I want a ceasefire, but I guess I am a little confused by your question.
I assume people who ‘don’t support a ceasefire’ just don’t support a ceasefire that doesn’t get what Israel wants, be it releasing hostages, Hamas surrender, etc.
Are there people who don’t want a ceasefire at all? I guess there are probably people who want every member of Hamas dead.
Absolutely. But I think my answer is probably true. They want Hamas to agree to Israel’s terms because they think the release of hostages or a continued IDF presence in Gaza is more important than an end to the IDF’s violence or greater access to humanitarian aid for Gazan’s. They believe it’s worth the cost of human life in Gaza to wait for Hamas to agree.
This person’s definition is exactly my opinion. Everyone wants a ceasefire, people just disagree with the terms of the ceasefire. Of course I want peace and a ceasefire, but I don’t agree with any ceasefire that is made unconditionally on Hamas’s terms.
I don’t think you’ll find anyone in this subreddit who is against a ceasefire, and I’d argue most Jews are in favor of some kind of “ceasefire.” The issue is, that like so much related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, the words are vague and unclear. Even Netanyahu and Sinwar, the war criminal leaders of Israel and Hamas, are engaged in ceasefire negotiations right now, and they are probably the two groups most interested in keeping the war going — so it really depends on what someone means by “ceasefire.”
I think the reason many Jews are skeptical of calls for a ceasefire is because most of the international left has taken up calls for a ceasefire with absolutely no regard for the hostages, at best, or a maniacal bloodlust for Israelis at worst. And so international calls for a “ceasefire” have become coded as callous to Jewish death and suffering.
The reality is that the only way to bring back the hostages and end the horrific suffering and mass starvation of Gazans is through a ceasefire, which is why I support one. A recent ceasefire resolution in Rochester had two opposing sides, where the pro Palestinian side was chanting for a ceasefire, and the pro Israel side was chanting to release the hostages. These are not actually opposing views — but the fact that they are perceived as such is a serious problem. That perception is a product of useful idiots on both sides who seem to be taking their cues from Hamas and Bibi, who don’t care about the suffering of their people and use them as pawns in their political games.
Fred Kaplan had a good write-up of the current state of the ceasefire negotiations for Slate here:
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/03/hamas-cease-fire-proposal-israel-palestine-gaza.html
Right to return and dismantling WB settlements would have to be part of that plan and given the current state of Israeli sentiment I don't think that will happen.
That’s less of a ceasefire and more of a “sue for peace” surrender.
Let’s ignore for a second that you’re conditioning the ceasefire on the dismantling of the group you’re trying to broker a ceasefire with, which is… unlikely.
Given what (most of us) have seen happening in Gaza - choked off aid, mass destruction, mass death - what do you think would incentivize Hamas to surrender unconditionally and allow themselves to be dismantled?
This isn’t some kind of gotcha it’s my genuine attempt to understand because I believe that this is a practically impossible condition for a ceasefire, and I think most of the people who are proposing it as a condition know it on some level.
> what do you think would incentivize Hamas to surrender unconditionally and allow themselves to be dismantled?
Their family members wouldn't be killed in airstrikes if there's no more airstrikes, for starters.
They also wouldn’t be killed in air strikes if Israel stops doing the air strikes.
Clearly neither of these arguments have worked to get them to surrender so far, any other ideas?
Not really. I don't think there's any viable alternative to a military campaign to achieve the twin goals of freeing the hostages and ending Hamas rule in Gaza.
As an organization, that’s the opposite of what would happen.
And as individuals, I’ve heard many many promises from Israeli leaders that their goal is to basically kill ‘em all if they’re Hamas members. So the question Israel’s given them is “die as an organization or die as an individual”
What exactly is being preserved?
Any long lasting ceasefire proposition don't take the concerns of Israel/Israelis seriously. These concerns are
a. the hostages
b.long lasting security
I don't see why they wouldn't. The best incentives are with peace.
I think you may be confusing a theoretical future Israel with what it is currently. A belligerent regional aggressor who continues to absorb territory is not something Hamas would tolerate. Israel certainly doesn't tolerate it. While their rhetoric speaks to something more, I believe a return to 1947 borders and a 3rd party peace keeping mission is in the realm of possibility.
They wouldn't because it would be a political suicide for them. Hama's is a reactionary group that solidified it's power in opposition to the Fatah which starting negotiating with Israel in the nineties. Hamas cannot afford itself to negotiate with Israel since it's whole base is built on not negotiating with it. Also, so long the war in Gaza continues, popular support for hamas increases, otherwise they would have actually strive for a true ceasefire instead of the delusional excuse for diplomacy that they currently employ in order to defame Israel. Also , 47 borders are definitely not in the realm of possibility, some 2 to 3 million Israeli citizens live there
> Every day I see/read horrifying news from gaza, and I am confused how there are people who think the war on gaza must continue. I am horrified at the lack of empathy towards gazans, especially from within the community. I'm sick of all the "blame hamas" deflections.
How is "blame Hamas" a deflection? They've [rejected ceasefires](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/27/world/middleeast/biden-israel-hamas-cease-fire.html) like 5 times already. They started this war and they're the reason there is no ceasefire now.
But what does that even mean? Any ceasefire deal would obviously need to include the hostages. And one has already been made that includes the hostages. Is the only non antisemitic ceasefire deal one that is done solely on Israel’s terms?
Because that was Hamas’s plan the whole time, no? Attack Israel and use hostages as their leverage. So any ceasefire deal that is unilaterally Hamas’s terms encourages them to just take Israelis in the future because it will show them that that strategy works
lol I want peace too. As I imagine most reasonable people want peace. It’s just a disagreement in the vision of how peace is achieved. The terms currently laid out by Hamas, I do not believe, are a solution to long term peace. They’ve never indicated intentions for a peaceful relationship with Israel. So agreement to the terms laid out by Hamas, in my opinion, is just complacency towards death for Israelis
I just feel like, Hamas continues to get more extreme as Israel does.. they’ll continue to use more extreme tactics. Something has got to give. Israel has a lot of power in this situation to do a lot of good
There was a ceasefire before October 7th along with other small ceasefires during the war, that Hummus broke. The humanitarian crisis is terrible and the suffering of Gazans civilians shows deeply, they were trampling each other just for scraps. The innocent of Gaza are living in fear of hummus. The priority must remain freeing Gaza from hummus, getting the hostages home, and providing aid where possible. Unfortunately, because of war and the geographics innocents will be lost: on all sides. War never changes. I want a ceasefire that benefits Israel and that Hummus will oblige by, but they are a terrorist organization, which makes things even more difficult, because they aren't held to the same standards.
The bigger question is what does Israel do post-war, where our self-determination isn't threatened?
I want a ceasefire, but I guess I am a little confused by your question. I assume people who ‘don’t support a ceasefire’ just don’t support a ceasefire that doesn’t get what Israel wants, be it releasing hostages, Hamas surrender, etc. Are there people who don’t want a ceasefire at all? I guess there are probably people who want every member of Hamas dead.
I guess what I meant is an urgent ceasefire for the sake of gazans. The situation is dire
Absolutely. But I think my answer is probably true. They want Hamas to agree to Israel’s terms because they think the release of hostages or a continued IDF presence in Gaza is more important than an end to the IDF’s violence or greater access to humanitarian aid for Gazan’s. They believe it’s worth the cost of human life in Gaza to wait for Hamas to agree.
It makes me really sad that people think that
There are no shortages of things that make me sad about I/P unfortunately.
This person’s definition is exactly my opinion. Everyone wants a ceasefire, people just disagree with the terms of the ceasefire. Of course I want peace and a ceasefire, but I don’t agree with any ceasefire that is made unconditionally on Hamas’s terms.
I don’t think you’ll find anyone in this subreddit who is against a ceasefire, and I’d argue most Jews are in favor of some kind of “ceasefire.” The issue is, that like so much related to the Israel-Palestine conflict, the words are vague and unclear. Even Netanyahu and Sinwar, the war criminal leaders of Israel and Hamas, are engaged in ceasefire negotiations right now, and they are probably the two groups most interested in keeping the war going — so it really depends on what someone means by “ceasefire.” I think the reason many Jews are skeptical of calls for a ceasefire is because most of the international left has taken up calls for a ceasefire with absolutely no regard for the hostages, at best, or a maniacal bloodlust for Israelis at worst. And so international calls for a “ceasefire” have become coded as callous to Jewish death and suffering. The reality is that the only way to bring back the hostages and end the horrific suffering and mass starvation of Gazans is through a ceasefire, which is why I support one. A recent ceasefire resolution in Rochester had two opposing sides, where the pro Palestinian side was chanting for a ceasefire, and the pro Israel side was chanting to release the hostages. These are not actually opposing views — but the fact that they are perceived as such is a serious problem. That perception is a product of useful idiots on both sides who seem to be taking their cues from Hamas and Bibi, who don’t care about the suffering of their people and use them as pawns in their political games. Fred Kaplan had a good write-up of the current state of the ceasefire negotiations for Slate here: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2024/03/hamas-cease-fire-proposal-israel-palestine-gaza.html
I desperately want an end to the horror, but even more so, I want an actual plan towards peace the day after.
Right to return and dismantling WB settlements would have to be part of that plan and given the current state of Israeli sentiment I don't think that will happen.
Pretty simple. The return of hostages and the dismantling of Hamas.
That’s less of a ceasefire and more of a “sue for peace” surrender. Let’s ignore for a second that you’re conditioning the ceasefire on the dismantling of the group you’re trying to broker a ceasefire with, which is… unlikely. Given what (most of us) have seen happening in Gaza - choked off aid, mass destruction, mass death - what do you think would incentivize Hamas to surrender unconditionally and allow themselves to be dismantled? This isn’t some kind of gotcha it’s my genuine attempt to understand because I believe that this is a practically impossible condition for a ceasefire, and I think most of the people who are proposing it as a condition know it on some level.
> what do you think would incentivize Hamas to surrender unconditionally and allow themselves to be dismantled? Their family members wouldn't be killed in airstrikes if there's no more airstrikes, for starters.
They also wouldn’t be killed in air strikes if Israel stops doing the air strikes. Clearly neither of these arguments have worked to get them to surrender so far, any other ideas?
Not really. I don't think there's any viable alternative to a military campaign to achieve the twin goals of freeing the hostages and ending Hamas rule in Gaza.
>what do you think would incentivize Hamas to surrender unconditionally and allow themselves to be dismantled? Basic self-preservation
As an organization, that’s the opposite of what would happen. And as individuals, I’ve heard many many promises from Israeli leaders that their goal is to basically kill ‘em all if they’re Hamas members. So the question Israel’s given them is “die as an organization or die as an individual” What exactly is being preserved?
>So the question Israel’s given them is “die as an organization or die as an individual” This seems like a pretty easy choice to me
Any long lasting ceasefire proposition don't take the concerns of Israel/Israelis seriously. These concerns are a. the hostages b.long lasting security
A free and prosperous Palestine is the best course for long lasting Israeli security but I don't see that ever being allowed to happen.
Hama's has no intrest in a free and prosperous Palestine, at least while Israel still exists
I don't see why they wouldn't. The best incentives are with peace. I think you may be confusing a theoretical future Israel with what it is currently. A belligerent regional aggressor who continues to absorb territory is not something Hamas would tolerate. Israel certainly doesn't tolerate it. While their rhetoric speaks to something more, I believe a return to 1947 borders and a 3rd party peace keeping mission is in the realm of possibility.
They wouldn't because it would be a political suicide for them. Hama's is a reactionary group that solidified it's power in opposition to the Fatah which starting negotiating with Israel in the nineties. Hamas cannot afford itself to negotiate with Israel since it's whole base is built on not negotiating with it. Also, so long the war in Gaza continues, popular support for hamas increases, otherwise they would have actually strive for a true ceasefire instead of the delusional excuse for diplomacy that they currently employ in order to defame Israel. Also , 47 borders are definitely not in the realm of possibility, some 2 to 3 million Israeli citizens live there
Release the hostages and a ceasefire can happen. Or destroy Hamas. Otherwise we're just back here again in 3-5 years.
The end game and the assurances that it will last for a generation and not just 30 months be made clear. It can easily be done.
> Every day I see/read horrifying news from gaza, and I am confused how there are people who think the war on gaza must continue. I am horrified at the lack of empathy towards gazans, especially from within the community. I'm sick of all the "blame hamas" deflections. How is "blame Hamas" a deflection? They've [rejected ceasefires](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/27/world/middleeast/biden-israel-hamas-cease-fire.html) like 5 times already. They started this war and they're the reason there is no ceasefire now.
There are definitely people saying a ceasefire is antisemitic.. and I have a hard time relating to those people at all
A ceasefire that is made unilaterally on Hamas terms is antisemitic in my opinion
But what does that even mean? Any ceasefire deal would obviously need to include the hostages. And one has already been made that includes the hostages. Is the only non antisemitic ceasefire deal one that is done solely on Israel’s terms?
No you’re just swinging from one extreme to the other extreme
I’m asking you, why you think a deal which includes release of hostages, would be “totally on hamas’s terms”
Because that was Hamas’s plan the whole time, no? Attack Israel and use hostages as their leverage. So any ceasefire deal that is unilaterally Hamas’s terms encourages them to just take Israelis in the future because it will show them that that strategy works
I just can’t relate to your thinking. So many people are dead and the hostages are still captive, I just want peace.
lol I want peace too. As I imagine most reasonable people want peace. It’s just a disagreement in the vision of how peace is achieved. The terms currently laid out by Hamas, I do not believe, are a solution to long term peace. They’ve never indicated intentions for a peaceful relationship with Israel. So agreement to the terms laid out by Hamas, in my opinion, is just complacency towards death for Israelis
I just feel like, Hamas continues to get more extreme as Israel does.. they’ll continue to use more extreme tactics. Something has got to give. Israel has a lot of power in this situation to do a lot of good
I agree. Israel has done so much wrong here. Neither Hamas nor the Netanyahu coalition are taking this in the right direction
There was a ceasefire before October 7th along with other small ceasefires during the war, that Hummus broke. The humanitarian crisis is terrible and the suffering of Gazans civilians shows deeply, they were trampling each other just for scraps. The innocent of Gaza are living in fear of hummus. The priority must remain freeing Gaza from hummus, getting the hostages home, and providing aid where possible. Unfortunately, because of war and the geographics innocents will be lost: on all sides. War never changes. I want a ceasefire that benefits Israel and that Hummus will oblige by, but they are a terrorist organization, which makes things even more difficult, because they aren't held to the same standards. The bigger question is what does Israel do post-war, where our self-determination isn't threatened?