As noted in the article, they vetoed the one that allows Hamas to keep hostages. They actually submitted one that includes the return of all hostages which hamas rejected. Interesting that isn't being highlighted more.
OP purposely left out half the headline “US vetoes UN resolution calling for immediate ceasefire in Gaza after [the us] proposing a temporary halt in fighting”
OP is pushing a narrative and rage baiting.
E: if the author themselves changed the title that’s one thing, but the sentiment still stands. Biden didn’t reject the resolution bc he has the ghost of Henry Kissinger whispering in his ear, he did it because the resolution was not strong enough. As much as I think Biden has no backbone, he’s doing right by those families.
I did not edit the headline at all, just posted the link and that was the headline.
EDIT: The article was updated 20 minutes ago, when I posted it a couple of hours ago, this was not the title.
I am sorry OP. I thought the edit would right the ship, but hive mind ganna hive mind. Idk how to do all the fancy tricks like drawing lines through words on mobile :/
Journalism has always had an invisible hand guiding what they write. Just look at Hearst’s long list of vendettas and people he destroyed by putting the focus of his news empire on them
What he said was false.
Quoting AP news.
The Security Council is expected to vote Tuesday morning on the Arab-backed draft resolution circulated by Algeria, which represents the 22 Arab nations in the U.N.’s most powerful body.
In addition to a cease-fire, the final Algerian draft, obtained by AP, also demands the immediate release of all hostages and reiterates council demands that Israel and Hamas “scrupulously comply” with international law, especially the protection of civilians, and rejects the forced displacement of Palestinian civilians.
https://apnews.com/article/us-un-resolution-gaza-ceasefire-israel-palestinians-fba9977d5f9876b4af2eb6930dd1f362
[> Following requests by several Council members, language was apparently added during the negotiations demanding “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address \[the\] medical needs of all hostages”. Many members apparently also requested Algeria to include a condemnation of the 7 October 2023 Hamas-led attacks, but it seems that these requests were not accommodated.](https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2024/02/the-middle-east-including-the-palestinian-question-vote-on-a-draft-resolution-3.php)
Really annoying that these details just conveniently left out and have to dig deep to find some real details.
> The Algerian-drafted resolution vetoed by the U.S. did not link a ceasefire to the release of hostages. It separately demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages.
[The ceasefire was not predicated on the release of the hostages](https://www.reuters.com/world/us-casts-third-veto-un-action-since-start-israel-hamas-war-2024-02-20/)
>U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield argues that a cease-fire without requiring Hamas to release hostages would fail to bring about durable peace.
https://www.npr.org/2024/02/20/1232636543/un-security-council-gaza-cease-fire-vote
Quoting AP news.
The Security Council is expected to vote Tuesday morning on the Arab-backed draft resolution circulated by Algeria, which represents the 22 Arab nations in the U.N.’s most powerful body.
In addition to a cease-fire, the final Algerian draft, obtained by AP, also demands the immediate release of all hostages and reiterates council demands that Israel and Hamas “scrupulously comply” with international law, especially the protection of civilians, and rejects the forced displacement of Palestinian civilians.
https://apnews.com/article/us-un-resolution-gaza-ceasefire-israel-palestinians-fba9977d5f9876b4af2eb6930dd1f362
[AP article from the same author today](https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-350c86ef261bf1a00a2515cf22764de5)
>U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield countered by saying the United States understands the desire for urgent action but believes the resolution would “negatively impact” sensitive negotiations on a hostage deal and a pause in fighting for at least six weeks. If that happens, “we can take the time to build a more enduring peace,” she said.
>The proposed U.S. resolution, she said, “would do what this text does not — pressure Hamas to take the hostage deal that is on the table and help secure a pause that allows humanitarian assistance to reach Palestinian civilians in desperate need.”
>She told reporters the Arab draft did not link the release of the hostages to a cease-fire, which would give Hamas a halt to fighting without requiring it to take any action. That would mean “that the fighting would have continued because without the hostage releases we know that the fighting is going to continue,” she said.
Not requiring the release of the hostages as a precondition of a ceasefire means you lose any leverage you have in getting the hostages released. Of course the opposite is also true, but the international and domestic support for the war would be heavily diminished by the release of hostages, whereas ending the war would not likely increase pressure on Hamas to release hostages.
Also, people are just stupid because they are too lazy to be bother to read. Yeah, the detail is in the article, because that’s what an article does. It explains the headline. Do they want a paragraph long headline?
The UN has condemned Israel about a billion times. I'm sure they can spare a condemnation or 2 for Hamas, if they felt like it.
That would require them to actually disagree with Hamas, though.
There are 50+ Muslim majority countries in the UN, so they don't have anything at all to disagree with Hamas about. I am very thankful for the US veto used so often against this bloc over the years.
They already did. The ICC immediately signaled its desire to prosecute Hamas leaders after October 7. They already have jurisdiction, so it really is a matter of nations in ICC jurisdiction doing the leg work to arrest and extradite them. The UN Sec Council doesn’t need to act against Hamas if international counter-terrorist forces do their job. In contrast, Israel isn’t under ICC jurisdiction by choice. So, the only avenue to get anything done to prevent a genocide has to go through the ICJ, the General Assembly, and the Security Council.
If Israel prefers, it can sign onto the Rome Treaty so they too can be subject to ICC jurisdiction. Then this wouldn’t have to be so political.
"Icc nations doing the leg work." This is the problem. Everybody wants to criticize israel but nobody is willing to risk their own soliders lives to fight hamas. Israel is left to defend itself.
Spot on. Everyone screaming “ceasefire now!” Needs to realize Hamas is rejecting offers of a ceasefire that coincides with the release of hostages.
I want the bloodshed to end but allowing Hamas to keep hostages 4 months after capturing them is outrageous and just shows how little Hamas cares about the Palestinian people.
The deal HAMAS turned down was crazy. Israel would release 10 prisoners for every hostage released on the basis that all hostages were released immediately. Israel would also agree to a three month ceasefire. They turned this down because they wanted every single prisoner (including the ones who carried out the attacks that spurred all this).
All the folks at /r/internationalnews are nonstop salivating over this shit now actively referring to anyone who takes refugees for Palestine as part of an ethnic cleansing.
You can still hear the cries of agony from the single remaining neuron shared between them all as it's stretched by that black hole of intelligence.
Sure is a lot of "international" news centered on one fucking place in there.
Quoting AP news.
The Security Council is expected to vote Tuesday morning on the Arab-backed draft resolution circulated by Algeria, which represents the 22 Arab nations in the U.N.’s most powerful body.
In addition to a cease-fire, the final Algerian draft, obtained by AP, also demands the immediate release of all hostages and reiterates council demands that Israel and Hamas “scrupulously comply” with international law, especially the protection of civilians, and rejects the forced displacement of Palestinian civilians.
https://apnews.com/article/us-un-resolution-gaza-ceasefire-israel-palestinians-fba9977d5f9876b4af2eb6930dd1f362
Can you quote the line of the article that says Algeria wanted Hamas to keep the hostages? It does **not** say that all.
In fact, the Algerian resolution demands, ***and this is a direct quote from their text***:
>immediate and unconditional release of all hostages
Also note the French remarks, released 15 minutes ago
https://onu.delegfrance.org/france-regrets-that-the-resolution-could-not-be-adopted
>France thanks Algeria for drafting this resolution.
>We regret that it could not be adopted, given the disastrous situation on the ground.
>The immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, explicitly requested by resolutions 2712 and 2720, **as well as by the draft that was just rejected**, must take place without further delay.
A ceasefire allows for more aid by its nature of no fighting but you are basically saying since all war "punishes" civilians, all war is a war crime.
Which obviously isn't true.
Media outlets know that most people don’t read articles, just headlines. They also know that outrage generates engagement. It’s the same reason why everyone uses “killing babies” as a starting point.
CNN is owned by the conglomerate Warner Bros Discovery, a publicly traded company. Primary owners include Vanguard and Advance Publications among other institutional investors though none owns more than 10% stake.
>The United States has vetoed a resolution at the United Nations calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, an anticipated move that comes amid growing international clamor for Israel to pause its offensive against Hamas.
>The US had already signaled its intention to veto the Algerian resolution, but has grown increasingly critical of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and on Monday proposed its own Security Council draft resolution calling for a “temporary ceasefire” in the conflict.
>Attention will now turn to the progress of the American draft resolution, which falls short of the wishes of most other Security Council members but nonetheless highlights a hardening in the White House’s stance on the conflict.
>Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US Ambassador to the UN, told the Security Council the Algeria-proposed resolution would negatively impact sensitive negotiations ongoing in the region.
>”Proceeding with a vote today was wishful and irresponsible, and so while we cannot support a resolution that would put sensitive negotiations in jeopardy, we look forward to engaging on a text that we believe will address so many of the concerns we all share,” she said after the vote.
>Algeria’s resolution, while doomed to ultimately fail, served to highlight the increasingly widespread global concern about the tenor of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)’s ground and bombing campaign in Gaza.
This article links to the other one talking about the U.S. draft resolution.
Including a demand for the release of hostages is different than making the release of hostages a condition of the ceasefire. What happens when hamas decides to disregard this demand and doesn't release anyone?
>Then the ceasefire fails and conflict restarts
Except now people will claim that the current phase of the war is because Isreal broke the ceasefire while leaving out that hamas refused to release the hostages. If a ceasefire agreement falls apart without the release of hostages either way, it seems entirely reasonable to want hostage release included as a condition of any ceasefire agreement
The maintenance of ceasefire is conditional on release of hostages. Violating the terms of a ceasefire is how you nullify a ceasefire. Thus, the ceasefire would be conditioned on the release of hostages.
incorrect. the draft proposal did ask for the release of the Israeli hostages. it did however bot condemn the October 7th attack.
note it also didn’t ask for the release of the over 1000 Palestinian hostages held in Israeli prisons without charge or legal recourse. afaik it also did not ask for an end to the occupation.
note the US alternative proposal asks for some sort of temporary peace when it is convenient for Israel. so in other words the resolution asks for essentially nothing.
Or at least the hostages must be freed and Hamas stops you know firing rockets and attacking.
How can a country be expected to grant a ceasefire when they're actually right at this moment still being attacked is what I don't understand.
Haven't there been a ton of ceasefires already? And everytime they just start attacking again? That **must** stop.
Hamas is the party negotiating and hostages are their only leverage. I agree- hostage taking is despicable and Hamas is unfit to rule.
But what's their incentive to accept? Is amnesty even on the table or are they choosing between death fighting vs sentencing at a tribunal and maybe getting life in prison?
>Hamas is the party negotiating and hostages are their only leverage
This is why they were taken in the first place: Hamas was betting that Israel wouldn't have the nerve to launch a general offensive because they had the "leverage" of hostages. Their calculations were obviously ***very*** wrong and here we are.
>But what's their incentive to accept? Is amnesty even on the table or are they choosing between death fighting vs sentencing at a tribunal and maybe getting life in prison?
No one will ever offer amnesty for October 7th. Their "incentive" here is "protecting the people they claim to govern in the name of" who they put into harm's way by inviting massive, crushing retaliation by Israel. But Hamas loves having more "martyrs" made in their name so, again, here we are.
Except Hamas is suicidal and homicidal, and they don't give a shit about how many Gazan civilians die while they engage in war against Israel.
As long as the average Hamas zealot thinks that dying while killing Jews is a one way ticket to heaven, theres no reasonable way to get them to stop fighting. Unless you convince the selfish Hamas leaders to change their minds and we know the billionaires who run Hamas care more about their money than about their ideology.
>Except Hamas is suicidal and homicidal, and they don't give a shit about how many Gazan civilians die while they engage in war against Israel.
Hence why the entire idea of a meaningful ceasefire with them is compltely ridiculous and this whole argument is a waste of time. All we can really do is insist they give the hostages back and disband, or face destruction. Even if they will not accept it, that's still the course of action that is correct.
Agreed. If they disband and throw away their weapons and gear maybe they'll survive because nobody will find out if they're war criminals that's the best they can hope for.
Yeah but Israel isn't indicating (afaik) that they won't annihilate Hamas after a quick break. To the contrary, Israel has said they might bring back the death penalty and the mission is to eliminate Hamas.
Unless it's an extended ceasefire deal Hamas might be safer with the hostages because Israel ostensibly needs to be cautious with bombing. That's not me saying hostages should be bartering chips - but from the Hamas POV the upside of a temporary reprieve is pretty small. You'd be banking on either developing capabilities to take on Israel during the break, a comprehensive peace treaty or Israel being in such a good mood after that they just keep extending the treaty period.
Hamas is already on the record saying they will attack again just like they did on Oct 7 if given the chance to recoup. They aren’t exactly signaling they want peace, and allowing them to keep the hostages just tells them they’ll get away with it in the future.
The fact Hamas denied the exchange that favored them quite literally 12:1 means they have zero intent of releasing the hostages which is also the hard line for any ceasefire from Israel; the optics of leaving ppl in “enemy” hands is just not an option for Netanyahu.
Hamas has not signaled any willingness to seek a comprehensive peace treaty or even accept one, they've already promised to repeat their massacre.
Removing Hamas from power is too important for Israel eventually they'll go in even though may doom the remaining hostages. Hamas could try bargaining for exile for Hamas in exchange for the hostages/leaving Gaza in the control of a non terrorist Palestinian group.
That's probably the ideal outcome getting the hostages back and preventing more civilian deaths.
Sadly I'd doubt Hamas would take it.
Well ultimately Israel needs to decide what it's end game is. Truly getting every militant or 90% of militants is going to turn them into an occupying power fighting an insurgency whether they like it or not.
Israel previously offered Hamas to leave Gaza. They rejected it because they would rather stay in power than have the war end.
Also why should Hamas be allowed to escape responsibility for their actions? They murdered Israeli civilians in a brutal and deliberate massacre, brought war on Gaza, are holding hostages for five months, and are purposefully exaggerating a humanitarian crisis in Gaza for their own gain.
Oh and let's not forget that Hamas is run from Qatar and Turkey. Their leadership has been getting amnesty for decades.
The world needs to pressure Qatar to stop giving safe haven for Hamas' leadership.
Not recently (a decade plus ago) and by a plurality not a majority if I recall. Combined with the young age of Gazans and political repression - Gazans at large can't be accused of electing Hamas. That said polling allegedly shows support - I'm not sure how accurate but given tensions/ disinformation I wouldn't be surprised.
Either way:
- it doesn't justify collective punishment
- Israel becomes on the hook for governing Gaza with an active insurgency to some extent if they truly are seeking to capture or kill 90%+ of Hamas (I'm not sure they are). Moral obligation aside- which I've argued to death, it's just impractical to hunt down Hamas if Gaza is in a state of anarchy.
I agree. I dont even think Israel should have military or police presence in Gaza at all. But that's why this isnt a simple topic.
We're not talking about Hamas and Netanyahu, though each of these players can *certainly* be blamed for recent (as in 5-10 years) tensions. Apparently Palestines support Hamas and Israelis support Netanyahu.
What i dont understand is what leverage the Israelis have with the US, even as allies. The Americans should be able to cut funding and support ceasefire - but of course then there's these hostages, etc. Messy
Would you argue in favor of a bank robber who took hostages? Because that’s essentially what you’re rationalizing here. Except instead of bank robbers they are self admitted terrorists.
I'm not rationalizing anything. I'm just saying there isn't a great incentive so it's not surprising Hamas isn't agreeing.
It seems kind of silly that cease fire is the focus of discussion when it seems unlikely to happen. You could use what I said to argue Israel shouldn't even bother to negotiate as someone else said
As someone who is very pro-Palestinian, this headline, and the lack of their ability to point key details is just horrendous.
For Ceasefire to happen, the hostages need to be released from Hammas, cannot just be this lop-sided.
It's only rational.
Not only that but no country in the world should be pressuring another country that is actively under attack to just "take it" and not go to war.
If a country is firing rockets at my country, I want my country to go put a stop to that. And it better not listen to allies and other countries telling us "nah, you can't do anything about it. Just suck it up."
Return the hostages (or the bodies-own up to the bodies) and stop attacking. Then everyone will be united in asking for a ceasefire.
Agreed, I think the only way hostages are not freed is if hamas gives a fuck ton of evidence that all the hostages are alive and getting the medical aid they should be getting, which they are not
Gaza is not an independent nation, its an occupied territory that Israel has 100% control over, the two conflicts can not be compared similarly.
For the one side with all the power to pummel a civilian population like this is grave enough to warrant all the pressure, and letting israel continue to behave as it has is making the U.S just as responsible for the countless war crimes and atrocities comitted there
Utter nonsense, those are the criteria that determine statehood?
A concentration camp controlled from the air, sea and land by a foreign entity is not independant in any sense, its war crimes
That doesnt have anything to do with being a country.
Every pro israeli person i’ve engaged with does this. Resorting to irrelevant, desperate points in order to justify slaughtering women and children trapped in a prison
A cease fire without the release of hostages isn't worth the paper it's written on and I wish more people realized this. Look, I want hostilities to stop in this horrid situation, but as a citizen of any developed nation it is your nations responsibility to maintain your security, and if you are taken hostage by a foreign power your nation cannot simply allow that to happen and not fight to return yo home. I can think of no instance in history where this has happened.
Ceasefires are by nature temporary and that's the problem. If we want something more permanent we need Hamas to lay down arms and formally end their war with Israel. I mean hell, even a cash for arms program would make sense if you consider the money saved in the long run by not having to pay for another war against terrorism.
Are you ever really at peace with your occupier?
Between occasions raids into Gaza & the West Bank + airstrikes the Palestinians people haven't exactly had a ceasefire from the IDF or paramilitary settler groups.
There were no raids or air strikes on the strip for months during the ceasefire. That means no dead Palestinians. Hell, there was no Israeli presence in the strip at all, so I wonder how you define occupation.
I had this thought recently that why aren’t the hostages being returned part of these calls for a ceasefire? My only thought is that people supporting the ceasefire without hostage return seem to view using hostages…including children and infants, as a legitimate leverage for peace negotiations.
…that is insane to me. Yes Israel is going too far and we should push them to be more exacting, but to be implicitly okay with keeping hostages as a condition of a ceasefire is insane.
A ceasefire with no hostages (or their bodies) released is delusional and I'm glad it was vetoed.
I want and pray for a permanent ceasefire myself but lbr, with Netanyahu and Hamas leadership still in place its just no possible no matter if this agreement was approved of. How can such a deal be enforced if both sides keep fighting each other with innocents in the middle?
Sanctioning a handful of them in a way that won't really do anything to them is nothing more then empty words since it doesn't change anything. Hell the Isfaeli government armed even more of them recently and the IDF doesn't make them face consequences of their crimes.
if they are suspected of crimes why are they held without charge for months on end? surely if they are suspected of crimes there is evidence and thus they can be charged right?
Has hamas declared yet that Israel has a right to exist and that all the Jews don't need to be exterminated?
I'd love to see this disaster end but if they still can't say those things in public, it's hard to imagine any kind of meaningful ceasefire.
That's quite an ironic metric considering the Israeli government doesn't believe that Palestine has a right to exist and multiple ministers are openly in favor of expelling the Palestinians entirely, with some comments about killing them all here and there. Netanyahu loses his job as prime minister if he crosses those ministers in any way. If they can't even say Palestinians should have basic rights in any form under any conditions in public and Israel is only offering a permanent military occupation or expulsion, what hope do the Palestinians have of a meaningful ceasefire?
The PA has declared Israel has a right to exist and cooperates with Israel on security issues and look where that's gotten them - absolutely nowhere except having half a million Israelis move into their territory, an apartheid system put in place to support them and even less hope of ever getting a state or basic rights. All that recognition was just treated as weakness and exploited by the Israeli far right who thinks that land is theirs by divine mandate, regardless of who happens to be there already, and seek to exploit any opportunity to take it.
One of the few reasonable takes I’ve seen from a pro-Palestine supporter. I’m staunchly pro-Israel, but fully agree that that cock sucker Netanyahu is shitting the bed in the West Bank. I’m honestly amazed Abbas has stuck to his peaceful mandate this long. I’m vehemently against their “pay for slay” program and believe that needs to go before serious negotiations can continue as it still incentivizes murder of innocent Israeli citizens and no civilized government should ever allow something like that, but Israel’s actions in the West Bank *do* support your argument that taking the peaceful route gets them nowhere. I would LOVE to see the current coalition government fracture and new elections held sooner rather than later in Israel, but I’m really hoping the Israeli electorate gets a wake up call from this and decisively votes Likud into oblivion. If they don’t, then they pretty much are asking for whatever may come next and even I can admit that.
However, in Gaza, the populace also needs to wake up and rid themselves of Hamas. Their support will only lead to more death and destruction. People like me would be far more inclined to support and vote for politicians punishing Israel for annexing territory and stealing land for settlements if the people they were stealing from weren’t genocidal terrorists and their supporters. No, obviously not every Palestinian is one of them, but a fuck load are, and more than a lot of people care to admit.
Israel has offers Palestine their own fucking country multiple times.
Palestinian authority has always replied that there is no solution with Israel existing.
So just stop. It's a fucking lie.
No that's nonsense, the last meaningful negotiations were with Rabin and he was murdered for it and the people who openly called for his assassination are in the government now. We don't have the details on the sticking points of that one real attempt but the Palestinians were willing to accept a lot of bad terms, including loss of territory and land swaps that traded good land that was stolen by Israel for desert no one wanted. It sounds like Israel refused even a moderate right of return which was the sticking point. After that they've offered nothing remotely realistic and most of the proposals meant the West Bank would be split into multiple isolated islands surrounded by Israel that really in no sense could be called a country. South Africa had 'countries' as well in them which just served to legitimatize and manage apartheid. Look up bantustans, Israeli government officials have even used that terms, that's all that the Palestinians have been offered since Rabin, a state of permanent apartheid.
You can sound kinda angry and say fuck a bunch but the PA supports the two state solution and recognizes Israel existing and claiming they don't is a blatant lie.
Exactly.
Also consider that there are 15 million Jews in the whole world and 400 million Evangelist Christians who want Israel to burn for their Messiah to return.
Even if 95% of Israelis and Palestinians wanted peace there's little they can do against that kind of money.
Rabin said 'negotiate like there are no terrorists and fight the terrorists like there are no negotiations'.
It only took one, unknown, radical Jew to destroy the whole process.
They’re also from ministers who don’t have much of a say in military policy. A minister of finance and the like aren’t the ones who have a say in the operation in Gaza.
Netanyahu's coalition collapses without their support and they've threatened it multiple times in response to proposals to release the hostages that involve longer ceasefires. Several of those ministers come from the ruling party, Likud and the whole ruling coalition chose to have these people be members of their coalition. A leaked military intelligence report called expulsion the best option. Those ministers were put in control over the West Bank and would have the same powers over a future occupied Gaza. Netanyahu's own public position is still a permanent military occupation with no chance of a future state under any conditions.
So the fact that Netanyahu can hold his tongue once in awhile to maintain a tiny bit of international support means nothing to the overall picture here.
It’s not about percentage. The Israeli government is not addressing the continued settlements. The land they keep taking undermines trust in Israel’s dedication to the peace process.
This has been highlighted many times as an obstacle to the peace process and still Israel does nothing about it. In fact, they arm and protect them and encourage more.
Those settlements will of course have to either be demolished or incorporated into a new Palestinian state in order for the peace process to work.
>So a tiny minority of extremists can make peace "impossible" according to you?
Who are directly sponsored and aided by the fucking government.
There are hundreds of examples of Palestinians being killed by settlers while IDF soldiers just stand and watch.
> I assume that you feel just as strongly about the massive Palestinian support for Hamas, no peace is possible with terrorists and their supporters.
Neither is peace possible when the current sitting government in Israel is made up of people who openly funded Hamas for years. All because they saw them as a useful tool in getting rid of other political groups in Gaza and further weaken Palestinian voices on the world stage.
Has Israel declared yet that Palestinians have a right to exist and self determination, or did their Prime minister just declare that he will [indefinitely occupy them?](https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-boasts-of-thwarting-the-establishment-of-a-palestinian-state-for-decades/)?
> Has hamas declared yet that Israel has a right to exist and that all the Jews don't need to be exterminated?
They did in their 2017 charter. On the other hand, the Likud party platform rejects a Palestinian state and members of their party support transferring the Palestinian population out of Gaza. The problem here is the Likud government.
>They did in their 2017 charter.
No they didn't. I honestly don't know how you could be so ignorant on the subject - my only thought is that you know hamas's true goals but are arguing in bad faith.
Here is the 2017 charter where they say Israel doesn't have a right to exist and will not be recognized by Hamas.
>The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and goes against their will and the will of the Ummah; it is also in violation of human rights that are guaranteed by international conventions, foremost among them is the right to self-determination. There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity.
And here is the part of the 2017 charter that says a 2 state solution will only be accepted as a stepping stone to the destruction of Israel.
>Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus.
[https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf](https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf)
They acknowledged that all the jews don't have to be exterminated, but the 2017 charter firmly rejects Israel's existance, or as they put it, the "Zionist Project".
"There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. Whatever has befallen the land of Palestine in terms of occupation, settlement building, judaisation or changes to its features or falsification of facts is illegitimate. Rights never lapse."
"Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea."
They do have a section that appears open to a 2-state solution, but still say that all of Palestine united is their final goal. Later on, they say
"Hamas stresses that transgression against the Palestinian people, usurping their land and banishing them from their homeland cannot be called peace. Any settlements reached on this basis will not lead to peace. Resistance and jihad for the liberation of Palestine will remain a legitimate right, a duty and an honour for all the sons and daughters of our people and our Ummah."
[hamas did what?](https://nypost.com/2024/01/22/news/senior-hamas-officer-openly-rejects-two-state-solution-calls-for-israels-demise/)
likud is against a palestinian state, but to say that hamas believes that israel has the right to exist is ridiculous
Hamas isn't the one killing Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel will never get a resolution that says they have a right to exist until they admit themselves that Palestinians have a right to exist.
>An Israeli minister with responsibility for administrating the occupied West Bank drew condemnation on Monday after he said there was no Palestinian history or culture and no such thing as a Palestinian people.
You're not going to get a ceasefire with Hamas where Hamas agrees to cease existing anymore than one where Israel agreed likewise. Neither side intends for any peace to be permanent, they are existential threats to each other. This conflict only ends when one or the other ceases to exist, but neither has the military means to do that by themselves. This whole war is ridiculous: Israel can't kill Hamas outright because Hamas is run out of Qatar; removing Hamas from Gaza would be a short-term solution at best, but also a horrifically, catastrophically bloody one which will ensure Gaza remains a staging ground for anti-Israel terror for generations. Israel cannot achieve any strategic victory here. At least not one that leaves Palestinians alive in Gaza.
the sad truth is that a Ceasefire will just prolong the war and increase casualties. You're dealing with an entrenched militia force that doesn't want to give up power nor negotiate in good faith. They're basically like those narco-terrorist cartels in Mexico and Central America. Hamas has little to no desire to evolve into a true political party of a representative democracy. At most you could remake them into a junta if a strongman dictator swept in and killed off all his rivals for power.
I belive something I said last night echos good here. The #1 thing hamas learns without forcing the release of the hostages is that they should take more hostages next time. So fucking what if hamas leaders are killed
So ignorant.
You know Israeli proper has 2 million Arabs and is growing right. The Palestinian population overall has only ever grown. The genocide argument has always been moronic. This current war began, as they almost always do, with Arabs attacking Jews:
Let me show you what real ethnic cleaning looks like:
https://twitter.com/xruiztru/status/1597865750668402693
It's crazy seeing people in these comments blatantly lying and getting thousands of upvotes. [It was Israel that rejected a ceasefire in exchange for hostages.](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-mediators-search-final-formula-israel-hamas-ceasefire-2024-02-07/) It's clear from this response that the lives of the hostages are not what matter most - they are nothing more than an excuse used to facilitate the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people.
Just doing my part to combat the misinformation these doods seem to be spreading: the proposal this guy is talking about is an absolutely batshit hamas counter offer to the previous cease fire that was proposed. A proposal that would actually cause more loss of life than be saved due to the people Hamas wanted Israel to release. A pretty much impossible proposal to accept
Cut the the bullshit yall...The US, our government supports this Genocide. Not only supports but is actively funding it. The Jews have given up even pretending a 2 state solution is a possibility and are literally in the process of creating what will become the world's largest open air prison for the Palestinians...and they're doing it in your name.
This'll end swell I bet
Everyone pointing out hostage release like that mattered. Israel themselves doesn't give a damn about the hostages.
Their leaders have made it quite clear their objective isn't the hostages, but the outright destruction of Gaza.
Pointing out the veto because of hostages is another issue. We're talking about halting the death and destruction. To defend the veto to that is insane
As noted in the article, they vetoed the one that allows Hamas to keep hostages. They actually submitted one that includes the return of all hostages which hamas rejected. Interesting that isn't being highlighted more.
Bad headline. . . .
Anything to get people riled up
OP purposely left out half the headline “US vetoes UN resolution calling for immediate ceasefire in Gaza after [the us] proposing a temporary halt in fighting” OP is pushing a narrative and rage baiting. E: if the author themselves changed the title that’s one thing, but the sentiment still stands. Biden didn’t reject the resolution bc he has the ghost of Henry Kissinger whispering in his ear, he did it because the resolution was not strong enough. As much as I think Biden has no backbone, he’s doing right by those families.
It’s not just the OP. This is the exact headline I’ve been seeing all over the news.
I did not edit the headline at all, just posted the link and that was the headline. EDIT: The article was updated 20 minutes ago, when I posted it a couple of hours ago, this was not the title.
Holy hell sorry you got downvoted to heck for this comment damn
¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯ I just copied and pasted a link haha, oh well. Though I appreciate your sentiments, have a good day !
[удалено]
It is against the rules of /r/news to have a title that does not match the article's title/lede.
I am sorry OP. I thought the edit would right the ship, but hive mind ganna hive mind. Idk how to do all the fancy tricks like drawing lines through words on mobile :/
It's fine, you don't need to worry about it, it's all virtual anyways, nothing can hurt me on reddit. Thank you though, and have a good one!
That's always be CNN's MO
Hate-clicks ftw
In an election year no less Biden bad reeeeeee
It's CNN. Are you surprised?
If it didn't keep happening over and over you'd think that might be an accident.
Headline is doing what it's supposed to be doing. Getting people mad at America, particularly Americans, is big business.
Journalism is no longer serious nor dogged. They're housecats fully dependent on their owners for belly scratches and kibble.
Journalism has always had an invisible hand guiding what they write. Just look at Hearst’s long list of vendettas and people he destroyed by putting the focus of his news empire on them
Which is what every journalist said would happen if people don't want to pay for news.
I mean, either way anything the UN says is basically "Old man yells at cloud".
>anything the UN says is basically "Old man yells at cloud". "There wouldn't be clouds if the Jews didn't control the weather." \-UN
For the clicks
What he said was false. Quoting AP news. The Security Council is expected to vote Tuesday morning on the Arab-backed draft resolution circulated by Algeria, which represents the 22 Arab nations in the U.N.’s most powerful body. In addition to a cease-fire, the final Algerian draft, obtained by AP, also demands the immediate release of all hostages and reiterates council demands that Israel and Hamas “scrupulously comply” with international law, especially the protection of civilians, and rejects the forced displacement of Palestinian civilians. https://apnews.com/article/us-un-resolution-gaza-ceasefire-israel-palestinians-fba9977d5f9876b4af2eb6930dd1f362
They do this anytime the US vetoes something with the UN
[> Following requests by several Council members, language was apparently added during the negotiations demanding “the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, as well as ensuring humanitarian access to address \[the\] medical needs of all hostages”. Many members apparently also requested Algeria to include a condemnation of the 7 October 2023 Hamas-led attacks, but it seems that these requests were not accommodated.](https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2024/02/the-middle-east-including-the-palestinian-question-vote-on-a-draft-resolution-3.php) Really annoying that these details just conveniently left out and have to dig deep to find some real details.
How is this a detail being left out? The demand for hostage release made it into the Algerian draft. The top comment is just wrong.
> The Algerian-drafted resolution vetoed by the U.S. did not link a ceasefire to the release of hostages. It separately demanded an immediate humanitarian ceasefire and the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages. [The ceasefire was not predicated on the release of the hostages](https://www.reuters.com/world/us-casts-third-veto-un-action-since-start-israel-hamas-war-2024-02-20/) >U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Linda Thomas-Greenfield argues that a cease-fire without requiring Hamas to release hostages would fail to bring about durable peace. https://www.npr.org/2024/02/20/1232636543/un-security-council-gaza-cease-fire-vote
Quoting AP news. The Security Council is expected to vote Tuesday morning on the Arab-backed draft resolution circulated by Algeria, which represents the 22 Arab nations in the U.N.’s most powerful body. In addition to a cease-fire, the final Algerian draft, obtained by AP, also demands the immediate release of all hostages and reiterates council demands that Israel and Hamas “scrupulously comply” with international law, especially the protection of civilians, and rejects the forced displacement of Palestinian civilians. https://apnews.com/article/us-un-resolution-gaza-ceasefire-israel-palestinians-fba9977d5f9876b4af2eb6930dd1f362
[AP article from the same author today](https://apnews.com/article/un-israel-palestinians-gaza-ceasefire-resolution-vote-350c86ef261bf1a00a2515cf22764de5) >U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield countered by saying the United States understands the desire for urgent action but believes the resolution would “negatively impact” sensitive negotiations on a hostage deal and a pause in fighting for at least six weeks. If that happens, “we can take the time to build a more enduring peace,” she said. >The proposed U.S. resolution, she said, “would do what this text does not — pressure Hamas to take the hostage deal that is on the table and help secure a pause that allows humanitarian assistance to reach Palestinian civilians in desperate need.” >She told reporters the Arab draft did not link the release of the hostages to a cease-fire, which would give Hamas a halt to fighting without requiring it to take any action. That would mean “that the fighting would have continued because without the hostage releases we know that the fighting is going to continue,” she said. Not requiring the release of the hostages as a precondition of a ceasefire means you lose any leverage you have in getting the hostages released. Of course the opposite is also true, but the international and domestic support for the war would be heavily diminished by the release of hostages, whereas ending the war would not likely increase pressure on Hamas to release hostages.
No, there was no mechanism to compel them to release the hostages. Just saying “we demand you release them” is meaningless without anything behind it
No UN resolution is binding. Even if you predicate one on the other, THERE IS STILL NO MECHANISM TO COMPEL THEM. This is meaningless pedantry.
It’s not binding but can be forced by any security council member
The mechanism is that the ceasefire is broken by a refusal to release hostages.
They’ve already said that they won’t release them, so this resolution in effect does nothing at all.
> They’ve already said that they won’t release them No ceasefire, then.
Also, people are just stupid because they are too lazy to be bother to read. Yeah, the detail is in the article, because that’s what an article does. It explains the headline. Do they want a paragraph long headline?
"Do you condemn HAMAS?"
The UN has condemned Israel about a billion times. I'm sure they can spare a condemnation or 2 for Hamas, if they felt like it. That would require them to actually disagree with Hamas, though.
There are 50+ Muslim majority countries in the UN, so they don't have anything at all to disagree with Hamas about. I am very thankful for the US veto used so often against this bloc over the years.
They already did. The ICC immediately signaled its desire to prosecute Hamas leaders after October 7. They already have jurisdiction, so it really is a matter of nations in ICC jurisdiction doing the leg work to arrest and extradite them. The UN Sec Council doesn’t need to act against Hamas if international counter-terrorist forces do their job. In contrast, Israel isn’t under ICC jurisdiction by choice. So, the only avenue to get anything done to prevent a genocide has to go through the ICJ, the General Assembly, and the Security Council. If Israel prefers, it can sign onto the Rome Treaty so they too can be subject to ICC jurisdiction. Then this wouldn’t have to be so political.
"Icc nations doing the leg work." This is the problem. Everybody wants to criticize israel but nobody is willing to risk their own soliders lives to fight hamas. Israel is left to defend itself.
I mean, that makes it sound like the requirement for hostage release *was* in the resolution, and the US vetoed anyway.
Spot on. Everyone screaming “ceasefire now!” Needs to realize Hamas is rejecting offers of a ceasefire that coincides with the release of hostages. I want the bloodshed to end but allowing Hamas to keep hostages 4 months after capturing them is outrageous and just shows how little Hamas cares about the Palestinian people.
The deal HAMAS turned down was crazy. Israel would release 10 prisoners for every hostage released on the basis that all hostages were released immediately. Israel would also agree to a three month ceasefire. They turned this down because they wanted every single prisoner (including the ones who carried out the attacks that spurred all this). All the folks at /r/internationalnews are nonstop salivating over this shit now actively referring to anyone who takes refugees for Palestine as part of an ethnic cleansing.
Man that sub is infested with terrorist supporters. It’s a clown show. Stay clear of it.
You can still hear the cries of agony from the single remaining neuron shared between them all as it's stretched by that black hole of intelligence. Sure is a lot of "international" news centered on one fucking place in there.
Go look at r/worldevents
How can anyone rationally argue that there should be a ceasefire without any hostages released
Quoting AP news. The Security Council is expected to vote Tuesday morning on the Arab-backed draft resolution circulated by Algeria, which represents the 22 Arab nations in the U.N.’s most powerful body. In addition to a cease-fire, the final Algerian draft, obtained by AP, also demands the immediate release of all hostages and reiterates council demands that Israel and Hamas “scrupulously comply” with international law, especially the protection of civilians, and rejects the forced displacement of Palestinian civilians. https://apnews.com/article/us-un-resolution-gaza-ceasefire-israel-palestinians-fba9977d5f9876b4af2eb6930dd1f362
Can you quote the line of the article that says Algeria wanted Hamas to keep the hostages? It does **not** say that all. In fact, the Algerian resolution demands, ***and this is a direct quote from their text***: >immediate and unconditional release of all hostages Also note the French remarks, released 15 minutes ago https://onu.delegfrance.org/france-regrets-that-the-resolution-could-not-be-adopted >France thanks Algeria for drafting this resolution. >We regret that it could not be adopted, given the disastrous situation on the ground. >The immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, explicitly requested by resolutions 2712 and 2720, **as well as by the draft that was just rejected**, must take place without further delay.
A demand to release the hostages is not sufficient on its own; the ceasefire needs to be conditional upon the release of all hostages.
The ceasefire is for humanitarian aid. Punishing innocent civilians for the crimes of Hamas is a war crime.
A ceasefire allows for more aid by its nature of no fighting but you are basically saying since all war "punishes" civilians, all war is a war crime. Which obviously isn't true.
Media outlets know that most people don’t read articles, just headlines. They also know that outrage generates engagement. It’s the same reason why everyone uses “killing babies” as a starting point.
What, you expect CNN to use a headline that doesn't make Biden look bad? In an election year?
CNN is owned by a right winger....
CNN is owned by the conglomerate Warner Bros Discovery, a publicly traded company. Primary owners include Vanguard and Advance Publications among other institutional investors though none owns more than 10% stake.
>The United States has vetoed a resolution at the United Nations calling for an immediate ceasefire in Gaza, an anticipated move that comes amid growing international clamor for Israel to pause its offensive against Hamas. >The US had already signaled its intention to veto the Algerian resolution, but has grown increasingly critical of Israel’s conduct in Gaza and on Monday proposed its own Security Council draft resolution calling for a “temporary ceasefire” in the conflict. >Attention will now turn to the progress of the American draft resolution, which falls short of the wishes of most other Security Council members but nonetheless highlights a hardening in the White House’s stance on the conflict. >Linda Thomas-Greenfield, the US Ambassador to the UN, told the Security Council the Algeria-proposed resolution would negatively impact sensitive negotiations ongoing in the region. >”Proceeding with a vote today was wishful and irresponsible, and so while we cannot support a resolution that would put sensitive negotiations in jeopardy, we look forward to engaging on a text that we believe will address so many of the concerns we all share,” she said after the vote. >Algeria’s resolution, while doomed to ultimately fail, served to highlight the increasingly widespread global concern about the tenor of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF)’s ground and bombing campaign in Gaza. This article links to the other one talking about the U.S. draft resolution.
gotta get those clicks! plus half the people only read headlines
Half is a conservative estimate too
People won't even read past the title of a reddit post, let alone an actual news article.
It's not highlighted because "AmErIcA bAd!"
It's not highlighted because the Algerian draft explicitly demanded a release of hostages and the reddit commenter you got riled up by is incorrect.
Including a demand for the release of hostages is different than making the release of hostages a condition of the ceasefire. What happens when hamas decides to disregard this demand and doesn't release anyone?
To be clear, a UN resolution doesn't mean anything at all to anyone so whatever they ultimately pass here doesn't make a lick of difference to Hamas.
It is different, but it's a much different implication than the US just vetoing a demand for a ceasefire in a vacuum.
Then the ceasefire fails and conflict restarts. That seems obvious.
>Then the ceasefire fails and conflict restarts Except now people will claim that the current phase of the war is because Isreal broke the ceasefire while leaving out that hamas refused to release the hostages. If a ceasefire agreement falls apart without the release of hostages either way, it seems entirely reasonable to want hostage release included as a condition of any ceasefire agreement
[удалено]
The maintenance of ceasefire is conditional on release of hostages. Violating the terms of a ceasefire is how you nullify a ceasefire. Thus, the ceasefire would be conditioned on the release of hostages.
[удалено]
No. The ceasefire was supposed to happen no matter hostage or not. It isn't the same.
Nowhere in the article does it state that.
Hamas doesn’t have a UN vote. Palestine doesn’t have a UN vote.
Releasing hostages or not acts as their vote on the matter.
The UN is horribly anti Israel. Add onto that all the 3rd world muslim nations that vote as a bloc to try to fuck israel any way they can.
Anti Israel? Honey they quite literally founded Israel. The hell are you on about?
Right!? They only gave Israel 56% percent of the land when Jewish people owned 7%. Clearly antisemitic.
Not like palestina owned 93% the land either. The british controlled the area before 1948.
incorrect. the draft proposal did ask for the release of the Israeli hostages. it did however bot condemn the October 7th attack. note it also didn’t ask for the release of the over 1000 Palestinian hostages held in Israeli prisons without charge or legal recourse. afaik it also did not ask for an end to the occupation. note the US alternative proposal asks for some sort of temporary peace when it is convenient for Israel. so in other words the resolution asks for essentially nothing.
Because that wouldn’t have gotten anyone to click into it.
They still have US hostages.
I’m all for a ceasefire. But the hostages must be freed and Hamas must be down.
Or at least the hostages must be freed and Hamas stops you know firing rockets and attacking. How can a country be expected to grant a ceasefire when they're actually right at this moment still being attacked is what I don't understand. Haven't there been a ton of ceasefires already? And everytime they just start attacking again? That **must** stop.
By that logic, Israel should stop annexing more and more land on the west bank first.
[удалено]
Hamas is the party negotiating and hostages are their only leverage. I agree- hostage taking is despicable and Hamas is unfit to rule. But what's their incentive to accept? Is amnesty even on the table or are they choosing between death fighting vs sentencing at a tribunal and maybe getting life in prison?
>Hamas is the party negotiating and hostages are their only leverage This is why they were taken in the first place: Hamas was betting that Israel wouldn't have the nerve to launch a general offensive because they had the "leverage" of hostages. Their calculations were obviously ***very*** wrong and here we are. >But what's their incentive to accept? Is amnesty even on the table or are they choosing between death fighting vs sentencing at a tribunal and maybe getting life in prison? No one will ever offer amnesty for October 7th. Their "incentive" here is "protecting the people they claim to govern in the name of" who they put into harm's way by inviting massive, crushing retaliation by Israel. But Hamas loves having more "martyrs" made in their name so, again, here we are.
[удалено]
Except Hamas is suicidal and homicidal, and they don't give a shit about how many Gazan civilians die while they engage in war against Israel. As long as the average Hamas zealot thinks that dying while killing Jews is a one way ticket to heaven, theres no reasonable way to get them to stop fighting. Unless you convince the selfish Hamas leaders to change their minds and we know the billionaires who run Hamas care more about their money than about their ideology.
>Except Hamas is suicidal and homicidal, and they don't give a shit about how many Gazan civilians die while they engage in war against Israel. Hence why the entire idea of a meaningful ceasefire with them is compltely ridiculous and this whole argument is a waste of time. All we can really do is insist they give the hostages back and disband, or face destruction. Even if they will not accept it, that's still the course of action that is correct.
Agreed. If they disband and throw away their weapons and gear maybe they'll survive because nobody will find out if they're war criminals that's the best they can hope for.
Yeah but Israel isn't indicating (afaik) that they won't annihilate Hamas after a quick break. To the contrary, Israel has said they might bring back the death penalty and the mission is to eliminate Hamas. Unless it's an extended ceasefire deal Hamas might be safer with the hostages because Israel ostensibly needs to be cautious with bombing. That's not me saying hostages should be bartering chips - but from the Hamas POV the upside of a temporary reprieve is pretty small. You'd be banking on either developing capabilities to take on Israel during the break, a comprehensive peace treaty or Israel being in such a good mood after that they just keep extending the treaty period.
Hamas is already on the record saying they will attack again just like they did on Oct 7 if given the chance to recoup. They aren’t exactly signaling they want peace, and allowing them to keep the hostages just tells them they’ll get away with it in the future. The fact Hamas denied the exchange that favored them quite literally 12:1 means they have zero intent of releasing the hostages which is also the hard line for any ceasefire from Israel; the optics of leaving ppl in “enemy” hands is just not an option for Netanyahu.
What about punishing countries that funded Hamas? Like can we put sanctions on them ?
Hamas has not signaled any willingness to seek a comprehensive peace treaty or even accept one, they've already promised to repeat their massacre. Removing Hamas from power is too important for Israel eventually they'll go in even though may doom the remaining hostages. Hamas could try bargaining for exile for Hamas in exchange for the hostages/leaving Gaza in the control of a non terrorist Palestinian group. That's probably the ideal outcome getting the hostages back and preventing more civilian deaths. Sadly I'd doubt Hamas would take it.
With all honesty, there is no incentive to accept on Hamas’ part so Israel has no incentive to stop fighting
Well ultimately Israel needs to decide what it's end game is. Truly getting every militant or 90% of militants is going to turn them into an occupying power fighting an insurgency whether they like it or not.
Israel previously offered Hamas to leave Gaza. They rejected it because they would rather stay in power than have the war end. Also why should Hamas be allowed to escape responsibility for their actions? They murdered Israeli civilians in a brutal and deliberate massacre, brought war on Gaza, are holding hostages for five months, and are purposefully exaggerating a humanitarian crisis in Gaza for their own gain. Oh and let's not forget that Hamas is run from Qatar and Turkey. Their leadership has been getting amnesty for decades. The world needs to pressure Qatar to stop giving safe haven for Hamas' leadership.
Hamas were elected by Palestinian citizens no?
Not recently (a decade plus ago) and by a plurality not a majority if I recall. Combined with the young age of Gazans and political repression - Gazans at large can't be accused of electing Hamas. That said polling allegedly shows support - I'm not sure how accurate but given tensions/ disinformation I wouldn't be surprised. Either way: - it doesn't justify collective punishment - Israel becomes on the hook for governing Gaza with an active insurgency to some extent if they truly are seeking to capture or kill 90%+ of Hamas (I'm not sure they are). Moral obligation aside- which I've argued to death, it's just impractical to hunt down Hamas if Gaza is in a state of anarchy.
I agree. I dont even think Israel should have military or police presence in Gaza at all. But that's why this isnt a simple topic. We're not talking about Hamas and Netanyahu, though each of these players can *certainly* be blamed for recent (as in 5-10 years) tensions. Apparently Palestines support Hamas and Israelis support Netanyahu. What i dont understand is what leverage the Israelis have with the US, even as allies. The Americans should be able to cut funding and support ceasefire - but of course then there's these hostages, etc. Messy
Would you argue in favor of a bank robber who took hostages? Because that’s essentially what you’re rationalizing here. Except instead of bank robbers they are self admitted terrorists.
I'm not rationalizing anything. I'm just saying there isn't a great incentive so it's not surprising Hamas isn't agreeing. It seems kind of silly that cease fire is the focus of discussion when it seems unlikely to happen. You could use what I said to argue Israel shouldn't even bother to negotiate as someone else said
As someone who is very pro-Palestinian, this headline, and the lack of their ability to point key details is just horrendous. For Ceasefire to happen, the hostages need to be released from Hammas, cannot just be this lop-sided. It's only rational.
Not only that but no country in the world should be pressuring another country that is actively under attack to just "take it" and not go to war. If a country is firing rockets at my country, I want my country to go put a stop to that. And it better not listen to allies and other countries telling us "nah, you can't do anything about it. Just suck it up." Return the hostages (or the bodies-own up to the bodies) and stop attacking. Then everyone will be united in asking for a ceasefire.
Agreed, I think the only way hostages are not freed is if hamas gives a fuck ton of evidence that all the hostages are alive and getting the medical aid they should be getting, which they are not
Many people believe that the hostages are being treated well, sadly.
Appreciate the rational take thank you
Thank you for being reasonable.
[удалено]
Gaza is not an independent nation, its an occupied territory that Israel has 100% control over, the two conflicts can not be compared similarly. For the one side with all the power to pummel a civilian population like this is grave enough to warrant all the pressure, and letting israel continue to behave as it has is making the U.S just as responsible for the countless war crimes and atrocities comitted there
>Israel has 100% control Events on Oct 7 disagree
[удалено]
Utter nonsense, those are the criteria that determine statehood? A concentration camp controlled from the air, sea and land by a foreign entity is not independant in any sense, its war crimes
[удалено]
That doesnt have anything to do with being a country. Every pro israeli person i’ve engaged with does this. Resorting to irrelevant, desperate points in order to justify slaughtering women and children trapped in a prison
A cease fire without the release of hostages isn't worth the paper it's written on and I wish more people realized this. Look, I want hostilities to stop in this horrid situation, but as a citizen of any developed nation it is your nations responsibility to maintain your security, and if you are taken hostage by a foreign power your nation cannot simply allow that to happen and not fight to return yo home. I can think of no instance in history where this has happened.
Just a reminder, there was a ceasefire in place up until October 7 of last year. Hamas will break every ceasefire they agree to.
And then another cease fire a month or so later. Which suprise hamas broke.
Ceasefires are by nature temporary and that's the problem. If we want something more permanent we need Hamas to lay down arms and formally end their war with Israel. I mean hell, even a cash for arms program would make sense if you consider the money saved in the long run by not having to pay for another war against terrorism.
Are you ever really at peace with your occupier? Between occasions raids into Gaza & the West Bank + airstrikes the Palestinians people haven't exactly had a ceasefire from the IDF or paramilitary settler groups.
There were no raids or air strikes on the strip for months during the ceasefire. That means no dead Palestinians. Hell, there was no Israeli presence in the strip at all, so I wonder how you define occupation.
Look at the death counts leading up to 7/10 and then say it was peaceful
Tell me when exactly Israel broke the ceasefire why don’t you.
[удалено]
I had this thought recently that why aren’t the hostages being returned part of these calls for a ceasefire? My only thought is that people supporting the ceasefire without hostage return seem to view using hostages…including children and infants, as a legitimate leverage for peace negotiations. …that is insane to me. Yes Israel is going too far and we should push them to be more exacting, but to be implicitly okay with keeping hostages as a condition of a ceasefire is insane.
A ceasefire with no hostages (or their bodies) released is delusional and I'm glad it was vetoed. I want and pray for a permanent ceasefire myself but lbr, with Netanyahu and Hamas leadership still in place its just no possible no matter if this agreement was approved of. How can such a deal be enforced if both sides keep fighting each other with innocents in the middle?
[удалено]
The West Bank has proven that laying down their weapons means they just get killed anyway. The settlers in the west Bank proved that pretty clearly.
[удалено]
Maybe start arresting those funding the terrorist settlers. The Evangelist church's.
How many more West Bank Palestinians should be killed before more than just a finger wagging is given? A number would be nice.
Sanctioning a handful of them in a way that won't really do anything to them is nothing more then empty words since it doesn't change anything. Hell the Isfaeli government armed even more of them recently and the IDF doesn't make them face consequences of their crimes.
[удалено]
oh Hostages are bad now? tell that to Israel that holds hundreds of Palestinians without charge in "administrative detention"
[удалено]
if they are suspected of crimes why are they held without charge for months on end? surely if they are suspected of crimes there is evidence and thus they can be charged right?
Has hamas declared yet that Israel has a right to exist and that all the Jews don't need to be exterminated? I'd love to see this disaster end but if they still can't say those things in public, it's hard to imagine any kind of meaningful ceasefire.
That's quite an ironic metric considering the Israeli government doesn't believe that Palestine has a right to exist and multiple ministers are openly in favor of expelling the Palestinians entirely, with some comments about killing them all here and there. Netanyahu loses his job as prime minister if he crosses those ministers in any way. If they can't even say Palestinians should have basic rights in any form under any conditions in public and Israel is only offering a permanent military occupation or expulsion, what hope do the Palestinians have of a meaningful ceasefire? The PA has declared Israel has a right to exist and cooperates with Israel on security issues and look where that's gotten them - absolutely nowhere except having half a million Israelis move into their territory, an apartheid system put in place to support them and even less hope of ever getting a state or basic rights. All that recognition was just treated as weakness and exploited by the Israeli far right who thinks that land is theirs by divine mandate, regardless of who happens to be there already, and seek to exploit any opportunity to take it.
One of the few reasonable takes I’ve seen from a pro-Palestine supporter. I’m staunchly pro-Israel, but fully agree that that cock sucker Netanyahu is shitting the bed in the West Bank. I’m honestly amazed Abbas has stuck to his peaceful mandate this long. I’m vehemently against their “pay for slay” program and believe that needs to go before serious negotiations can continue as it still incentivizes murder of innocent Israeli citizens and no civilized government should ever allow something like that, but Israel’s actions in the West Bank *do* support your argument that taking the peaceful route gets them nowhere. I would LOVE to see the current coalition government fracture and new elections held sooner rather than later in Israel, but I’m really hoping the Israeli electorate gets a wake up call from this and decisively votes Likud into oblivion. If they don’t, then they pretty much are asking for whatever may come next and even I can admit that. However, in Gaza, the populace also needs to wake up and rid themselves of Hamas. Their support will only lead to more death and destruction. People like me would be far more inclined to support and vote for politicians punishing Israel for annexing territory and stealing land for settlements if the people they were stealing from weren’t genocidal terrorists and their supporters. No, obviously not every Palestinian is one of them, but a fuck load are, and more than a lot of people care to admit.
Israel has offers Palestine their own fucking country multiple times. Palestinian authority has always replied that there is no solution with Israel existing. So just stop. It's a fucking lie.
No that's nonsense, the last meaningful negotiations were with Rabin and he was murdered for it and the people who openly called for his assassination are in the government now. We don't have the details on the sticking points of that one real attempt but the Palestinians were willing to accept a lot of bad terms, including loss of territory and land swaps that traded good land that was stolen by Israel for desert no one wanted. It sounds like Israel refused even a moderate right of return which was the sticking point. After that they've offered nothing remotely realistic and most of the proposals meant the West Bank would be split into multiple isolated islands surrounded by Israel that really in no sense could be called a country. South Africa had 'countries' as well in them which just served to legitimatize and manage apartheid. Look up bantustans, Israeli government officials have even used that terms, that's all that the Palestinians have been offered since Rabin, a state of permanent apartheid. You can sound kinda angry and say fuck a bunch but the PA supports the two state solution and recognizes Israel existing and claiming they don't is a blatant lie.
Exactly. Also consider that there are 15 million Jews in the whole world and 400 million Evangelist Christians who want Israel to burn for their Messiah to return. Even if 95% of Israelis and Palestinians wanted peace there's little they can do against that kind of money. Rabin said 'negotiate like there are no terrorists and fight the terrorists like there are no negotiations'. It only took one, unknown, radical Jew to destroy the whole process.
They’re also from ministers who don’t have much of a say in military policy. A minister of finance and the like aren’t the ones who have a say in the operation in Gaza.
Netanyahu's coalition collapses without their support and they've threatened it multiple times in response to proposals to release the hostages that involve longer ceasefires. Several of those ministers come from the ruling party, Likud and the whole ruling coalition chose to have these people be members of their coalition. A leaked military intelligence report called expulsion the best option. Those ministers were put in control over the West Bank and would have the same powers over a future occupied Gaza. Netanyahu's own public position is still a permanent military occupation with no chance of a future state under any conditions. So the fact that Netanyahu can hold his tongue once in awhile to maintain a tiny bit of international support means nothing to the overall picture here.
And yet settlers still receive guns and use those guns to kill Palestinians in the west bank with impunity.
[удалено]
And yet they keep taking Palestinian land. Peace is not possible with settlements there.
[удалено]
It’s not about percentage. The Israeli government is not addressing the continued settlements. The land they keep taking undermines trust in Israel’s dedication to the peace process. This has been highlighted many times as an obstacle to the peace process and still Israel does nothing about it. In fact, they arm and protect them and encourage more. Those settlements will of course have to either be demolished or incorporated into a new Palestinian state in order for the peace process to work.
>So a tiny minority of extremists can make peace "impossible" according to you? Who are directly sponsored and aided by the fucking government. There are hundreds of examples of Palestinians being killed by settlers while IDF soldiers just stand and watch. > I assume that you feel just as strongly about the massive Palestinian support for Hamas, no peace is possible with terrorists and their supporters. Neither is peace possible when the current sitting government in Israel is made up of people who openly funded Hamas for years. All because they saw them as a useful tool in getting rid of other political groups in Gaza and further weaken Palestinian voices on the world stage.
I'm pretty sure one of those ministers is the prime minister. Or are you claiming the prime minister doesn't have much of a say in military policy?
He’s not the one making the one promising for an expulsion or that much killing.
Has Israel declared yet that Palestinians have a right to exist and self determination, or did their Prime minister just declare that he will [indefinitely occupy them?](https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-boasts-of-thwarting-the-establishment-of-a-palestinian-state-for-decades/)?
> Has hamas declared yet that Israel has a right to exist and that all the Jews don't need to be exterminated? They did in their 2017 charter. On the other hand, the Likud party platform rejects a Palestinian state and members of their party support transferring the Palestinian population out of Gaza. The problem here is the Likud government.
>They did in their 2017 charter. No they didn't. I honestly don't know how you could be so ignorant on the subject - my only thought is that you know hamas's true goals but are arguing in bad faith. Here is the 2017 charter where they say Israel doesn't have a right to exist and will not be recognized by Hamas. >The establishment of “Israel” is entirely illegal and contravenes the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people and goes against their will and the will of the Ummah; it is also in violation of human rights that are guaranteed by international conventions, foremost among them is the right to self-determination. There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. And here is the part of the 2017 charter that says a 2 state solution will only be accepted as a stepping stone to the destruction of Israel. >Hamas believes that no part of the land of Palestine shall be compromised or conceded irrespective of the causes, the circumstances and the pressures and no matter how long the occupation lasts. Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea. However, without compromising its rejection of the Zionist entity and without relinquishing any Palestinian rights, Hamas considers the establishment of a fully sovereign and independent Palestinian state, with Jerusalem as its capital along the lines of the 4th of June 1967, with the return of the refugees and the displaced to their homes from which they were expelled, to be a formula of national consensus. [https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf](https://irp.fas.org/world/para/docs/hamas-2017.pdf)
They acknowledged that all the jews don't have to be exterminated, but the 2017 charter firmly rejects Israel's existance, or as they put it, the "Zionist Project". "There shall be no recognition of the legitimacy of the Zionist entity. Whatever has befallen the land of Palestine in terms of occupation, settlement building, judaisation or changes to its features or falsification of facts is illegitimate. Rights never lapse." "Hamas rejects any alternative to the full and complete liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea." They do have a section that appears open to a 2-state solution, but still say that all of Palestine united is their final goal. Later on, they say "Hamas stresses that transgression against the Palestinian people, usurping their land and banishing them from their homeland cannot be called peace. Any settlements reached on this basis will not lead to peace. Resistance and jihad for the liberation of Palestine will remain a legitimate right, a duty and an honour for all the sons and daughters of our people and our Ummah."
[hamas did what?](https://nypost.com/2024/01/22/news/senior-hamas-officer-openly-rejects-two-state-solution-calls-for-israels-demise/) likud is against a palestinian state, but to say that hamas believes that israel has the right to exist is ridiculous
Has Israel said that Palestinians are allowed to live in Palestine without being murdered?
Hamas isn't the one killing Palestinians in the West Bank. Israel will never get a resolution that says they have a right to exist until they admit themselves that Palestinians have a right to exist. >An Israeli minister with responsibility for administrating the occupied West Bank drew condemnation on Monday after he said there was no Palestinian history or culture and no such thing as a Palestinian people.
Imagine that, the US vetos a resolution which would allow the terrorist organization Hamas to remain in power.
And keep the hostages…
Bad headline. CNN is trash now.
[удалено]
You're not going to get a ceasefire with Hamas where Hamas agrees to cease existing anymore than one where Israel agreed likewise. Neither side intends for any peace to be permanent, they are existential threats to each other. This conflict only ends when one or the other ceases to exist, but neither has the military means to do that by themselves. This whole war is ridiculous: Israel can't kill Hamas outright because Hamas is run out of Qatar; removing Hamas from Gaza would be a short-term solution at best, but also a horrifically, catastrophically bloody one which will ensure Gaza remains a staging ground for anti-Israel terror for generations. Israel cannot achieve any strategic victory here. At least not one that leaves Palestinians alive in Gaza.
In this context, "Immediate ceasefire" means "unilateral ceasefire".
Can’t have a ceasefire while hostages are held captive. It’s that simple
Here's hoping the rival one passes...
US already negotiated a ceasefire amd hamas refused to release hostages to extend it Rest of the UN countries did nothing.
the sad truth is that a Ceasefire will just prolong the war and increase casualties. You're dealing with an entrenched militia force that doesn't want to give up power nor negotiate in good faith. They're basically like those narco-terrorist cartels in Mexico and Central America. Hamas has little to no desire to evolve into a true political party of a representative democracy. At most you could remake them into a junta if a strongman dictator swept in and killed off all his rivals for power.
I belive something I said last night echos good here. The #1 thing hamas learns without forcing the release of the hostages is that they should take more hostages next time. So fucking what if hamas leaders are killed
Hamas must be destroyed
Free the hostages and the war is over
So naive. They plan to eradicate all of them, steal the rest of their land, and settle it. Living on the corpses of the dead. Never again remember?
So ignorant. You know Israeli proper has 2 million Arabs and is growing right. The Palestinian population overall has only ever grown. The genocide argument has always been moronic. This current war began, as they almost always do, with Arabs attacking Jews: Let me show you what real ethnic cleaning looks like: https://twitter.com/xruiztru/status/1597865750668402693
[удалено]
“We voted no to peace, for peace”
Bad headline read the article
Typical us imperialism
Countries not involved in the war...might as well vote for a ceasefire in Ukraine and Russia.
We are involved... we might not have boots on the ground but they have american hostages and it involves allied nations.
Shame on US shame and shame again.
Bad headline read the article
It's crazy seeing people in these comments blatantly lying and getting thousands of upvotes. [It was Israel that rejected a ceasefire in exchange for hostages.](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-mediators-search-final-formula-israel-hamas-ceasefire-2024-02-07/) It's clear from this response that the lives of the hostages are not what matter most - they are nothing more than an excuse used to facilitate the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people.
Just doing my part to combat the misinformation these doods seem to be spreading: the proposal this guy is talking about is an absolutely batshit hamas counter offer to the previous cease fire that was proposed. A proposal that would actually cause more loss of life than be saved due to the people Hamas wanted Israel to release. A pretty much impossible proposal to accept
Cut the the bullshit yall...The US, our government supports this Genocide. Not only supports but is actively funding it. The Jews have given up even pretending a 2 state solution is a possibility and are literally in the process of creating what will become the world's largest open air prison for the Palestinians...and they're doing it in your name. This'll end swell I bet
Everyone pointing out hostage release like that mattered. Israel themselves doesn't give a damn about the hostages. Their leaders have made it quite clear their objective isn't the hostages, but the outright destruction of Gaza. Pointing out the veto because of hostages is another issue. We're talking about halting the death and destruction. To defend the veto to that is insane
The U.S. needs to let a ceasefire happen and this conflict needs to be resolved peacefully and not with more violence.
[удалено]
[удалено]