By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) estimated that up to 3,000 Hamas fighters were present in the city, while Hamas claimed to have 5,000 fighters, though these figures are unverified. The IDF has been employing tactics like rapid thrusts into urban areas and using remote-controlled explosive-laden vehicles, while Hamas has reportedly shifted to guerrilla tactics and ambushes. Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of civilians continue to flee south due to the ongoing conflict, facing exorbitant transport costs and abandoning belongings, while those remaining in Gaza City endure bombardment, collapsing infrastructure, and severe shortages. This conflict was initiated by the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on October 7, 2023, and since then, at least 65,419 people have been killed in Israeli attacks in Gaza.
Read the original article here
Hamas reportedly preparing for street-to-street fighting as Israeli forces near Gaza City centre, it’s like a dark chess match nearing its endgame. The reported preparations, which probably involve fortifying structures and establishing defensive positions within the urban landscape, paint a grim picture of what’s to come. The comments suggest that Hamas is unlikely to engage in traditional, head-to-head combat. They are more likely to employ guerilla tactics, aiming to inflict casualties on Israeli forces and maximize destruction, as well as using civilians as cover, possibly forcing a costly and protracted conflict.
The anticipation is thick with speculation. Will Hamas actually stand and fight in the streets, or will they melt away, leaving behind booby traps and ambushes? Some suggest they might use any means necessary, even resorting to horrific acts that would further tarnish their reputation and undermine any sympathy they might garner. The general consensus leans towards the latter, pointing to the group’s history and the asymmetric nature of the conflict. The IDF’s overwhelming military advantage, including air power and advanced weaponry, would make conventional warfare a suicidal endeavor for Hamas.
Given the stark disparity in military capabilities, a conventional, frontal assault by Hamas seems incredibly improbable. The expectation is that they’ll resort to asymmetric warfare tactics, seeking to bleed the IDF through ambushes, IEDs, and exploiting the urban environment. This strategy would attempt to prolong the conflict and, crucially, increase civilian casualties, which could galvanize international condemnation of Israel. This in turn provides Hamas with a strategic victory, even if their military assets are decimated.
The potential for civilian casualties hangs heavy in the air. The nature of urban combat, where buildings become bunkers and civilians are caught in the crossfire, almost guarantees it. The discussions highlight the tragic reality that Hamas’s actions, even more so than the actions of Israeli forces, will likely lead to the deaths of innocent people.
There’s a sense of cynicism in the discussions, a feeling that the situation is beyond redemption. Some observers seem convinced that the conflict has been preordained, with Hamas seeking to exploit the situation for propaganda purposes and Israel determined to crush all resistance, regardless of the cost. This view suggests that both sides are playing a game of political and moral calculation, rather than seeking any kind of peaceful resolution.
The comments raise a valid point regarding the use of uniforms, or the lack thereof. While it’s hoped Hamas will identify themselves as combatants, allowing soldiers to differentiate between combatant and non-combatant and operate in accordance with the laws of war. It seems likely that Hamas fighters will blend in with the civilian population. This deliberate tactic makes it harder for the IDF to target them, while also increasing the risk of civilian casualties.
The debate underscores the tragic irony of this conflict. Israel’s overwhelming military power is juxtaposed against Hamas’s guerilla tactics, creating a scenario where the lines between combatants and civilians are blurred. The cost of this is, and will continue to be, a human one, and the prospect of any real, lasting peace seems distant. The tragedy lies in the fact that the civilians, on both sides, are the ones who will inevitably suffer the most.
The conversation reveals that while both sides are mentioned, it’s a strategic calculation, not a matter of military prowess, that appears to be at play. Hamas seems to be seeking a strategic victory by goading Israel into causing maximal infrastructure damage. The discussions acknowledge that Israel will be taking the brunt of the blame for any civilian casualties, regardless of who is at fault.
There is almost no doubt that the next phase of the conflict will be exceptionally brutal, further compounding the already dire humanitarian situation in Gaza. It’s a grim reminder that in the brutal reality of armed conflict, it is often the innocent who pay the ultimate price.