- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmit.online
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmit.online
You must log in or register to comment.
Quatar surely knows how to provide safe heaven to all the terrorists
FIFA checking in
Is nobody going to mention how refusing a temporary ceasefire (aka being genocided again after 6 weeks) is apparently “hardline”?
That’s too extreme. Israel should be allowed to Genocide all Palestinians.
Don’t we live in a free world? How dare we take the freedom of Israel away! Genocide freedom is sacred
Hamas loves committing massacres, that’s why they want a “permanent” ceasefire.
According to Egyptian and Hamas officials, Qatar has threatened to expel Hamas officially from their base in Doha if they don’t come to an agreement, but Badran denied this claim.
Which ones? Anonymous Hamas witnesses? This article provides no source for its headline whatsoever
“If you guys don’t stop genociding Palestinians, we won’t you play futbol with us!”
If Hamas in in Qatar, how is attacking Gaza going to wipe them out?
Unless of course wiping out Hamas was never the goal?
Technically, if there is no one left alive in Gaza then there is no Hamas in Gaza.
That’s the idea, and that’s why Netanyahu has the loving support of both worthless parties.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
As far as the negotiation process goes, he revealed that the discussion of swaps of Israeli hostages for Palestinian prisoners has taken a back seat to relieving the humanitarian situation and ending the fighting.
Later on in the report, however, he revealed that Hamas met in Moscow with other Palestinian officials, including secular politicians and the PIJ, where they agreed to “expand operations in the West Bank and Jerusalem.”
It said that unspecified Arab negotiators were aiming for an urgent two-day ceasefire before the beginning of Ramadan due to increased operations in Rafah.
Arab mediators have also confirmed, according to the report, that Hamas has refused to give Israel a list of living hostages as part of a deal.
He said many of the prisoners are held by other factions, including Palestinian Islamic Jihad, making them harder to locate and guarantee as part of a deal.
The report also talked about Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, who recently broke his radio silence and has also made demands about a potential deal.
The original article contains 555 words, the summary contains 170 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
This should have been done sooner, we’ve known since basically the beginning of this entire ordeal that the majority of the heads of Hamas relocated to Qatar.
Israel and it’s allies could have easily made negotiations with Qatar to hand over the Hamas leaders and accomplished a ceasefire sooner using that as leverage, but instead, because Israel’s government has ulterior motives with illegally settling Gaza, they basically erase the existence of the northern portion and have real estate companies advertising new developments on the seafront where Palestinian homes used to be.
To be “fair” Hamas is a grassroots organization. It exists because there’s popular will for it to exist, not because of one person or a few people. This does mean the Israeli Orphanization force is doing anything to curb Hamas, but it’s not like Hamas needs its leaders to exist.
You cannot kill an idea.
You can only change it if you provide a better alternative, and Israel is trying really hard not to.
Since Hamas is internationally recognized as a terrorist organization, are you implying that Palestinians support those views? I’d like to think most of them only want peace.
It’s called a terrorist organization according to the US and its allies. Now they’re not good, more like morally grey, but they’re not any worse than the IDF. Also given that Hamas has agreed to a two-state solution before, I’m not sure what beliefs you’re objecting to Palestinians having.
Also given that Hamas has agreed to a two-state solution before
I think you may be conflating Hamas and the PLO. Hamas maintains that Israel should not exist.
Hamas doesn’t recognize Israel, but has stated they’d accept a two-state solution with 1967 borders multiple times.
Do you think those two things are logically consistent?
It’s a decision made for practical reasons, much like the PLO switching from armed to peaceful resistance and the Palestinian resistance movement as a whole switching from taking back all of Palestine to returning to 1967 borders. Hamas ideologically rejects Israel (for good reason) so they’re not willing to recognize it, but denying the position they’re in won’t accomplish anything, hence their current position. You can think of them as a more self-aware IRA.
See also: The PLO taking back their recognition of Israel during the second Intifada despite not changing their goal of a two-state solution.
You know one terrorist is a liberation fighter for another. And those labels are given by the strong side.
There are plenty of examples of very ambiguous terrorist designation by a lot of countries, like Turkiey for example, who have labelled the PKK as a terrorist organisation.
If Israel had recognised the Palestinian statehood and didn’t make everything possible to prevent them from uniting them, Hamas wouldn’t exist.
If Israel had recognised the Palestinian statehood and didn’t make everything possible to prevent them from uniting them, Hamas wouldn’t exist.
I think you may lack the historical background to make these kinds of pronouncements. Palestinian Arabs had been trying to expel Jews since the late Ottoman era. Increased Jewish immigration during British rule only aggravated that.
Oh really?!?
Some Jewish organisations also opposed the proposal. Irgun leader Menachem Begin announced, “The partition of the Homeland is illegal. It will never be recognised. The signature by institutions and individuals of the partition agreement is invalid. It will not bind the Jewish people. Jerusalem was and will forever be our capital. Eretz Israel will be restored to the people of Israel. All of it. And for ever.”
During the foundational events of the Nakba in 1948, dozens of massacres targeting Arabs were conducted and over 500 Arab-majority towns and villages were depopulated,[8] with many of these being either completely destroyed or repopulated by Jews and given new Hebrew names. Approximately half of Palestine’s predominantly Arab population, 750,000 people,[9] fled from their homes or were expelled by Zionist militias and later the Israeli army in what is now Israel proper, which covers 78% of the total land area of the former Mandatory Palestine.
Zionists wanted to create a Jewish state in Palestine with as much land, as many Jews, and as few Palestinian Arabs as possible.[17] By the time the British announced their official support for Zionism in the 1917 Balfour Declaration during World War I,[18] the population of Palestine was about 750,000, approximately 94% Arab and 6% Jewish.[19]]
Zionists accepted the partition but planned to expand Israel’s borders beyond what was allocated to it by the UN.[26] In the fall of 1947, Israel and Jordan, with British approval, secretly agreed to divide the land allocated to Palestine between them after the end of the British Mandate.
On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly passed Resolution 181 (II), the “United Nations Partition Plan for Palestine.”[28] At the time, Arabs made up about two-thirds of the population[29] and owned about 90% of the land,[30] while Jews made up between a quarter and a third of the population[31] and owned about 7% of the land.[32] The UN partition plan allocated to Israel about 55% of the land, where the population was about 500,000 Jews and 407,000-438,000 Arabs. Palestine was allocated the remaining 45% of the land, where the population was about 725,000-818,000 Arabs and 10,000 Jews.
Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
I think you are the one lacking historical background. And for the record no ethnicity will be happy when 7% of the land holders are getting 55% of the land. Jews got the lion share of the newly established country on what exactly grounds?
I have another question to you, why is Israel denying the expelled Palestinians the right to return?
I’m not sure why you’re citing events from 1948 when I was discussing the Ottoman era, but feel free to talk about whatever you like. I on the other hand was referring to this period (1908 is before 1948) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercommunal_conflict_in_Mandatory_Palestine)
Edit: no rebuttals, only downvotes from those who think that conflict in the middle east started with the foundation of Israel. lol
deleted by creator
That’d be great. Next stop: the hague.
Only if Netanyahu and his ilk go with them.
Actually, yeah. I think both camps facing consequences would be the best outcome for this clusterfuck.
Why?
If we can only get one of them, shouldn’t we at least get one?
I mean fuck Israel, and fuck hummus, but one is better than zero
That ignores that Hamas is, messed up as it is, one of the few things preventing Israel from turning Gaza into a wasteland and then Lebensraum (which they’re already doing, but you can probably imagine that it would be going a lot faster if there was nobody to resist). You take away however many of Hamas’s numbers you can provably convict for war crimes (I’d wager the number is a lot less than most would expect, but that aside), and Palestinian resistance suffers greatly as a result. Israel takes the opportunity to oppress Palestinians even more, and those Palestinians are rightly convinced that the international community is an enemy just like Israel, only hiding behind a layer of hypocrisy that they call justice.
The only environment where war criminals in Hamas can be convicted is after Palestine has its own state, and with Israel in tow. Selective justice is oppression, not justice.
So better nothing than something?
Fascist detected
