What can be said when there is still no commission of inquiry?

Hello Rabbi Michael,
In the context of the question of planning the war, according to my understanding (and from what I understood a little from what you wrote and from the bots), you believe, like the right-wing part of the coalition, that military pressure on Hamas should be continued until its final decision, also taking into account the risk of the hostages.
This is of course not just your opinion, but that of a large and not insignificant public, but I ask whether it is even possible to say anything unequivocally when there is still no state commission of inquiry that is supposed to investigate this failure in the first place. After all, I assume that the majority of the side that believes that a final decision should be made believes so that October 7th will not happen again (I don’t know if you agree with this statement) – but as long as there is no commission that investigated how we got to this situation in the first place, it is impossible to really say what situation we need to reach in order for it not to happen again.
The committee’s conclusions may be that even when Hamas is not in actual control, there is still a likelihood that it will continue to operate as a movement that can launch attacks on Israeli territory – which essentially means that there is no such thing as truly defeating Hamas in order to prevent October 7th again and that we must continue the ‘eternal war’ with it. Or alternatively, the conclusion may be that just because Hamas received its centralized and ruling power in the Gaza Strip led to October 7th and it is enough for there to be another body in the Gaza Strip that will rule in conjunction with the West and the countries of the world and that will be enough to prevent October 7th – then it is possible to go for a deal when Hamas is weak enough with the governmental intervention of the Arab countries in conjunction with the US (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, etc.). Another conclusion is of course that Hamas will never release all the hostages and that we must go for one more partial deal to save those who remain and continue the maneuver.
 
I’m just giving examples, of course. There could be a million conclusions in theory, of course – but my question is, as someone who does express a position, what is the weight of positions, on both sides, if there is still no commission of inquiry. Who said there couldn’t be a deal that wouldn’t bring with it October 7th again? And who said there was such a thing as Hamas’s decision in the Gaza Strip at all?
It feels to me that for two years, they’ve been saying something every time that it will be the final and decisive phase of the war (the entry into Khan Yunis, Rafah, the evacuation of the northern Gaza Strip, Gideon’s chariots, and now the complete occupation of Gaza City) – but no one has bothered to define and examine where it’s going, and it all stems from gut feelings and various experiences (and of course, we don’t have the time right now to waste on maneuvering a year or two ahead).
Don’t you think that instead of discussions about the pros/cons of a deal/decision, all parties should say out loud and unanimously that they have no idea and that discussions can only be held after a state investigation committee is established? (Even if it is practical, until the committee at this stage presents its recommendations, who knows how long it will take, maybe years, but I’m still asking in principle).