I think you tried to engage in goal-post moving, by arguing that Israel has not "occupied" Gaza following the "disengagement", which is not directly tied to the "Gulag" label you were disagreeing with. While I think the claim that Israel was not occupying Gaza during this period is literally true, this is only because international legal definitions of occupation have multiple specific requirements. Though Israel was not stationing soldiers inside the territory, and was not running a sole government in the territory, it has still had enormous control. Imposing a blockade by sea, air and land for years on end, and continuously imprisoning Palestinians without charge or trial, is technically not "occupation", but it is an enormous projection of state force over a territory that Israel claimed was not in its control. Perhaps it's not "occupation" as defined in international law -- fine. So let's come up with a new word for it, but continue to recognize it as abusive.

In that context, talking about the rights of women and gays inside Gaza seems like bad faith whataboutism; if Israel cared about their rights and equality, it could let women and queer people living in Gaza leave.

Gaza is still militarily occupied. Israel controls the flow of goods and people, prevents Gazans from leaving the territory, uses violence and collective punishment against the civilian population, and discriminates against Palestinians.

> For decades they fired rockets on Israel civilians

for decades, the people of Gaza have been subject to apartheid. i don't agree with violence but claiming that Israel has the moral high ground here is ridiculous considering that Palestinian civilians have been terrorized since 1948.

> even took over a thousand of hostages including children

"An estimated 10,000 Palestinian children have been held in military detention over the past 20 years, with Save the Children noting that they are "the only children in the world who are systematically prosecuted in military courts.'"

yes, taking children as hostages is horrible. but your focus shows your bias and leads me to believe that you're not arguing in good faith.

> their only hope for freedom is the total and utter destruction of Hamas‘ network of terrorists.

we know this is absolutely false because this ethic cleansing predates the creation of Hamas. Israel was in fact involved in the creation of Hamas and supported it in the early days as a way to prevent the left-wing PLO from taking power.

in short, your "argument" completely ignores history and the context of this conflict.