356
I don't think peace is possible when one side is holding the other in an open air prison and giving them only the amount of calories needed to not die (after the war started even that was suspended)
Stop calling it a prison, prisons are for convicted criminals, Palestinian's only crime is being Palestinian. These were open air concentration camps, they are now open air extermination camps
prisons are for convicted criminals,
Always?
Have you ever seen Gaza? I thought it looked more like a city.
Is "open air concentration camps" now a code word for dense urban city?
Honestly this looks like a pretty nice city to me.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Does that change anything?
Hamas is a terrorist organization with strong ties to Iran. We've already seen what happens when terrorist groups destabilize countries and take control. Syria is an ongoing testament to that. So is Afghanistan
Are the Israeli Government's sins the reason why Hamas is in power? The extent is arguable, but it would be a lie to outright say "no".
But... does that change anything?
Hamas is the power in Gaza. Any form of concessions that don't involve the destruction of Hamas will be considered a win because the Palestinian people have been held in an open air prison for decades. And that will just lead to Hamas becoming more powerful.
If someone was abused horrifically as a child and decided to get a gun and take it out on others, what do you do? In a just world, you get them the help that they need. But in any world, the first thing you do is take the gun away before they can hurt anyone else.
What that means in this situation? I don't know. Short of external military intervention, the Israeli government is not going to stand down. And I for one don't want the US and NATO to fuck around in yet another middle eastern country for another two decades only to leave it considerably worse than we found it.
You realize Israel is controlling the prison in reality, right?
Hamas doesn't shoot Palestinians that go to far off the coast, Israel does.
Hamas didn't erect a huge border wall around Gaza, Israel did.
Hamas doesn't control the supply of food, water, and goods into Gaza. Israel does.
Who controls Gaza?
WRT the wall at least:
Hamas's goal from securing power in 2007 has been rejecting the two state solution and destroying Israel leading to many many attacks since then so, maybe securing the border isn't an insane idea? I mean, fuck all good the wall did recently but still.
Hamas doesn't control the supply of food, water, and goods into Gaza. Israel does.
Slightly amend that one, Egypt also supports the blockade. That being said, it's not the fault of all the civilians in Gaza that people voted in 2007 to let a terrorist organization take over and things went poorly because of it. This blockade needs to end. Humanitarian aid needs to be able to get to Gaza.
I'm not going to get fully bogged down in the semantics, but Israel still basically controls the Egypt border.
The US forced a vote, didn't like the outcome, attempted to coup Hamas, and failed. Also, if Hamas is so bad (which they are in many respects), why does Israel fund them and explicitly has a policy of only interacting with them as being the legitimate government?
Easy, they want an unsympathetic enemy that does not want peace. They want to continue the project of taking the rest of Israel for the ethnostate.
I'm overall on board for this comment but how does Israel find Hamas?
It's a deliberate strategy to divide and conquer and create blowback (Oct 7th)
load more comments
(9 replies)
At least for #2, you might want to do more research into why hamas doesn't have prisons in Gaza..
Quite disappointed with Sen. Sanders on this one considering his general stance. Barack Obama had a better understanding here:
How about Israel stop bombing civilians so that Hamas doesn't get new recruits? Does it really not occur to them that 7000+ civilians killed is going to radicalize more youth. Especially since Gaza's demographic is mostly youngsters due to past conflicts killing off those who survive for longer.
It's quite clear that in this conflict, the following people have all the gain: Netanyahu who wants to prolong the war to keep corruption charges and an ouster at bay, by winning favor with Israel conservative fundamentalists; Hamas who successfully intervened when relations were about to be mended with the Saudis, Israel, and a few other countries; Putin, whom the U.S is funding against in the conflict with Ukraine; U.S. war manufacturers that supply the missiles to Israel.
Edit: Fixed some typos and an incorrect negation
Edit2: It's been pointed out to me that there was a wild misrepresentation of what Sanders said. My faith is restored. Thankfully it was I who foolishly fell for this clickbait.
Quite disappointed with Sen. Sanders on this one
If you ever read a headline about Bernie and are disappointed in what he said, it's a pretty good chance he said some other stuff too that got left out.
“The immediate task right now is to end the bombing,” Sanders said Sunday, “to end the horrific humanitarian disaster, to build – go forward with the entire world for a two-tier, two-state solution to the crisis to give the Palestinian people hope.”
Just because the headline doesn't have him also criticizing Netanyahu, doesn't mean he's suddenly supporting him.
Agree with you. I was browsing when out on a weekend and fell for the clickbait.
The problem with his idea is that Hamas actively refuses the two state solution and has been doing so violently for decades. That's their whole thing.
And then you've got Netanyahu on the other side. Which... You know
load more comments
(2 replies)
The CNN article seems to be cherry-picking his statements. This is his op-ed on the topic which is much more in-depth:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/nov/01/gaza-humanitarian-pause-bernie-sanders
Yeah you need to actually read what he said.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Remember people,
Hamas != Palestina
Putin's mafia != Russia
You know, I wonder how many people would support guerilla tactics if they were living in the fucking hunger games.
How 'bout we try it and see - what do we have to lose?
Innocent human lives. (Which the Jsraeli government is of course also carelessly discarding. But that's why I think Sanders' position is the most reasonable. We should definitely demand Israel greatly reduce the military force it's exerting, but a total ceasefire might not be entirely realistic)
We lose "innicent human lives" in a ceasefire attempt? The killing will increase?
load more comments
(6 replies)
Last time ignoring Hamas ended up costing 1033 dead civilians and more than 3000 wounded. And anyone that thinks that Hamas wouldn't do worse war crimes in retaliation if the situations were inverted is deluding themselves.
Peace is not possible while Hamas has any power (the same being true for lots of Israeli organizations but this escalation is entirely on Hamas).
1033 dead civilians and more than 3000 wounded
Only counting one side i see...
load more comments
(2 replies)
Ignoring Hamas? You mean actively committing genocide and bombing infrastructure in Gaza made a freedom fighting army stronger? Yo that's crazy. You should tell people about the Jews that tried to resist Hitler. Must have been very violent terrorists according to your logic.
Who is proposing ignoring Hamas? It's a ceasefire - not a new concept, and certainly not one that depends on ignoring the counterparty to that ceasefire.
Israel has been the primary aggressor here for decades, and unless I'm mistaken, has propped up Hamas over the more secular, reasonable PLO tp establish this pretext for the genocide they're now attempting to carry out.
Hamas are murderous jihadis, but they're a product of Israel's hostility and decisions to prop them up. Hamas are armed with small arms and a paraglider, Israel has a nuclear arsenal and F-35s. Depending on the count you use, over the past few decades, Palestinian casualties have outnumbered Israeli casualties between dozens to one and 500:1. The UN has called Israel's management of Palestine an open air concentration camp, and we've seen Israel's response to the Hamas attack has already carelessly killed many more times more people - particularly children than Hamas did - they've shut off food, water, and supplies, they've shut down movement, they've pushed them out of their homes, they've bombed hospitals and refugee camps.
Who is the overwhelming military force that's killing all the innocent civilians here? But yeah - Hamas are escalating this.
You want to defend Russia's invasion of Ukraine, the Nazis, Chinese expansionism, and the US war on terror while you're at it with the monstrous shit takes, my dude?
load more comments
(2 replies)
Blink twice if you are been kidnapped
No, you probably can't. But you can, however, hold the moral high ground and offer one.
Here is a list of peace offers which would grant the Palestinians a country of their own, they refused all of them
1937 - Peel commission, rejected
1947 - Partition resolution, rejected
2000 - Camp David, rejected
2001 - Taba, rejected. Arafat starts the second intifada and a year later changes his mind.
2008 - Olmert offer, rejected
Hamas have tried to agree to boundaries Despite media attempts to portray it as a new Hamas charter, it is not. The new ‘policy document’ accepts the creation of a Palestinian state in 1967 borders, but still rejects Israel and claims its territory. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39775103
Here are some other noteworthy peace meeting or proposals from Israel to the rest if the Arab world, which were rejected
1919: Arabs of Palestine refused nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.
1920: San Remo conference decisions, rejected.
1922: League of Nations decisions, rejected.
1937: Peel Commission partition proposal, rejected.
1938: Woodhead partition proposal, rejected
1947: UN General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR 181), rejected.
1949: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 194), rejected.
1967: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNSCR 242), rejected.
1978: Begin/Sa’adat peace proposal, rejected (except for Egypt).
1994: Rabin/Hussein peace agreement, rejected by the rest of the Arab League (except for Egypt).
1995: Rabin’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
2000: Barak/Clinton peace offer, rejected.
2001: Barak’s offer at Taba, rejected.
2005: Sharon’s peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, rejected.
2008: Olmert/Bush peace offer, rejected.
2009 to 2021: Netanyahu’s repeated invitations to peace talks, rejected.
2014: Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
Not gonna link Trump’s imbecilic peace plan as an example.
Here is a list of peace offers ~~the Palestinians~~ the governing body of palestinians offered to Israel -
None
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2023
356 points (100.0% liked)
politics
24969 readers
2341 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. 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.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
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.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS