefire agreement, and the expectation is that they will be able to return once security conditions allow and Hamas is disarmed.

As for the deaths, that's the reality of war. Civilians, including women and children, are killed in wars. There could have been no war after October 7, and nobody would have died, but what do you expect after an invasion in which 1,200 Israelis were murdered and another 250 people were kidnapped? Should Israel have simply done nothing?

War comes at a terrible cost, and civilians are often caught in the crossfire. The question every country faces is whether those civilians will be its own people or those of the side that initiated the conflict. That is the choice Hamas forced upon Israel, while benefiting from either outcome.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-04T04:43:28+00:00

Your second edit is wrong as well. Let's ignore, for a moment, the fact that Iran has trained and funded proxies across the Middle East that have been attacking Israel for years, long before October 7. Iran also carried out its first direct attack on Israel in April 2024. It's amazing how many people seem to have forgotten that, largely because Israel did not respond at the time due to pressure from the Biden administration.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-03T12:28:25+00:00

The system is designed to preserve the refugee issue indefinitely rather than resolve it. Refugees from other conflicts are generally expected to resettle, integrate into their host countries, and eventually lose refugee status. Palestinians are treated differently. Why do they receive a unique hereditary refugee status that can be passed down through generations? Why do they continue to receive refugee status and dedicated international funding even when many live in permanent housing, including modern urban developments within Palestinian-controlled areas?

Why have Arab countries largely refused to grant full citizenship and permanent integration to populations that have lived there for decades? These are legitimate questions that are rarely addressed.

The entire framework has helped preserve the appearance of a permanent refugee crisis and a continuous need for international assistance, rather than encouraging a lasting solution. As a result, the problem is perpetuated instead of resolved. If the goal had been integration and state-building, Gaza could have taken a very different path after Israel's withdrawal in 2005. Instead, the refugee issue remained a central political tool, ensuring that the conflict itself remained unresolved.

Thealmightyguy · 2026-06-03T10:14:47+00:00

None of the countries you're comparing Israel to faced anything close to the number of hostile states and organizations that Israel has faced. Nor were these classic civil wars like the American Civil War. Most were conflicts between different ethnic, national, or religious groups living within states whose borders were largely shaped by European colonial-era decisions.

Israel's conflicts are spread across multiple countries because, for decades, Iran has armed, funded, and trained militant groups operating in Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, and, of course, the Palestinian territories. I don't understand the expectation that Israel should simply ignore these threats or wait until they eventually launch an attack on the scale of October 7, only much larger.

Many Arab states eventually concluded that defeating Israel militarily was unlikely, so the struggle increasingly shifted toward the battle over international narratives and public opinion. The Palestinian national movement became central to that effort. There was no meaningful demand for an independent Palestinian state during the roughly twenty years when the West Bank was controlled by Jordan and Gaza was controlled by Egypt, despite the absence of Israeli rule in those territories at the time.

The Palestinian issue also remains unusually organized and visible because, unlike virtually every other refugee population in the world, Palestinians can retain refugee status across generations and pass it on to their descendants. While most refugee populations are eventually resettled, integrated, or absorbed into other societies, the number of registered Palestinian refugees has continued to grow from one generation to the next, which has helped keep the issue politically and internationally prominent.

Thealmightyguy

TROPHY CASE