593
submitted 1 year ago by NIB@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

A top Hamas political official told The Associated Press the Islamic militant group is willing to agree to a truce of five years or more with Israel and that it would lay down its weapons and convert into a political party if an independent Palestinian state is established along pre-1967 borders.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 174 points 1 year ago

That will never happen while Netanyahu and his regime are in power. And the only time steps were taken in that direction, the Israeli Prime Minister got assassinated.

[-] Everythingispenguins@lemmy.world 67 points 1 year ago

Assassinated by hard line Israelis who refuse to accept any type of two states solution. I have always wondered if we would have seen a true two state solution if Yitzhak Rabin hadn't been shot. I think it probably would have happened.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] avater@lemmy.world 48 points 1 year ago

nor will the Hamas remain peaceful...

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 98 points 1 year ago

Considering they're the only ones offering to lay down arms, I'd say they're more likely to be peaceful than the IDF and Netanyahu, who are not making such an offer.

[-] avater@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

They also justified the terrorist attack on the 7th of october, welcomed the large attack on Israel, are not "ashamed to say that Israel has no place in their land and has to be removed" and "will do it again and again".

So yeah they may lay their weapons down, but they never remain peaceful.

Source: https://news.yahoo.com/hamas-member-says-repeat-attacks-065643206.html?guccounter=1

https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/11/02/world/israel-hamas-war-gaza-news#hamas-official-promises-more-attacks-against-israel-similar-to-those-of-oct-7

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago

Okay? I still only see one side saying they're willing to lay down arms. "This will end when we get an independent state" vs. "this will end when you're all dead?" The former seems more reasonable to me. Your mileage may vary.

[-] avater@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Your mileage may vary.

It does. I agree that Netanyahu has to go and Palestine should have the chance to be independend, but the Hamas has also to be put down for good. With those terrorist fucks and their degenerated supporters, there will be no peace in the middle east.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago

How did 'Al Qaeda has to be put down for good' work out for the U.S.?

[-] avater@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How did ‘Al Qaeda has to be put down for good’ work out for the U.S.?

Not that bad since Osama and Zawahiri are dead. Their last big terrorist attack against America was when, 2010? Against the west in general, in France 2015? Since then they pretty much done or in a clash with the Taliban. If we can do the same with the Hamas, I would call it a win.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I see, so by 'put down for good,' you meant 'still exists, just not doing anything dangerous to Israel at this moment.'

Also, you know it took decades of war for Al Qaeda to get to that point, right?

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

You can't shoot an idea. The only way to kill Hamas for good would be genocide. Or actually solving the underlying problem with Palestine, and so starving them of redicalised recruits.

[-] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If Palestine wasn't oppressed, no one would be joining Hamas and they would have no power. This is a problem Isreal created for themselves.

I recommend this video, it really shows how what Isreal calls peace is still so oppressive.

[-] Grimy@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

They shouldn't be ashamed to say it. Israel has no place on their land and should be removed. We aren't talking about mom and pop tourists but militants that are forcing people out of their homes and killing their children.

What the fuck are you smoking?

[-] InformalTrifle@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago

It’s pointless arguing this on Lemmy. Everyone here is convinced that the Islamic jihadists are oppressed and just want peace despite what they actually say and do.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm not saying that. You guys seem to think Arabs are born angry, though, and so can't be dealt with just by not being consistently a bastard yourself.

load more comments (24 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] _sideffect@lemmy.world 107 points 1 year ago

Lmao, fuck this guy. He doesn't give two fucks about Palestine or its people.

[-] DdCno1@kbin.social 72 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The fact that a large number of people in the West are denying this and portraying Hamas as freedom fighters is very worrying.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] WamGams@lemmy.ca 75 points 1 year ago

I would personally reject this deal.

The Palestinian people do not deserve to live under the rule of Hamas. In 19 years of living under Hamas, after all the money given to them by the US, France, the UK, Qatar, Iran, and even Israel, the only thing they built for the Palestinian people has been tunnels to commit terrorism from.

[-] Passerby6497@lemmy.world 36 points 1 year ago

I would personally reject this deal.

The Palestinian people do not deserve to live under the rule of Hamas.

Instead, they deserve to live under the genocidal tyranny of Israel. Clearly that's the much better choice.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

The Israeli imposed closure on Gaza began in 1991, temporarily, becoming permanent in 1993. The barrier began around Gaza around 1972. After the 'disengagement' in 2007, this turned into a full blockade; where Israel has had control over the airspace, borders, and sea. Under the guise of 'dual-use' Israel has restricted food, allocating a minimum supply leading to over half of Gaza being food insecure; construction materials, medical supplies, and other basic necessities have also been restricted. This has been a deliberate tactic of De-development.

Gaza Policy Forum summary: Experts agree that Israel’s dual-use policy causes acute distress

Through 1993 Israel imposed a one-way system of tariffs and duties on the importation of goods through its borders; leaving Israel for Gaza, however, no tariffs or other regulations applied. Thus, for Israeli exports to Gaza, the Strip was treated as part of Israel; but for Gazan exports to Israel, the Strip was treated as a foreign entity subject to various “non-tariff barriers.” This placed Israel at a distinct advantage for trading and limited Gaza’s access to Israeli and foreign markets. Gazans had no recourse against such policies, being totally unable to protect themselves with tariffs or exchange rate controls. Thus, they had to pay more for highly protected Israeli products than they would if they had some control over their own economy. Such policies deprived the occupied territories of significant customs revenue, estimated at $118-$176 million in 1986. (Arguably, the economic terms of the Gaza—Jericho Agreement modify the situation only slightly.)

  • page 240

In a report released in May 2015, the World Bank revealed that as a result of Israel’s blockade and OPE, Gaza’s manufacturing sector shrank by as much as 60 percent over eight years while real per capita income is 31 percent lower than it was 20 years ago. The report also stated that the blockade alone is responsible for a 50 percent decrease in Gaza’s GDP since 2007. Furthermore, OPE (com- bined with the tunnel closure) exacerbated an already grave situation by reducing Gaza’s economy by an additional $460 million.

  • Page 402

The Gaza Strip: The Political Economy of De-Development - Third Edition by Sara M. Roy

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Phegan@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago

They also do not deserve to live under an Israeli genocide.

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 20 points 1 year ago

After Ireland gained independence they fought a civil war. Same in countless outer places. The Greeks fought one while fighting for independence. I fully expect the Palestinians to do the same.

The thing is: the Israelis don't get to decide any of this. That what independence from Israel means.

load more comments (33 replies)
[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 54 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Before people go off about them being evil, how much worse would it be if you tried? If it fails you're just back in the same place. If it works then you have peace.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] Altofaltception@lemmy.world 52 points 1 year ago

If you consider that Hamas only exists to fight against Israeli oppression over an ineffective PA, it makes sense that if the oppression ends, Hamas becomes irrelevant.

[-] IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works 42 points 1 year ago

It's important to note that for most of its existence, "fighting against Israeli oppression" explicitly meant Israel no longer existing. This is the first time I can remember them even implying that they would accept a two state solution.

[-] jpreston2005@lemmy.world 34 points 1 year ago

they accepted a two-state solution previously, the isreali PM that was negotiating with them at the time was assassinated.

[-] gimpchrist@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an Israeli law student who didn't believe in the peace talks. Hamas didn't even kill him, Israel did it. No fucking surprise there.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago

Before 1948, Palestinian Leadership repeatedly advocated for a Unitary Binational State for decades: Palestinian Arab Congress advocating for Unified State 1928, Arab Higher Committee advocating for Unified State 1937, Arab League advocating for Unified State 1948

After the founding of Israel, the Two-State Solutions were utilized to further annex the Palestinian Occupied Territories and enact military control over Palestinians while denying them human and civil rights. This is apartheid. Despite this, both Fatah and Hamas have accepted a Two-State Solution on the 1967 borders, with the two most important factors being the Right of Return of Palestinian refugees and an end to the permanent occupation.

Oslo Accord Sources: MEE, NYT, Haaretz, AJ

History of peace process - The Intercept

The settlements represent land-grabbing, and land-grabbing and peace-making don’t go together, it is one or the other. By its actions, if not always in its rhetoric, Israel has opted for land-grabbing and as we speak Israel is expanding settlements. So, Israel has been systematically destroying the basis for a viable Palestinian state and this is the declared objective of the Likud and Netanyahu who used to pretend to accept a two-state solution. In the lead up to the last election, he said there will be no Palestinian state on his watch. The expansion of settlements and the wall mean that there cannot be a viable Palestinian state with territorial contiguity. The most that the Palestinians can hope for is Bantustans, a series of enclaves surrounded by Israeli settlements and Israeli military bases.

  • Avi Shlaim

How Avi Shlaim moved from two-state solution to one-state solution

‘One state is a game changer’: A conversation with Ilan Pappe

One State Solution, Foreign Affairs

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] xhieron@lemmy.world 40 points 1 year ago

That's a chicken and egg problem, though, isn't it: Netanyahu's government wants Hamas because the conflict keeps Bibi out of prison, and Hamas wants to remain relevant. All the same, the Israeli and Palestinian people are the ones who suffer due to both regimes being in power, and Hamas doesn't shed its guilt just because Israel doesn't want a reasonable Palestinian government. Neither side wants to blink because they have multi-generational hatred for the other side, and that means popular support for further violence probably isn't going anywhere. You back down! No, you back down!

The result is that neither side is going to take real steps to deescalate, because both sides benefit from the conflict. That the Palestinians are suffering more, by orders of magnitude, doesn't make either side's position any less entrenched: Bibi wants to stay in power (and free), and Hamas wants to remain relevant and in power, and they're more justified now than ever. Both regimes need to be replaced.

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The Prophet, Allah bless him and grant him salvation, has said: ‘The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.’

-Article 7 of Hamas’ founding charter

They were founded to kill Jews and push them out of Palestine. They’re not righteous freedom fighters.

“Oh Allah, destroy the Jews and their supporters. Oh Allah, destroy the Americans and their supporters. Oh Allah, count them one by one, and kill them all, without leaving a single one.”

-prayer of Sheik Ahmad Bahr

They’re just as genocidal as Israel has been as of late, they just lack the same capability Israel does.

[-] Keeponstalin@lemmy.world 25 points 1 year ago

Hamas began twenty years into the occupation during the first Intifada, with the goal of ending the occupation. Collective punishment has been a deliberate Israeli tactic for decades with the Dahiya doctrine. Violence such as suicide bombings and rockets escalated in response to Israeli enforcement of the occupation and apartheid.

Hamas 1988 Charter and Revised 2017 Charter

The 1988 Charter, which is certainly unreasonable in its fundamentalism with Sharia Law and is antisemitic, does not call for the extermination of all Jewish People. Hamas wants an end to Israel as an Apartheid State, not an extermination of all Israelis. Under Ahmed Yassin in the 1990's, truces were offered in exchange for Israeli to withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank to the 1967 borders. The 2017 Revised charter explicitly accepts a Two-State Solution of the 1967 Borders. Check Article 7 and 13 of the 1988 Charter to see yourself, compare it to Article 20 and 24-26 in the revised charter.

The slogan From the River to the Sea is about Palestinian liberation that started in the 60s by the PLO for a democratic secular state, not Genocide. The Syrian leader Hafez al-Assad in 1966 maybe, but he's not Palestinian.

History of Hamas supported by Netanyahu since 2012

No I don't support Hamas as a ruling party, I want Palestinians to be able to have free fair elections.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
[-] ZMoney@lemmy.world 50 points 1 year ago

Gotta love the wording in this article "Hamas, which is committed to the destruction of Israel..."

It's because the "state" of Israel is inseparable from a military blockade that imposes a starvation regime and illegally settles lands in the West Bank in direct defiance of the UN. It's like saying I'm committed to the destruction of the US because I'm committed to ending criminal wars of aggression, unconstitutional mass surveillance, and a prison system with 2 million residents.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] bradorsomething@ttrpg.network 46 points 1 year ago

“Best we can do is value menu holocaust.”

[-] sazey@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago

Even that they are failing hard at. Despite all the unimaginable cruelty and choicest Western weaponry, all they have succeeded in is causing utter destruction and wholesale slaughter; they have neither decisively defeated Hamas or broken the resolve of a people they have blockaded more or less since 1967. What a bunch of losers.

[-] Rapidcreek@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago

Two issues. The first is that they aren't going to get pre-1967 borders. The larger more important point though is that Hamas just admitted they aren't a legitimate government power and are actually terrorists instead. Own goal.

[-] Count042@lemmy.ml 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Terrorism is a verb.

Terrorists are people that commit terrorism.

Official count is now 42,000 dead Palestinians, but that is because the ability to count the dead no longer exists. The number is probably closer to 100,000

Israeli doctors have come forward to detail how amputations are regular for Palestinian prisoners who have been zip tied for months now.

Any definition of terrorism that includes Hamas, also includes the Israeli government.

Edit: recognizing your username, now is when you'll call me antisemitic.

load more comments (21 replies)
[-] protist@mander.xyz 20 points 1 year ago

What's the difference between terrorists and the resistance to an occupation?

[-] DdCno1@kbin.social 16 points 1 year ago

I suspect you are not asking in good faith, but I'm answering anyway: Methods and goals. Hamas methods are clear: Legitimate resistance doesn't deliberately and as a core policy murder, abduct and rape civilians. Hamas are no different from IS in this regard, which nobody calls resistance or freedom fighters.

Goals: Hamas actual and openly stated goal is the creation of a global Islamic caliphate and the murder and/or enslavement of all "nonbelievers", not the liberation of the Palestinian people.

[-] Count042@lemmy.ml 18 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

How many Palestinian prisoners do the IDF hold from the west bank?

How are they taken?

What level of evidence is required for them to be 'arrested'?

Do they face the same legal processes as the Israeli 'settlers' when arrested?

What is the difference between the words 'hostage' and 'prisoner' to you?

How many Palestinian prisoners, including children, are reported raped each year in prison?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] bartolomeo@suppo.fi 19 points 1 year ago

The charter of Likud says

Between the sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

so let's see if Israel chooses security or expansion this time. Every other time they have chosen expansion and a Greater Israel, but hopefully they choose peace this time.

[-] avater@lemmy.world 15 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

sounds reasonable but on the other hand I wouldn't trust that terrorist dipshit a second. The Hamas does not care about Palestine or it's people...

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 25 Apr 2024
593 points (100.0% liked)

World News

48842 readers
1626 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

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.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS