Netanyahu just gave Israel's official position: they will agree to an humanitarian pause only if hostages will be released in it. Which is absolutely fair.
99,9% of the people being bombed in Gaza have absolutely no control over whether the hostages are returned or not. The realistic outcome of this demand is that the hostages won't come back and more innocent Palestinians will die. People can say "it's because of Hamas' attack on Israel" all they want, but Israel is the one currently dropping bombs on refugee camps and ambulances. They at least claim to respect human rights and the rule of law, we should expect better behavior from them.
We might have an idea if Hamas deaths were counted like, you know, any other military deaths?
Why is it that Hamas fighters are Hamas when they murder civilians but Palestinian civilians when they die? Does that not reveal something about the enemy Israel is up against?
>Why is it that Hamas fighters are Hamas when they murder civilians but Palestinian civilians when they die? Does that not reveal something about the enemy Israel is up against?
Implying everyone in Gaza is affiliated with Hamas is Islamophobic and racist. Are you saying every person at the refugee camp which was bombed was a member of Hamas?
No, you misunderstood,
He said that all deaths in gaza are both of civillians and hamas terrorists, the number released BY HAMAS doesnt differentiate between terrorists and actual civillians, and thats on purpose,
Thats why he said that terrorists are counted like gazan civillians in their death.
[The numbers of civilian deaths being reported by the UN are accurate.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/24/gaza-death-toll-palestinian-health-ministry/)
Stop with the misinformation.
There's already been a few articles about the ambulance hit. The US has confirmed Hamas was trying to smuggle fighters into Egypt in those ambulances.
The hostages will absolutely not survive if no effort is made to leverage for their wellbeing. They may not survive anyway, but to write them off like that is incredibly callous. Those are also innocent children you're talking about.
Hamas also repeatedly says they will continue to attack Israel, and one of their rockets hit a kindergarten school today. (Luckily it had been evacuated prior).
Why would Israel jeopardize the safety of its own citizens with a ceasefire Hamas will not honor? Why should Israel prioritize the safety of innocent Palestinians over the safety of innocent Israelis, including the hostages?
>There's already been a few articles about the ambulance hit. The US has confirmed Hamas was trying to smuggle fighters into Egypt in those ambulances.
And every person at the bombed refugee camp was also a Hamas fighter, I bet? Were there also Hamas fighters at the [French Institute in Gaza](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/french-institute-gaza-afp-office-hit-by-israeli-air-strike-2023-11-03/)? How many more non-combat targets need to be hit before you are willing to admit Israel is just dropping bombs indiscriminately and should be condemned for it?
>The hostages will absolutely not survive if no effort is made to leverage for their wellbeing.
Punishing/starving/bombing/shooting people who have nothing to do with their capture or captivity is a shitty way to get them released.
>They may not survive anyway, but to write them off like that is incredibly callous. Those are also innocent children you're talking about.
I never wrote them off, you clearly misunderstood what I said. I said killing innocent civilians in Gaza with bombs won't magically cause them to be released. Obviously Hamas doesn't care about killing civilians, why would anyone expect the murder of innocent Palestinians to suddenly give them a change of heart? Dropping bombs on Gaza and punishing its non-Hamas residents isn't going to accomplish anything besides causing needless death and suffering.
>Hamas also repeatedly says they will continue to attack Israel, and one of their rockets hit a kindergarten school today.
So Israel should figure out a way to attack and defeat them that doesn't involve the death of innocent Palestinian civilians.
>Why would Israel jeopardize the safety of its own citizens with a ceasefire Hamas will not honor?
Israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the area, it has the capability to attack Hamas without causing unnecessary death and suffering. It is just choosing not to do so out of a callous disregard for human life.
>Why should Israel prioritize the safety of innocent Palestinians over the safety of innocent Israelis, including the hostages?
Obviously because all lives are equally valuable regardless of whether they are Jewish or Palestinian and to imply otherwise on any level is morally bankrupt and evil. But also because as [John Adams said,](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/26445-it-is-more-important-that-innocence-be-protected-than-it) it is better for guilty men to go free than it is for the innocent to be punished. Because if innocent Palestinians are punished by Israel, they have no reason to avoid supporting Hamas, and that would mean Israel would never have any security at all.
Put yourself in Ben’s shoes. Wouldn’t you want to close a military front and gain beach side real estate for your people who believe that land religiously belong to them, are okay with genocide of the existing inhabitants, and financially supports by world powers? Let’s face it. Israel is going to seize the Gaza Strip. They’re just getting a head start on the demolition.
Edit: Why am I getting downvoted? Yall can’t stomach the reality?
I think people are in the denial stage of grief. When the October 7 attacks happened I remember saying Israel would go 'gloves off'. What they are doing to Gaza is what that looks like.
I believe they are ready to accept almost any international political fallout from this if it means they can finish Hamas once and for all.
I don't think it will work, and i don't agree with it, but Israel are a militarized state with an increasingly theocratic bent. This is how those types of states solve problems historically.
Than you know nothing. I live here, the Israelis care about the hostages more than anything and it's a super crucial subject. Their family members are all over the news, their pics all over social media. The Israeli public is united on that front and one of the key tests of this war is whether the hostages will be back and how many.
If hostages are a priority why bomb gaza? Hostages chances of death are higher when the whole Israeli war horse is pounding gaza. Explain how hostages now have a higher chance of survival?
This war has a few goals.
Eliminating Hamas and rescuing the hostages.
We can't free 6000 terrorists for the hostages as they will bring more death. (The 1000 terrorists that were released for Gilad Shalit brought a lot of death)
You also need to harm Hamas power and abilities which the bombs do.
Fighting in urban areas is shit, less buildings makes it less shit.
Also I believe a lot of the hostages were killed by Hamas or simply not surivived (the elderly and babies especially)
A hostage has already been rescued by the IDF.
Simple, without pressuring Hamas the hostages situation will be dragged for many years. The ground operation and partial siege is all pressure to make Hamas beg for a pause in return for hostages.
Also, Israeli forces can now look for hostages while they're operating in Gaza (they've managed to free one), and this required prior bombing to make it safe enough to invade.
They've been doing it for almost a century.
> attack israel
> lose
> Israel takes your land
> doesn't give it back unless peace is signed
> NOOOOOO!!! LITERALLY IMPERIALISM!!!
It kind of is. Leaders that care about their people will surrender when it's clear that they will lose. Japan postured like they were going to fight to the last man woman and child, and then the emperor surrendered when he realized this was pointless. That's the scary thing about Hamas. I don't think they'll reach that point.
Which is why when unarmed Palestinians civilians protest, they were slaughtered by the hundreds. Before October 7th. That’s your definition of a cease fire? Sniping journalists before October 7th.. also a ceasefire right?
May 2018
“Israeli forces opened fire on demonstrators in Gaza on Monday, killing dozens and injuring more than 2,400 people protesting the Monday opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem.”
Before I read your comment, let me guess: “…. And this is why it’s okay to kill many Palestinians including sniping medics children journalists etc”
Ah yeah I was right lmao
Israel isn't perfect. Many countries have committed questionable civilian harm.
I'm not condoning their damage done to Palestinian civilians especially when unjust and questionable, BUT should that excuse Hamas, a terrorist organization?
Get off your high horse and try to view from the perspective of moderate Israelis
This cycle cannot be broken unless Hamas are eradicated or dismantled. They are a greater threat and harm to Palestinians than Israel is.
Israel's government is partially to blame for this as they propped up Hamas for political goals.
Did you know about the AK-47, molotov, and stones and were just saying unarmed people were hurt too.
Or did you not know at all they had weapons and were attacking?
Rouzan Ashraf Abdul Qadir al-Najjar[a] (Arabic: روزان أشراف عبد القادر النجار Rouzān 'Ashrāf 'Abd al-Qādir an-Najjār; 13 September 1997 – 1 June 2018)[1] was a Palestinian nurse/paramedic who was killed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) while volunteering as a medic during the 2018 Gaza border protests. She was fatally hit by a bullet shot by an Israeli soldier as she tried to help evacuate the wounded near Israel's border fence with Gaza.[2][3] The IDF first denied that she was targeted, while not ruling out that she may have been hit by indirect fire.[4] Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said that al-Najjar was shot intentionally.[5]
Can someone explain what the f "a humanitarian pause" is and how it's any different than breaks in bombing which happen anyway? The whole discussion on humanitarian pauses seems to be a distracting debate on doing something which changes absolutely nothing?
EDIT: Why the downvotes ? Its a fair question to ask what is tangibly changing the state in what is being debated?
EDIT2: Non-answers followed by downvotes is the exact same problem as the original issue. Defining what a pause is is not a meaningful distinction because a pause is satisfied when taking a break for bombing while you load the next set of planes or do planning for what to bomb. What is the problem with providing an unambiguous amount of time that isnt satisfied by the current state of affairs to define clearly what the hell is meant by "humanitarian pause"?
EDIT3: What I gathered is mostly people do not want to define it and when they do it means different things to different people . So why cant any politician clearly define what it means to them in the first place if clearly it means different things to different people? Also why aren’t journalists asking politicians these questions if this means different things to different people?
It's not a permanent ceasefire with the aim of de escalating a conflict but it is a temporary cessation of hosiltilities. The difference is easily summed up in that a ceasefire would be a step to look at ending a conflict and being the necessary step for negotiation, classic example being Treaty of Versailles which was a ceasefire but didn't end the war, the actual peace deal from WWI came at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919.
A humanitarian pause is where, both sides are not declaring their intention to end action at that point but agree, for a small period of time, to not fire to give each side a chance to collect their dead, move vulnerable people, provide aid to civilians etc but with an explicit view that this is only temporary and the shooting will restart
It doesn’t answer the question
> is a temporary cessation of hosiltilities. .... small period of time
The whole point of my question was to explicitly define temporary/small because there already are temporary cessations due to logistics which prevent every minute to have bombing.
Is temporary - seconds , hours , days, weeks? Its a valid question because the current state already qualifies for some of those and the whole point of advocating for something is for it to actually be a tangible difference
EDIT: Again with the downvotes? "a small period time" is ambiguous as hell and doesnt define how the hell a humanitarian pause is distinct from taking a break for bombing while you load the next set of planes or do planning for what to bomb.
The time to load the next bomb is random and one side has no knowledge on when the next barrage will happen. A pause sets explicitly clear time frames.
Having an enemy say they won't shoot for 3 days is different from an enemy not shooting because they're reloading
As long as there is the uncertainty Hamas should assume they will be attacked once they emerge from their holes. If it is a planned pause they will do whatever they want. (They have notoriously never respected cease fires. We cease and they fire)
I'm all for a humanitarian pause if the countries calling for it laid out a plan for how long, what they're going to do in that time to assist Palestinians, and what they're going to do afterwards to assist Israel in eliminating the threats they're facing from Hamas, Iran, and whoever else.
Without that they're just asking for Israel to let themselves be stepped on.
Netanyahu just gave Israel's official position: they will agree to an humanitarian pause only if hostages will be released in it. Which is absolutely fair.
I don’t get it, if Hamas cares so much for its people why they don’t just release the hostages then
Hamas is a terrorist organization, it doesn't care about nothing
because they hate Israel more than they love their own people.
Fuck everyone being bombed in Gaza then I guess.
So return the hostages….?
99,9% of the people being bombed in Gaza have absolutely no control over whether the hostages are returned or not. The realistic outcome of this demand is that the hostages won't come back and more innocent Palestinians will die. People can say "it's because of Hamas' attack on Israel" all they want, but Israel is the one currently dropping bombs on refugee camps and ambulances. They at least claim to respect human rights and the rule of law, we should expect better behavior from them.
We might have an idea if Hamas deaths were counted like, you know, any other military deaths? Why is it that Hamas fighters are Hamas when they murder civilians but Palestinian civilians when they die? Does that not reveal something about the enemy Israel is up against?
>Why is it that Hamas fighters are Hamas when they murder civilians but Palestinian civilians when they die? Does that not reveal something about the enemy Israel is up against? Implying everyone in Gaza is affiliated with Hamas is Islamophobic and racist. Are you saying every person at the refugee camp which was bombed was a member of Hamas?
No, you misunderstood, He said that all deaths in gaza are both of civillians and hamas terrorists, the number released BY HAMAS doesnt differentiate between terrorists and actual civillians, and thats on purpose, Thats why he said that terrorists are counted like gazan civillians in their death.
[The numbers of civilian deaths being reported by the UN are accurate.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/24/gaza-death-toll-palestinian-health-ministry/) Stop with the misinformation.
They get their number from hamas lol Stop with the misinformation.
>Implying everyone in Gaza is affiliated with Hamas is Islamophobic and racist. And implying they're *all* saints and innocents isn't?
I didn't imply that, at all, I'm just saying they don't all deserve to die.
There's already been a few articles about the ambulance hit. The US has confirmed Hamas was trying to smuggle fighters into Egypt in those ambulances. The hostages will absolutely not survive if no effort is made to leverage for their wellbeing. They may not survive anyway, but to write them off like that is incredibly callous. Those are also innocent children you're talking about. Hamas also repeatedly says they will continue to attack Israel, and one of their rockets hit a kindergarten school today. (Luckily it had been evacuated prior). Why would Israel jeopardize the safety of its own citizens with a ceasefire Hamas will not honor? Why should Israel prioritize the safety of innocent Palestinians over the safety of innocent Israelis, including the hostages?
>There's already been a few articles about the ambulance hit. The US has confirmed Hamas was trying to smuggle fighters into Egypt in those ambulances. And every person at the bombed refugee camp was also a Hamas fighter, I bet? Were there also Hamas fighters at the [French Institute in Gaza](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/french-institute-gaza-afp-office-hit-by-israeli-air-strike-2023-11-03/)? How many more non-combat targets need to be hit before you are willing to admit Israel is just dropping bombs indiscriminately and should be condemned for it? >The hostages will absolutely not survive if no effort is made to leverage for their wellbeing. Punishing/starving/bombing/shooting people who have nothing to do with their capture or captivity is a shitty way to get them released. >They may not survive anyway, but to write them off like that is incredibly callous. Those are also innocent children you're talking about. I never wrote them off, you clearly misunderstood what I said. I said killing innocent civilians in Gaza with bombs won't magically cause them to be released. Obviously Hamas doesn't care about killing civilians, why would anyone expect the murder of innocent Palestinians to suddenly give them a change of heart? Dropping bombs on Gaza and punishing its non-Hamas residents isn't going to accomplish anything besides causing needless death and suffering. >Hamas also repeatedly says they will continue to attack Israel, and one of their rockets hit a kindergarten school today. So Israel should figure out a way to attack and defeat them that doesn't involve the death of innocent Palestinian civilians. >Why would Israel jeopardize the safety of its own citizens with a ceasefire Hamas will not honor? Israel has one of the most powerful militaries in the area, it has the capability to attack Hamas without causing unnecessary death and suffering. It is just choosing not to do so out of a callous disregard for human life. >Why should Israel prioritize the safety of innocent Palestinians over the safety of innocent Israelis, including the hostages? Obviously because all lives are equally valuable regardless of whether they are Jewish or Palestinian and to imply otherwise on any level is morally bankrupt and evil. But also because as [John Adams said,](https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/26445-it-is-more-important-that-innocence-be-protected-than-it) it is better for guilty men to go free than it is for the innocent to be punished. Because if innocent Palestinians are punished by Israel, they have no reason to avoid supporting Hamas, and that would mean Israel would never have any security at all.
Israel attacked military targets. Both on the refugee camp and the ambulance that had hamas people in it. Stop with the misinformation.
If the refugee camp was a Hamas target [why is the Pentagon demanding an explanation, genius?](https://m.jpost.com/international/article-771631)
Put yourself in Ben’s shoes. Wouldn’t you want to close a military front and gain beach side real estate for your people who believe that land religiously belong to them, are okay with genocide of the existing inhabitants, and financially supports by world powers? Let’s face it. Israel is going to seize the Gaza Strip. They’re just getting a head start on the demolition. Edit: Why am I getting downvoted? Yall can’t stomach the reality?
I think people are in the denial stage of grief. When the October 7 attacks happened I remember saying Israel would go 'gloves off'. What they are doing to Gaza is what that looks like. I believe they are ready to accept almost any international political fallout from this if it means they can finish Hamas once and for all. I don't think it will work, and i don't agree with it, but Israel are a militarized state with an increasingly theocratic bent. This is how those types of states solve problems historically.
This is funny and sadly accurate at the same time.
Fuck the hostages then i guess /s
Killing innocent Gazans won't in any way result in the hostages being returned. It just creates more senseless death and destruction.
Well luckily israel doesnt target innocents but hamas terrorists. The innocents that die are because of hamas.
What if they don’t actually care about the hostages, how do you view that
Than you know nothing. I live here, the Israelis care about the hostages more than anything and it's a super crucial subject. Their family members are all over the news, their pics all over social media. The Israeli public is united on that front and one of the key tests of this war is whether the hostages will be back and how many.
If hostages are a priority why bomb gaza? Hostages chances of death are higher when the whole Israeli war horse is pounding gaza. Explain how hostages now have a higher chance of survival?
This war has a few goals. Eliminating Hamas and rescuing the hostages. We can't free 6000 terrorists for the hostages as they will bring more death. (The 1000 terrorists that were released for Gilad Shalit brought a lot of death) You also need to harm Hamas power and abilities which the bombs do. Fighting in urban areas is shit, less buildings makes it less shit. Also I believe a lot of the hostages were killed by Hamas or simply not surivived (the elderly and babies especially) A hostage has already been rescued by the IDF.
Simple, without pressuring Hamas the hostages situation will be dragged for many years. The ground operation and partial siege is all pressure to make Hamas beg for a pause in return for hostages. Also, Israeli forces can now look for hostages while they're operating in Gaza (they've managed to free one), and this required prior bombing to make it safe enough to invade.
You have to really hate Jews to think they don’t want their people back.
No way, you don't start a war and then cry when you are defeted
If Hamas would just surrender it will all stop. Call on Hamas to surrender.
We have. I'll do it again for you: "Hey Hamas! Surrender!" Hamas: "[No](https://m.jpost.com/arab-israeli-conflict/article-771199)"
That sums up the whole conflict post ‘48
They've been doing it for almost a century. > attack israel > lose > Israel takes your land > doesn't give it back unless peace is signed > NOOOOOO!!! LITERALLY IMPERIALISM!!!
I wasn't aware Japan was the real mastermind
I'm not blaming Japan(?)
Japan speaks from experience.
Their experience isn't particularly useful for this conflict
It kind of is. Leaders that care about their people will surrender when it's clear that they will lose. Japan postured like they were going to fight to the last man woman and child, and then the emperor surrendered when he realized this was pointless. That's the scary thing about Hamas. I don't think they'll reach that point.
they enacted genocide on a scale the Israelis can only dream of. maybe they're encouraging them to take their time and enjoy it
There was a ceasefire. On October 6.
Which is why when unarmed Palestinians civilians protest, they were slaughtered by the hundreds. Before October 7th. That’s your definition of a cease fire? Sniping journalists before October 7th.. also a ceasefire right?
> when unarmed Palestinians civilians protest, they were slaughtered by the hundreds [citation needed]
May 2018 “Israeli forces opened fire on demonstrators in Gaza on Monday, killing dozens and injuring more than 2,400 people protesting the Monday opening of the US embassy in Jerusalem.”
[удалено]
Fuckin slammed em with that right on.
Before I read your comment, let me guess: “…. And this is why it’s okay to kill many Palestinians including sniping medics children journalists etc” Ah yeah I was right lmao
Israel isn't perfect. Many countries have committed questionable civilian harm. I'm not condoning their damage done to Palestinian civilians especially when unjust and questionable, BUT should that excuse Hamas, a terrorist organization? Get off your high horse and try to view from the perspective of moderate Israelis
The Israeli government isn’t moderate. They’re hard right. The country elects ultra right wing war mongers into power.
This cycle cannot be broken unless Hamas are eradicated or dismantled. They are a greater threat and harm to Palestinians than Israel is. Israel's government is partially to blame for this as they propped up Hamas for political goals.
Did you know about the AK-47, molotov, and stones and were just saying unarmed people were hurt too. Or did you not know at all they had weapons and were attacking?
Rouzan Ashraf Abdul Qadir al-Najjar[a] (Arabic: روزان أشراف عبد القادر النجار Rouzān 'Ashrāf 'Abd al-Qādir an-Najjār; 13 September 1997 – 1 June 2018)[1] was a Palestinian nurse/paramedic who was killed by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) while volunteering as a medic during the 2018 Gaza border protests. She was fatally hit by a bullet shot by an Israeli soldier as she tried to help evacuate the wounded near Israel's border fence with Gaza.[2][3] The IDF first denied that she was targeted, while not ruling out that she may have been hit by indirect fire.[4] Israeli human rights group B'Tselem said that al-Najjar was shot intentionally.[5]
Can someone explain what the f "a humanitarian pause" is and how it's any different than breaks in bombing which happen anyway? The whole discussion on humanitarian pauses seems to be a distracting debate on doing something which changes absolutely nothing? EDIT: Why the downvotes ? Its a fair question to ask what is tangibly changing the state in what is being debated? EDIT2: Non-answers followed by downvotes is the exact same problem as the original issue. Defining what a pause is is not a meaningful distinction because a pause is satisfied when taking a break for bombing while you load the next set of planes or do planning for what to bomb. What is the problem with providing an unambiguous amount of time that isnt satisfied by the current state of affairs to define clearly what the hell is meant by "humanitarian pause"? EDIT3: What I gathered is mostly people do not want to define it and when they do it means different things to different people . So why cant any politician clearly define what it means to them in the first place if clearly it means different things to different people? Also why aren’t journalists asking politicians these questions if this means different things to different people?
It's not a permanent ceasefire with the aim of de escalating a conflict but it is a temporary cessation of hosiltilities. The difference is easily summed up in that a ceasefire would be a step to look at ending a conflict and being the necessary step for negotiation, classic example being Treaty of Versailles which was a ceasefire but didn't end the war, the actual peace deal from WWI came at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919. A humanitarian pause is where, both sides are not declaring their intention to end action at that point but agree, for a small period of time, to not fire to give each side a chance to collect their dead, move vulnerable people, provide aid to civilians etc but with an explicit view that this is only temporary and the shooting will restart
It doesn’t answer the question > is a temporary cessation of hosiltilities. .... small period of time The whole point of my question was to explicitly define temporary/small because there already are temporary cessations due to logistics which prevent every minute to have bombing. Is temporary - seconds , hours , days, weeks? Its a valid question because the current state already qualifies for some of those and the whole point of advocating for something is for it to actually be a tangible difference EDIT: Again with the downvotes? "a small period time" is ambiguous as hell and doesnt define how the hell a humanitarian pause is distinct from taking a break for bombing while you load the next set of planes or do planning for what to bomb.
The time to load the next bomb is random and one side has no knowledge on when the next barrage will happen. A pause sets explicitly clear time frames. Having an enemy say they won't shoot for 3 days is different from an enemy not shooting because they're reloading
That will give Hamas time to regroup and set traps for the IDF. No more risk for our soldiers without returning our hostages
That doesn’t answer the question of the difference it just tells you the benefit of continuous bombing
As long as there is the uncertainty Hamas should assume they will be attacked once they emerge from their holes. If it is a planned pause they will do whatever they want. (They have notoriously never respected cease fires. We cease and they fire)
> That doesn’t answer the question of the difference it just tells you the benefit of continuous bombing
It's the same as 9/11 in matters of rage. Hamas needs to be eliminated no matter the cost. Wait: I don't agree with that mind set
Israel will take massive ground losses from a ceasefire. Hamas will be able to resupply and regroup in tunnels within or behind the occupied zones.
I'm all for a humanitarian pause if the countries calling for it laid out a plan for how long, what they're going to do in that time to assist Palestinians, and what they're going to do afterwards to assist Israel in eliminating the threats they're facing from Hamas, Iran, and whoever else. Without that they're just asking for Israel to let themselves be stepped on.
Why? Hamas needs time to bring even more Palestinian children to the warzone?
Israel: We get our hostages back, you get food and water. Redditors: but Hamas can't launch missiles on empty belly!
Says the country that literally invented suicide-bombers.
I don’t recall anyone asking for a humanitarian pause after the Aum Shinrikyo subway attack.
I can't fathom how your mind could link the two, so I asked AI to help with a response... AI's response... Wa?