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

    • ahornsirup@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 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.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 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
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 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?

  • A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 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
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 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.

      • cosmicrookie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s not about the hostages any more. They are the excuse Israel needs to eradicate a whole country.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 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.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Well, color me surprised… he’s seemed so interested in a peaceful resolution.

    • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 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)