Blinken says some of Hamas’ proposed changes to a cease-fire plan in Gaza are workable and some not (apnews.com)

submitted 4 months ago by Billy@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/world@lemmy.world

21 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 4 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

The American’s comments came as Lebanon’s Hezbollah fired a massive barrage of rockets into northern Israel to avenge the killing of a top commander, further escalating regional tensions.

Air raid sirens sounded across northern Israel, and the military said that about 160 projectiles were fired from southern Lebanon, making it one of the largest attacks since the fighting began.

Hamas spokesman Jihad Taha told the Lebanese news outlet ElNashra that the “amendments” requested by the group include guarantees of a permanent cease-fire and the complete withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza.

Netanyahu’s far-right coalition allies have rejected the latest proposal and have threatened to bring down his government if he ends the war leaving Hamas intact.

The official, who was not authorized to speak to media and spoke on condition of anonymity, said Abdullah had joined Hezbollah decades ago and took part in attacks against Israeli forces during their 18-year occupation of southern Lebanon that ended in May 2000.

Other groups allied with Iran, including powerful militias in Iraq and Syria, and the Houthi rebels in Yemen, have also attacked Israeli, U.S. and other targets since the start of the war, often drawing Western retaliation.

The original article contains 1,036 words, the summary contains 195 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[-] Linkerbaan@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago

Weekly Biden gaslight complete.

Hope they change the script soon this is getting stale.

[+] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world -21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Usually terms that equate to “leave us alone so we can plan our next attack on you” would just be laughed at. But for some reason, since the other party is Israel, I guess they’re monsters if they don’t accept. Complete Hamas surrender or nothing. Gaza needs to be "dehamasafied" a la Berlin 1945

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 10 points 4 months ago

Oh no no, Israel are monsters whether they accept or not. You can't kill over 10k children and purposefully try to create a famine and get away without that label.

Gaza needs to be "dehamasafied" a la Berlin 1945

If you think the current conflict hasn't created more terrorists than it's killed you are not thinking empathetically. If a nearby state killed your whole family and destroyed your home because some authoritarian regime you never voted for pissed them off and you could do nothing about it, would you really be less likely to want to take up arms against them? Give me a break.

The only solution is peace. The only way to get true peace is to give Palestine a proper state and freedom from occupation. Dismantle illegal settlements. Immediately release "administrative detainees" held without charge (aka hostages). In short, give Palestinians the same respect and rights as everybody else. You cannot bomb this problem out of existence.

[+] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world -9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Well peace, until Hamas has gathered more strength and attacks Israel again, right? How many months of peace do you think it will be before they’re firing rockets into Israel again? How many peaceful months until they launch another terrorist attack and kill 1000+ and kidnap 250?

The only solution is the dehamasification of Gaza. An international coalition overseeing the process, similar to post-war Germany. Otherwise this back and forth will continue forever

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 8 points 4 months ago

Well peace, until Hamas has gathered more strength and attacks Israel again, right?

No, by peace I mean peace. Like the ordinary meaning of the word.

How many months of peace do you think it will be before they’re firing rockets into Israel again?

Maybe if Israel tries not oppressing people? Wild idea I know. Not a defence of their actions, but if you abuse a people for long enough it's not exactly unexpected is it? My previous comment is full of ideas that would make this much less likely to happen. It could be stopped entirely with diplomacy, although without addressing the serious systemic inequalities it would probably flare up again, yeah.

The only solution is the dehamasification of Gaza.

How do you achieve this? Do you think the current conflict is going to plan in this regard?

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world -3 points 4 months ago

You can’t have perpetual peace in this ongoing conflict man. Each side wants the complete destruction of the other. We can’t just say “be peaceful” and walk away and know that they will never attack each other again.

In order to do this, an international coalition needs to physically occupy and de-radicalize the radical factions. Like post-war Germany, this won’t be some overnight fix. It will take immense resources and effort. Is that going to happen?

“Dehamasification” isn’t bombing and killing all of Hamas, so no I don’t think the current situation is being successful. It’s a long term project that will likely take decades, with an international occupation force overseeing it.

But this specific conflict does not end until Hamas surrenders. Israel will not stop until that end is met. We can argue all day about the morality of that, but it doesn’t matter, that’s the reality of the facts on the ground at this moment

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Each side wants the complete destruction of the other.

I don't think this is true. Hamas' charter supports a two state solution, for example.

We can’t just say “be peaceful” and walk away and know that they will never attack each other again.

No shit. Did you even read what I wrote?

You can’t have perpetual peace in this ongoing conflict man

You get peace by addressing the issues that created the conflict. Is this not obvious? It's ongoing because of shit like the illegal settlements and the blockade of Gaza. The land was stolen but agreements can be reached to split it, if the sides are willing. Of course they tried with the Oslo Accords and it didn't go so well (eg the illegal settlements yet again). Calling it a perpetual conflict is giving up. We need a peace agreement which is actually enforced.

“Dehamasification” isn’t bombing and killing all of Hamas, so no I don’t think the current situation is being successful. It’s a long term project that will likely take decades, with an international occupation force overseeing it.

But yeah fair enough. So if this is not working we need an immediate ceasefire. And yeah I agree it will take time.

But this specific conflict does not end until Hamas surrenders. Israel will not stop until that end is met. We can argue all day about the morality of that, but it doesn’t matter, that’s the reality of the facts on the ground at this moment

The morality does matter. Israel is not a force of nature. What they are doing is wrong and we need an international coalition to make them stop. "The reality of the facts on the ground" is that innocent people are dying every day and Israel is making that happen. And Hamas kicked off this particular round of fighting so they also get some of the blame.

Edit, missed this part:

Like post-war Germany, this won’t be some overnight fix. It will take immense resources and effort. Is that going to happen?

It should. I don't know how this will end but we can't just allow this to continue. Nobody wants another October 7th and nobody wants another 8 months of livestreamed war crimes in response

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Right my whole point is I think we all know, or think, what needs to happen to achieve long term peace. But, will any of it happen? We can’t just march an international coalition into Israel and begin occupying. We can’t just force Israel to stop their campaign and release all prisoners. So what is the real solution? It’s far more complicated than just “Israel and Hamas bad, they should be peaceful will each other”

As much as we all want to see violence end, Israel is a sovereign nation with complex relationships with foreign powers. There isn’t some easy street solution to long term peace, because whatever that solution is, needs to be accepted by them. And their current political establishment don’t want to just release prisoners and give Palestine statehood.

That’s why I said complete surrender of Hamas is the only way we even begin having conversations about long term peace. Israel will accept nothing less at this point

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Well excuse me if I don't think we should all bend over and do what Israel wants. Why should being an obstinate cunt about it mean you get your way? Sanction, threaten, UNSC resolutions, and actually enforce it.

We can’t just force Israel to stop their campaign and release all prisoners.

We could fucking try. Can you imagine making this type of argument about the holocaust? Well you know guys, we all hate the genocide but Hitler really wants to keep killing jews so we have to work with him on that.

It’s far more complicated than just “Israel and Hamas bad, they should be peaceful will each other”

Obviously. This straw man is pointless. But when I talk about dismantling illegal settlements, Palestinian statehood and freedom, you just ignore that? Why? There are many practical steps I have suggested and many others that people with actual expertise could suggest.

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world -1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The reason why Germany was able to be denazified was because the Allied powers bombed them into submission, and then killed anyone with ties to the party. It’s all based on who can bring the most pain upon the other. That’s why this solution goes through Israel, unless we want to bomb them into submission. They will not respond to other pressure

That’s exactly what Israel is trying to do to Hamas right now. Bomb them into submission and then kill anyone left over who had ties to them.

I ignore the statehood/settlements stuff because Israel will never do it. It’s pointless to sit here and say “well they should just give Hamas everything they want” because they will not. They are winning the war from their perspective, so they’ll just keep bombing and killing until they get what they want. Say it’s horrible and terrible all you want, it will not change their perspective. To them, Hamas is Nazi Germany and they are the Allies. They’ll win by killing everyone if they have to.

The only TRUE solution is complete Hamas surrender. And then options like statehood are back on the table. Until then, it will just be bombing and killing

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I don't care what Israel wants. Like I said, Hitler wanted to keep killing Jews - should we have worked with him? Should we have let him continue? You point out that we bombed them into submission but somehow don't support this solution with Israel's unreasonable demands, why?

I don't think boots on the ground would be necessary if we actually sanctioned Israel, stopped providing arms, made them a pariah. But if it came to it and that was the only way to prevent more bloodshed, then we should do it.

It’s pointless to sit here and say “well they should just give Hamas everything they want” because they will not.

First off. Negotiations don't work that way. Both sides must make concessions. Of course we shouldn't give Hamas everything they want.

Second, why do you seem to think it's ok that we give Israel everything they want? Just because they're currently winning thanks to US and generally western weapons and backing?

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world -2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I don’t care what Israel wants. Like I said, Hitler wanted to keep killing Jews - should we have worked with him?

Then we should declare war on Israel is your perspective? Because we were at war with Hitler, that's why we didn't just give him what he wanted. Because we knew we could beat them by killing them. If you truly think the US will ever declare war on Israel, you're insane and this conversation can end here. It's so outside of the realm of reality

The only way this specific conflict will end is either complete destruction of Hamas, or their complete surrender. Period.

Not how SHOULD this conflict end. The only way it will.

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 2 points 4 months ago

Then we should declare war on Israel is your perspective?

Did you miss this part?

I don't think boots on the ground would be necessary if we actually sanctioned Israel, stopped providing arms, made them a pariah. But if it came to it and that was the only way to prevent more bloodshed, then we should do it.

Sanction. Boycott. Make demands with actual consequences. Then if none of that works, international peacekeeping forces should stop the genocide immediately.

If you truly think the US will ever declare war on Israel, you're insane and this conversation can end here. It's so out of the realm of reality

Yeah that's why I did not say that.

The only way this specific conflict will end is either complete destruction of Hamas, or their complete surrender. Period.

Wrong. Cease fire. Prisoner exchanges. Happened many times before.

Again WHY do you think everyone should bend over backwards to do what Israel wants "for peace" but not make any concessions for Hamas? Don't you understand that peace requires both sides to actually agree?

Are you thinking that Hamas is actually going to lay down their arms? Or that if they were destroyed another terror group wouldn't take their place? Is that realistic?

[-] goferking0@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 4 months ago

Their comments here and comment history just show they want Israel to be able to eliminate all Palestinians. Idk if any logic you present will change their mind (or any others that think like that)

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

Probably not but I think it's good to make the case and to give people a chance.

But yeah that seems to be it. Israel gets everything "it's the only way, I'm just being realistic" and Hamas surrenders entirely and gets nothing because.... that is "realistic" apparently? This will make Palestinians stop fighting for their freedom, somehow? Bizarre logic.

[-] slurpinderpin@lemmy.world 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I don’t think boots on the ground would be necessary if we actually sanctioned Israel, stopped providing arms, made them a pariah. But if it came to it and that was the only way to prevent more bloodshed, then we should do it.

Again, not going to happen man. They are America's strongest ally in the region, *AND one of our strongest allies in the entire world. We'll never do this. You're living in a fantasy land. So we should just stop here. You can keep wishing but you aren't looking at the facts and reality. Goodbye

[-] OccamsTeapot@lemmy.world 1 points 4 months ago

You ignore everything else so you can pretend you're being "realistic" and everyone with morals is "living in a fantasy land." Ronald fucking Reagan suspended weapons delivery to them so let's not pretend it's so impossible.

Reagan not only supported UNSC Resolution 487, which condemned the attack, but he also criticized the raid publicly and suspended the delivery of advanced F-16 fighter jets to Israel.

And since you're just ignoring anything inconvenient to you, I'll just leave this question here again...

Again WHY do you think everyone should bend over backwards to do what Israel wants "for peace" but not make any concessions for Hamas? Don't you understand that peace requires both sides to actually agree?

[-] lolcatnip@reddthat.com 4 points 4 months ago

Yes, things are different when the other party is equally genocidal and a thousand times more capable.

this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2024

47 points (92.7% liked)

World News

38837 readers

1786 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.