Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line

  • @jesseaccountname@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    931 year ago

    He just wants genocide. It’s infuriating seeing world leaders pretend they don’t get that so they can get what they want out of Palestinian deaths.

      • @Land_Strider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Hey, getting having a casus belli that can be passed around to buy you time to bomb a city long enough before someone intervenes, especially if you can’t singlehandedly deter many of the other armies to leave you alone, is a rare opportunity for small fish warmongers.

    • Cosmic Cleric
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      casus belli

      casus belli /kā″səs bĕl′ī, kä″səs bĕl′ē/

      noun

      • An act or event that provokes or is used to justify war.

      • A matter or occasion of war; an excuse or a reason for declaring war: as, the right of search claimed by Great Britain constituted a casus belli in 1812.

      • An act seen as justifying or causing a war.

      (The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition)

    • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      431 year ago

      He doesn’t give a shit about hostages.

      If he did, they wouldn’t be blowing up all of Gaza.

      If any die from IDF strikes, he’ll just say that Hamas killed them and use their deaths to justify more bombings.

    • @RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 year ago

      Dude had a chance to stop the whole thing in its tracks and didn’t take it.

      This has always been about taking the land.

      • @Tavarin@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -11 year ago

        Hamas has stated they will repeat attacks like Oct 7th until all Israel is wiped out, and you think they will honour a ceasefire and actually accept peace?

        Hamas only wants a ceasefire so they can regroup and rearm before attacking Israel again.

    • R0cket_M00se
      link
      fedilink
      English
      41 year ago

      Before? Dude, radical islamic extremists have been calling us “the great Satan” for decades lol

      They hate us for our support of Israel and thousands of people have already died because of it.

      • burchalka
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        Nope, radical islamists hate US and anything that stands between them and dar-al-islam (world of Islam)…

  • @shatal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    321 year ago

    At this point he doesn’t have a choice. Hamas offered to release about a dozen hostages for a ceasefire.

    The Israelis repeatedly declared that there won’t be any ceasefire without the release of all the hostages.

    If he accepts anything else he’s most likely to loose all control.

  • ShroOmeric
    link
    fedilink
    English
    311 year ago

    He’ll rather kill them allwoth hiis own hands rather than stop the war. The moment genocide is over he’s next in line to get fucked. So long hostages. This is what you get for electing sociopathic I guess.

  • @A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    241 year ago

    Of course he did.

    The hostages are much more valuable to Israel in captivity, so they can continually exploit them for genocidal justifications.

    • @Genericusername@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      This is simply not true.

      There were talks about up to 15 hostages, of 239 in demand for 4 days of ceasefire. Hamas needs this ceasefire desperately to regroup and assess the damages. The chaos now serves Israel well and apparently it puts much more pressure on Hamas. The ground invasion proves very effective. Maybe as Hamas becomes more desperate the “price” for the hostages will drop. Alternatively, if Israel will allow them to regroup, the war will take significantly more time because it will be much harder to eradicate them. Maybe the Israelis know where the hostages are held and after a ceasefire the hostages will be transferred to a different hideout, or smuggled via the tunnels to Egypt and from there to who knows where.

      • @homura1650@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 year ago

        Neutral and Israel alligned countries have been calling for a humanatarian pause on purely humanitarian grounds. Even if you don’t care about the hostages, that Hamas was willing to offer them means that they had an interest in such a pause as well; making Israel the only obstacle to it happening. That is to say, the severity of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is squarly on Israel’s shoulders. The most charitable reading of the situation is that they have determined that the tactical advantage of blocking a humanitarian pause outways the civilian lives they put at risk by doing so.

        • ???OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -11 year ago

          And even that charitable reading means they are committing collective punishment.

        • @Genericusername@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          81 year ago

          Israel cares a whole lot about its hostages. Evidence for that are the prices they were willing to pay in the past.

          But sure, let’s go with your logic. Why can’t Israel just go carpet-bombing the crowded part in the south of the Gaza strip that all the refugees fled to? It would be a very effective way to eradicate them all. They are so crowded in such a small area that it’s possible to kill a couple hundred thousands in a single day. Wow, Israel has a lot to learn on how to ethnically cleanse a region.

      • ???OP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -2
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The price of Hamas not “regrouping” is not worth committing genocide for.

  • BeautifulMind ♾️
    link
    fedilink
    English
    221 year ago

    Of course he doesn’t want to de-escalate the situation.

    If he did that, things might calm down and fewer people will vote based on his promises of being strong on security. Also if he did that, his hard-right backers (who need a hot conflict to keep taking Palestinian land politically acceptable) will attack him for being ‘soft’ on security.

    The logic of it all is genocide of course, but Bibi wants that if the alternative is him being out of office and back in court defending himself against corruption charges.

    • @ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      Which is a very important distinction that people here seem to overlook. If you give in to a terrorist’s and hostage taker’s demands you’re inviting more terrorism and hostage-taking because it worked.

        • @mwguy@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          English
          51 year ago

          Honestly, at this point there aren’t any other options. Because the last major conflict in the region was 5 years ago in 2018, there was a real feeling around the world that Hamas/Gaza had “turned a corner” and was open to living in peace with its neighbors. That’s why you had seen rising calls from the West, even the US, calling for a freeze on new settlements in the West Bank. And there was a real hope that maybe covid had “reset” the expectations of both sides in the same way that the end of the Cold War seemingly had.

          But it looks like Hamas had no intention of that. Instead they unleashed an attack and had five years of rocket build up behind it instead of the normal two. At this point I don’t know how many more times we need to Hamas the show that it’s uninterested and even the ideal concept of peace. Even Hezbollah, in southern Lebanon, a fellow terrorist organization; seems to have the ability to respect a border with Israel. So at this point yes tearing him off down even with the understanding that a new terrorist like organization might take its place is preferable to the status quo. Because there is a reasonable chance that even a new terrorist organization could respect a border, and not attack its neighbors. And honestly if a Taliban-esque group ends up taking over it probably be a better outcome for the day-to-day of Gazans. That’s f***** up as that is.

          • @T00l_shed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            11 year ago

            Honestly all this will do is infuriate more Gazans who may have lost everything, and will want vengeance. Continuity the cycle. I get Hamas is an issue but making Gazans suffer for it doesn’t help anyone.

            • @mwguy@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              How much more angry can they get? Like they’re angry enough to behead children, and cheer raped corpses through their streets. What more do they have to offer?

              • @T00l_shed@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 year ago

                I can’t believe I have to say this, but hamas ≠ Palestinians, Just like Israel’s government ≠ Jewish people.

                • @mwguy@infosec.pub
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  Hamas didn’t cheer those corpses, common Palestinians did. There’s extensive polling in the region and Hamas enjoys widespread support. It’s believed that if elections happened today in the West Bank that Hamas would win.

                  While Hamas might not represent the Palestinian diaspora, they definitely represent the Palestinians located in the Gaza Strip.

    • ???OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 year ago

      And yet nowhere did anyone claim otherswise 😕 nor does it improve the situation or change how Bibi is viewed now

      (judging by how you phrased this comment)

        • ???OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The headline says nothing about the number nor implies anything.

          This is why you need to read the rest of an article.

          • @mwguy@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 year ago

            The hostages are a group that’s assumed to be complete. That’s like if someone stole your tires off your car and offered to give “your tires” back to you but only 2 of the 4. People assume they offered all the tires if the headline doesn’t say otherwise.

            If you include the partial hostage release, it essentially robs the story as it’s clear why you wouldn’t do a deal for some of the hostages. Making any deal for some of the hostages is stupid.

            • ???OP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              0
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I think this is dumb. The title didn’t say all hostages. The article didn’t say all hostages. You invented this in your own head then decided to build an argument around it.

              • @mwguy@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -11 year ago

                I mean future articles covering it have said things like “Ceasefire for $x hostages rejected” for exactly this reason.

                • ???OP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  01 year ago

                  Sure but your case is still weak and honestly not even there.

  • @aidan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    101 year ago

    One source with knowledge of the talks, which slowed after the Israeli ground invasion, said a central point of discussion was a demand by the Israeli side for Hamas to provide a full list specifying the name and details of each person held in Gaza. The Israeli side was unwilling to cease bombardments without receiving this list.

    Hamas responded that it was unable to provide the list without a pause in the fighting, as the estimated 240 hostages were held by a number of different groups in places across Gaza. That suggested even Hamas leaders do not know for sure how many people are held captive, their locations or the number who have survived the bombardments.

    Another source said Hamas originally demanded prisoner exchanges, fuel and other supplies in return for the hostages, but these demands were dropped in favour of a halt to the airstrikes alone.

    “Each time the Israeli counter-demand got harder,” the source said. Members of Hamas have previously said they took hostages in order to exchange them for the thousands of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.

    Sources briefed on the talks told Reuters that the group discussed allowing small amounts of fuel into Gaza for humanitarian purposes, which Israel has so far refused, as well as the deal to free a small number of hostages in exchange for a ceasefire of one or two days. The outcome of the talks, however, remained unclear.

    It sounds like these sources may be members of Hamas’ negotiating team, which I don’t exactly know that that’s a reliable source.

    • @Microw@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      81 year ago

      It doesnt sound like complete BS that Hamas probably doesnt know the exact number, names and placement of hostages at the moment. They probably have a good idea but no definite list.

  • @Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    9
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    When Putin was invading Ukraine everyone was calling for the Russians to just kill Putin. When Hamas invaded everyone was calling for the Palestinians to kill Hamas themselves.

    Awfully silent these days though now israel is the party committing war crimes.

  • @TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 year ago

    Globally, we’re going to need to develop approaches for de-radicalizing large groups of people. Even if we can start on the direction towards peace in this situation, both the Israeli and some segments of Palestinian people seem radicalized to the point of no return, where no true solutions is even possible. I see the same thing in the US with whatever tf you want to call the Republican party. They’re over the cliff. No pulling them back. Yet we need a way to de-radicalize these people otherwise there is no path forward.

    • Flag
      link
      fedilink
      18
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You dont have to leave Israel and palestine to find more groups. Have you seen what kinds of people bibi is courting to stay in power? Ultra-orthodox far right netters who are publically asking for a cleansed ethno-state.

  • BombOmOm
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 year ago

    Considering it wasn’t a return of all of the hostages and additionally Hamas said they intend to repeat the terrorist attack that sparked this, what motivation does Netanyahu have to stop until Hamas is destroyed?

    • @dependencyinjection@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      241 year ago

      That Hamas did was abhorrent, as was the response of Israel.

      What motivation do Hamas have to just take the current occupation of Gaza and living in such a way? Genuinely curious.

      This just seems like nobody will win and everybody will suffer. For what?

      • @JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -111 year ago

        What motivation do Hamas have to just take the current occupation of Gaza and living in such a way? Genuinely curious.

        Less lives lost, even in the long term. We won’t know what would have been, but there may well have been a diplomatic solution that got Gazan independence. But Hamas is built on violence is the answer.

            • @Grimy@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              61 year ago

              That’s a bit silly. Sentencing a whole population to “suffer forever” isn’t caring for them.

              It’s like you didn’t even read what he said.

              • @givesomefucks@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                21 year ago

                Nah, I think people just didn’t get that I was saying the reason someone would view how Gaza was like before 10/7 as good, could only be because you only care about Israeli civilian deaths and not Palestinians.

                Explaining jokes kind of ruins them, but I guess in this case I overestimated people.

                • @Grimy@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  So your comment was sarcastic? (which kind of seems obvious in hindsight, woops)

                  I don’t really get your explanation to be honest and how what you said relates to that.

            • TheDankHold
              link
              fedilink
              171 year ago

              In the West Bank, with no Hamas presence, Israeli settlers backed by the IDF come kill them and take their homes. The Israeli leadership doesn’t want a two state solution because extreme Zionists are in power.

                • TheDankHold
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  They went from occupation to siege. Not much improvement. I also wasn’t talking about Gaza so try to stay on topic.

              • @JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                -31 year ago

                They weren’t in power when Hamas came to power. Both sides have been pushing each other towards wanting to annihilate each other. But do you think a two state solution would minimize the suffering, but is not a feasible outcome?

                • @deegeese@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  111 year ago

                  A two-state solution was viable before Israel settled people in the middle of the west bank.

                  As an intentional tactic of Zionist settlers, it is now impossible to have a defensible border.

                  The only way forward now is to end apartheid and give full rights to the civilians living in the West Bank and Gaza.

                  Zionists will claim this “destroys Israel” or other nonsense we heard from South African defenders of apartheid.

                • TheDankHold
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  The Zionists I’m talking about funded and propped up Hamas. Likud is not younger than Hamas. You seem to have a very limited understanding of this.

            • ???OP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              01 year ago

              For the time being, and prior to cutover 7th, the two-state solution was either perpetually on hold or completely unworkable because of Israel (in both cases). Will it help stop the stuffing from moving on? Maybe if it’s implemented properly, yes.

    • Overzeetop
      link
      fedilink
      101 year ago

      Well, lucky for him he didn’t even entertain the ceasefire to see if he could have gotten them all back.

      • @mwguy@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -41 year ago

        The ceasefire would have happened in return for some of the hostages. Why would they give them more?

        • @hitmyspot@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          91 year ago

          Ceasefires end, otherwise it’s called a truce. Hamas probably didn’t want to give up their strongest negotiating chip. In saying that, keeping hostages in this way is a war crime too.

          Negotiating is the only path forward. Netanyahu rejecting the offer outright leads to more death and violence in the short and long term.

          If Israel don’t negotiate in good faith, why would Hamas stop terrorist attacks? Your rhetoric goes both ways.

          • @mwguy@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -11 year ago

            Netanyahu rejecting the offer outright leads to more death and violence in the short and long term.

            Just the short term really. The least deaths in the long term from a game theory perspective is to make the value of the hostages zero or even negative.

            Israel’s biggest mistake in the hostage back and forth was in the past giving up like 1000 fighters for some hostages.

            Instead Israel should occupy like an additional acre of Palestine everytime a hostage/day is taken. Domestically the loss of territory seems to be the only thing that matters to Palestinians, in terms of political support. So they need to take that away.

            • @hitmyspot@aussie.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              Your game theory is only considering the lives of hostages in the short and long term. Thousands are dying in the meanwhile.

              • @mwguy@infosec.pub
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 year ago

                Thousands more would die in the next war for hoatages if they’re allowed to be viable. Long term, peace on the '67 borders is the only way to minimize total casualties.

                Hamas has proven over the last 20 years that it will continue to attack Israel no matter what. It’s proven that it doesn’t care about the lives of Palestinians.

                • @hitmyspot@aussie.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  21 year ago

                  I took agree that peace leads to less death. The question is how to get there.

                  Hamas are a terrorist organisation who committed a horrible act. Hamas are not in power in the west bank, yet the Palestinians there have suffered apartheid and lose land to Israeli settlers in breach of international law. This is happening for years.

                  If we look at stats from before October, the loss of lives is clearly on the Palestinians side to a much higher degree. If we look at since October, it’s the same.

                  Hamas commits horrible acts. Israel commits horrible acts.

                  Keeping civilian hostages as human shields is a war crime. Indiscriminately bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure is a war crime.

                • @filister@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -21 year ago

                  Oh and Israel cares so much about civilians lost. Perhaps you should check the numbers of killed and injured people on both sides even before 7.10, to get a bit of perspective.

        • Overzeetop
          link
          fedilink
          51 year ago

          The way I read it was a ceasefire in return for some of the hostages. Nobody floats their final offer with the first contact.

          • Some of the hostages for humanitarian lanes
          • Most of the hostages for a 7 day ceasefire with monitored evacuations
          • All of the hostages for a 14 day ceasefire
          • All of the hostages and known leaders of HAMAS for an indefinite ceasefire, contingent on zero future incursions or military operations (you have to offer at least one impossible option past what you want)
          • @mwguy@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            01 year ago

            Israel needs to reset the value of hostages in the long run. They can’t afford for hostage taking to be viable in the long run. And as long as they are successful militarily; there’s no real reason for them to budge from their position.

    • ???OP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 year ago

      The deal that went off was before that statement by Hamas.

        • ???OP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          Wanting an occupying force off the map shouldn’t come as a shock to anyone, since Israel should have never existed (I’m for a one joint state solution where Palestinians get freedom and rights too but it’s not too hard for me to understand Hamas’ “radical” idea).