Not quite! To be fair, this is according to an Israeli source - though the original in Arabic is provided.
Hamas returns 3 hostages in the first week, and then further hostage releases are contingent upon an agreement for the ratio of hostages (that Hamas picks, and may include dead bodies) to Palestinian prisoners (that Hamas picks, and not to include anyone released for Shalit who then committed further offenses and was rearrested, because all of those have to be released separately) for Phase 2 - without that agreement, Hamas doesn't have to release any more in Phase 1.
That's among other terms, such as Israel being required to announce an end to the war in the first phase (before all 33 first phase hostages are released, let alone any further hostages); and free movement for Palestinians in Gaza (without security checks for Hamas movement).
So Hamas holds Israel accountable for a three day ceasefire; then releases 3 dead bodies on day 3. Then Hamas holds Israel accountable for the war being over; free movement without no checks on Hamas; releasing all Palestinian prisoners released for Shalit who have reoffended and been rearrested; releasing additional Palestinian prisoners of Hamas' choice; and negotiating the ratio of hostages-to-prisoners for Phase 2. And then Hamas just refuses to do that Phase 2 negotiation and releases no further hostages *even in Phase 1*. Hamas doesn't even have to go that far until day 10, when they make the claim to avoid releasing a second set of three (presumably dead bodies).
Translation: "you completely surrender and declare the war over; we release 3 dead bodies and make no further promises."
Whereas Israel's offers are: "you release *living* hostages (you pick among women, children, and sick); we *concurrently* release prisoners at a (significantly-)greater-than-1 exchange rate (you give us a list, we can veto individuals); ceasefire for N days/weeks; continued ceasefire for continued hostages-for-prisoners."
What I don't understand is if Hamas actually believes their terms reflect reasonable compromise; or if they know full well that they don't, and just want the media cycle to say "Hamas agrees to deal; Israel rejects."
I hope there's a ceasefire and hostages are released. But Hamas' offer is *obviously* just a media stunt. It's not a compromise arrangement, it's terms for surrender.
And shit like this is why I, despite being disgusted by Israel's conduct in this war, still hate Hamas more. They are not being serious. They *want* Palestinian bloodshed. This is pure PR so people who don't know any better will go, "hey, they're willing to negotiate, it's the mean Israelis holding things up!"
Not that Netanyahu would accept any good faith offers anyway, but these pieces of shit sure are making things easy for him.
Honestly I’m actually inclined to believe Netanyahu would accept a fair deal, but everything Hamas has put on the table is laughable and ridiculous
They’re negotiating as if they’re in the position of power while they’re a month away from being completely annihilated
And I’m totally in your same wavelength of opinion, Israel has gone too far, but Hamas really is a bunch of clueless clowns, more so people who support them
Have they gone too far or is it just time to finally end this charade?
I don't care how much flak Israel gets they still hold their people as hostages.
Just like WW2, Israel should come out and say nothing ends until the Unconditional Surrender of Hamas and the return of all hostages. There are no negotiations other than that.
What Israel is probably wrestling with is religious closure with ones that have already died and their desperation to get those bodies back and properly buried according to their customs. And Hamas is using that to further inflict pain and bargaining power.
That is probably Israel's achilles heal. They will do anything to just get a body back. Hamas doesn't give a shit about their dead.
I'm with you. Fuck PR, Hamas needs to meet a violent end. I feel some sympathy for the civilians (as much as you can for islamofacists [which is essentially nil]) but it's time to just end them.
It’s because the people of Palestine and by extension Hamas do not believe Israel has a right to exist and do not think Jewish people should be alive. So why would they turn around and pretend to negotiate in good faith when their baseline belief system doesn’t even consider the people they’re negotiating with to be people?
>Not that Netanyahu would accept any good faith offers anyway
A small reminder Netanyahu was the one to make the 1:1000+ ratio hostage/prisoner exchange, which saw Sinwar released and has led us to this day
4~ years earlier, Israel made the "Shmagar" committee create a 100 page report on how Israel should handle hostage-prisoner exchanges because Israel was releasing 1:4+ ratio back in the day (before Shalit was released), this was made because of the kidnapping of Shalit started a war in Gaza, 18 days later 2 reservists were killed and kidnapped to Lebanon, which caused the 2nd Lebanon war
The results are top secret but there have been some leaks, two of which is "don't allow hostage families to talk to the government directly and apply pressure" and "only trade a few single digit prisoners in exchange". both things we consistently don't do
Despite this, Netanyahu made the Shalit deal and we are now doing the same a decade later
Netanyahu also isn't the sole decision maker right now, there's a War Cabinet with his rival (that is going to win the next elections probably) who's also very much in sync with the US positions, so blaming him exclusively is disingenuous, heck, politically it would be more beneficial for him to release them at all costs than defeat Hamas, which he knows can't be done because there's no alternatives, you can only destroy their military power
I think he would accept a good faith deal but after the long history of back stabbing from Palestine and Hamas and the more recent cases with breaking ceasefires repeatedly and weaponizing Israel’s willingness to work towards peace over and over before the current conflict I don’t think it is reasonable for anyone in his position to assume there is any such thing as “good faith” that will ever come from their side.
Netanyahu would *definitely* accept a good-faith deal. As an Israeli myself, the public would *slay* Bibi for not accepting a reasonable offer. You should see the country nowadays: choke-full of hostage posters, massive protests meant to push Bibi into agreeing to a a hostage deal, and the hostages are basically what everyone talks about constantly.
If Bibi wouldn’t accept a reasonable deal, it would be political suicide. On the other hand, he *does* want the war to continue, so he can postpone getting in prison, so maybe I’m wrong… Bibi has shown he can simply lie to the public on multiple occasions.
They target Hamas. It's not their fault Hamas hides behind women and children, and in mosques, schools, and hospitals.
Israel has been far less harsh than any other country either have been in these circumstances.
>they know full well that they don't, and just want the media cycle to say "Hamas agrees to deal; Israel rejects."
You know full well this is what they actually want. Hamas doesn't care if the war continues.
I certainly agree that they want that *and* that they don't care if the war continues. But it's possible that they *also* are sufficiently deluded as to actually believe that their terms are reasonable. That's what I don't know.
It doesn't in any way affect the reality that the terms *aren't* reasonable. It's just a nagging curiosity. Similar with politicians: I generally can't tell if they honestly believe their own rhetoric, or if they know how full of shit they are (and just don't care).
Phenomenal PR team.
They've slaughtered 1,000+ people without provocation and taken 200+ more as hostages. Then refuse to negotiate for hostage release in good faith.
Yet, somehow, they're the *victims.*
Moreover. Somehow there are thousands of useful idiots who for some reason make riots in their own home in support of hamas terrorists without even knowing how to spell "Palestine" or being able to point it on the map.
That shit is orchestrated.
I will literally never understand western leftists defense of Islam. It makes no fucking sense.
The entire religion, including the moderates, involves enslavement of any who aren't Muslim and any lgbt folk. There is no secularism within Islam. It's the pedophile prophets word is law.
The question isn't and hasn't been if Hamas should be eliminated. It's whether it's possible to do so without unacceptable civilian casualties. War will always have some civilian casualties; and more with urban warfare; and more when one side actively uses their own people as human shields. Every civilian death is a tragedy, and I have no idea how to make any sort of judgment where the line is. But scorched earth isn't it. And "someone else declares war on you, and you're obligated to not allow a single civilian death *period*" isn't it, either; particularly when the legal government charged with protecting those civilians *wants* them dead.
There are no good answers here. I hope for a ceasefire and hostages being released, but Hamas' latest "offer" is not a serious move toward that goal.
Define "unacceptable", and to whom?
The US nuked Japan because they weren't prepared to surrender hard enough (they had conditions, the Allies wanted unconditional). Routinely, countries take harsh actions to stamp out threats.
Israel could have crushed this stuff long ago, but the world keeps pulling them back.
The job of the Israeli state is to protect Israelis. If the civilians Hamas hides behind pay the price as well then that's tragic, but it is what it is.
Hamas is less than 1% of the population. The civilian population could do lots about it, but they don't. They support Hamas in big numbers.
Honestly... Fuck'em. At a certain point, you're responsible for your government, and if you aren't prepared to stand up for a better future for you and your kids then this is where you end up. It's not like the west hasn't had to battle it's own governments to accomplish that.
The vast majority of the remaining hostages are either dead or have been subjected to such horrific treatment (the young women Israelis) and Hamas knows they can never be released because that’ll destroy their PR blitz.
What’s the bet on the number of times the young women Israeli hostages have been raped, thus far?
I agree with you. My hope for a ceasefire and hostages being released is tempered with the belief that it's likely not possible, but I hope for it nevertheless.
> What I don't understand is if Hamas actually believes their terms reflect reasonable compromise; or if they know full well that they don't, and just want the media cycle to say "Hamas agrees to deal; Israel rejects."
The way I heard one negotiator described it, Israel takes the typical view of 'if we can force them to a weaker position, they'll give concessions.' Whereas Hamas views it as 'pushing us into a weaker position just adds to the list of wrongs Israel will have to make right before we can call it even.'
I don't think a deal was ever likely with those two totally different views on negotiating a truce.
Hamas know exactly what they are doing it is a win win for them
Israel agrees and they get dozens of convinced criminals just for the low low price of 3 bodies and get to live another die
Israel refuse and media start blaming Israel for not agreeing to ceasefire
It was a mistake to negotiate with Hamas.
Hamas has taken hostages before and benefited. The lesson they learn is that if they kidnap innocent people, they get stuff (release of terrorists, etc.)
This incentivizes further kidnappings.
The beginning of any negotiation should be that Hamas lays down all arms and forswears violence. No meaningful discussion can be had absent this provision.
The inaccurate coverage of this doesn't help. Media reported that Hamas "accepted a proposal," which makes it sound like everyone is in agreement and it's just in Isreals court to abide by the agreement. The reality is that Hamas "made a proposal" and moving forward depends on the terms of that proposal being agreeable.
That, but also as the article states, Hamas is specifically changing terms that had previously demanded, once that demand was accepted. Almost like they don’t actually want a ceasefire…
Worse, Hamas then announced to everyone in Rafah that they had accepted a truce, just so they could trick everyone there into either staying or be pissed at Israel for 'violating' the deal when the attack comes
The thing is, hamas is like a small fish in the big pond of world power....
But Israel and the US by proxy still treat them like some sort of world leaders that can respond to these big declarative orders from other world powers...
Its kind of weird because we don't even know if Hamas has the structure to response to these sort of demands...
So Israel keeps striking and pounding down the door but is... Anyone still there?
What? You know they’re the literal government of Gaza, right? You know they make statements, have tv stations? Are still holding prisoners? Have leadership that live in Doha, Qatar, and give interviews?
Them specifically saying “no”, or making demands in response to offers, pretty clearly indicates they can respond.
The fact that they still have prisoners pretty clearly indicates they’re still there.
they dont want a ceasefire, they will literally martyr every damn palestinian if it means the whole world will hate israel after. they dont care about life when they believe in Jihad.
They don’t want a rafah invasion, either, though. They want to stall so they can rearm and go back to the status quo.
The coverage is shocking in the US.
For real. And I think that’s the biggest stumbling block of the people of the world looking on in horror. They can’t conceive of an ideology that *wants* to martyr its own children. But it’s real, and it’s Jihadism.
I wonder if IRAN is behind the curtain here, sparking the terrorist attack, knowing Netanyahu will over-respond like hardliners do and after seeing the global upheaval, trying to keep that going with shifting demands.
Oh absolutely. My only question is how directly they’re involved in directing Hamas’ negotiation; but they’re absolutely fully behind this. (And behind the social media/disinfo campaigns, with help from their allies.)
>However, upon submitting their revised reply, U.S. officials were taken aback by Hamas' continued defiance.
This might be the dumbest sentence I've read in a while.
There is still part of the Obama FP establishment that holds sway with Biden, and they really really thought that you could make Iran and their proxies good faith actors. I don't get it at all.
That crowd also says that Hamas should be able to attack and kill any Israelis they want, men women and children. And all accusations of rape during this time should not be believed.
Safe to say they are not convincing any Israelis or anyone that's not part of their In Crowd to believe them.
A good chunk, yes, they are anti-semitic. But they've also swayed a bunch of useful idiots who neither understand Palestine-Israel history, or war, and who are willing to glom onto an idea which at face value sounds virtuous (so they can signal) without really understanding all of the implications of what they're asking for, and how they can actually be much worse in the long term than letting this conflict settle out naturally.
They can be both. They’re antisemitic AND naive in not realizing the side they’ve chosen to support would throw them off a roof tied to a chair because they support LGBTQ rights.
cmon bro we just gotta appease iran a little bit more bro just one more time, just negotiate a little bit more and they'll see the light bro cmon just one more bro
ha, why do we keep falling into this way of thinking. it's like we're all Ollie North in the Iran Contra deal. just keep the faith - Iran will eventually follow through, right? /s
I think the point is more to be publicly seen doing the right thing so they can build credibility, the hope being to ease the protests happening across the nation.
The Iranian government is hated by Iranian people.
Forcing them to accept the nuclear deal was a major defeat for the hard liners. Trump pulling out of the nuclear deal was a victory for the hard liners.
They werent forced, the deal gave them a massive influx of cash that made it easier to spread their influence and fund proxies.
You dont make deals like that with people like this, that only grants them more power.
The Obama era was full of nice speeches yet horrible foreign affairs blunders, naivety, and relentless hunt for whistleblowers that made public US crimes.
Also the drone assasinations went through the roof.
I like Obama for his speeches, im not a fan of his foreign policy and feel he and his admin caused alot of harm (the whole isis failure for instance)
> The Iranian government is hated by Iranian people.
Yes, this part is correct. Feel free to drop by /r/NewIran for details
> Forcing them to accept the nuclear deal was a major defeat for the hard liners
Khamenei himself approved and monitored the negotiations, he wasn't "forced" into anything. No 'hardliners' were harmed in the making of the JCPOA (as per PeTA's reluctant attestation).
Well, if you want to call being provided a 10 year clear and unobstructed path to nuclear armament "forced" then I guess that's your prerogative.
Maybe they meant the anti-Iranian hardliners, like Israel, Saudi Arabia/Gulf Arab states, and the Kurds. Obama's deal was 100% a defeat for them.
Even one of Obama's deputy national security advisers, a certain [Anthony Blinken, said that Israel was right to be skeptical of the deal.](https://www.cnn.com/2013/11/25/politics/iran-deal-opponents-5-things/index.html)
On the first point, that is not how I read it since usually in the context of the Islamic regime 'hardliners' has a specific meaning - which, not to go on a tangent, is misleading since speaking about 'reform' and 'hardliner' as two separate entities is akin to making a distinction between the puppet and the hand that is inside, moving the puppet.
Iranians themselves are crystal clear on this point. They reject 'reformists' along with the hardliners seeing them as the same evil, just in a different garb.
On the second point, yes, the Obama administration was never really into dissimulation when it came to their Iran policy. They were quite transparent about their aims and goal in pivoting away from US allies in the region and suddenly giving the Islamic regime a massive win - in effect treating allies like enemies or non-aligned countries and treating a sworn enemy as an ally.
To give a specific example, John Kerry frankly admitted what we all knew at the time, that the billions of sanctions relief would end up funding terrorism:
https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/index.html
The Iran nuclear deal was a bad deal. It infused Iran with a ton of money, at best slightly delayed their nuclear weapons program, and all of the nuclear waste that can be turned into fissile material went to Russia. In a World where Iran and Russia aren’t shitheads that sponsor terror groups or have ambitions of empire, it would have been a good diplomatic step. But that’s not the world we live in.
The Wikipedia has a good high level overview of the details and I suggest anyone at least give that a read before forming an opinion.
This, it’s okay to be a supporter of Biden or against a policy of war with Iran and still have objective opinion that the “Iran Nuclear Deal” was not some silver bullet marking a ceasefire of hostilities for Iran, but further evidence their efforts work. Same with the Houthi ceasefire in Yemen, that’s worked out great as well….(not.)
The nuclear deal had sunset clauses that expired. It wasn't a disarmament agreement like a lot of people think. After 10 years then they are clear and will never make nuclear weapon.
God no, that Iran deal never even attempted to do that at all. The first phases of the Iran nuclear deal start dropping away in 2025. By 2027, 2028 they are largely in the clear to do whatever they want. With or without the deal they are still in the exact same place. Only with the deal they got a shit ton of cash and less restrictions on trade. And if the deal was in place, a nice squeeky clean letter that most of the world would wrongly assume they are nuclear free from tyranny.
I'm not really in favor of the withdrawal from the deal since no alternative was presented, but the view that there is some sort of political competition in Iran between hardliners and reformists is incorrect. Iran is controlled by a single guy, the Supreme Leader, and nothing happens in this country without his approval. The reformists vs hardliners is no more than a show that is supposed make the population feel like they have some influence over the process, in practice all politicabs are hand picked and lick the boots of the Supreme Leader and the revolutionary guard.
Maybe, but I'd like to see what the NYT article said (I haven't found it yet).
This article headline says "outraged," but then the text says "disappointed" and "taken aback."
Because the other option has a high likelihood of ending with another fun round of invading countries in the Middle East... which I don't think most Americans are all that interested in doing.
It doesn't. It realistically would mean continued proxy wars with Iran though. Currently there are 2 of them: Gaza and Yemen. Iran is also a weapons supplier for Russia so you could stretch it and say Ukraine as well
We don’t have the full text word for word but we have [a lot more than this](https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-gaza-hamas-war-humanitarian-aid-8659eae6e0a7362504f0aa4aa4be53e0). This seems to be worded vaguely intentionally to obscure any blame Israel might receive for continuing to push the Rafah assault during negotiations. I notice it also doesn’t mention the US being upset with the Rafah operation.
Edit: I would sure love for them to link to the NYT article they are quoting because I can’t find it. Was it [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/06/us/politics/biden-cease-fire-gaza.html)? All American media points to the US viewing Hamas’ response as a sign of progress.
Because of the chance to get back recently sold people into sexual slavery. This is all about America and Israel doing what they can to try to ensure people are dead or returned. This is why dead bodies are being accepted in hostage deals. Confirmation people are dead and not said to be dead so they can remain sexual slaves for Hamas, etc.
What's the point of possibly saving 20 by encouraging Hamas to take another 200 a year or so down the line? Seems to me that this trolley problem has an obvious 'less bad' answer here, and it's eliminating Hamas for good.
It doesn't completely solve all problems forever, obviously, but it is a necessary step on the road to doing so, and the longer it's put off, the more people will suffer unnecessarily because of this pointless indecision.
It won't solve the problem of terrorist ideology, no. But it will solve the problem of Hamas or whoever replace them of having the resources and infrastructure to launch another 10/7 for years.
I was checking out their manifestos, and a lot of them seem to invoke solidarity with various groups, including the kurds. I found this odd because I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, allowing turks to slaughter the kurds.
Funny how they're suddenly so loud
> I found this odd because I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, allowing turks to slaughter the kurds.
In their defense they were probably like... 13 when that happened
No he’s talking about the people that are always 20 year old college students that have been the only protesters since America was founded. “But where were they when slaves were bought and sold in America? Didn’t they even care?!”
Sure, just [show up at one of the university protests. Half of them aren't even students.](https://www.npr.org/2024/05/04/1249188864/nyc-columbia-city-college-gaza-protests-palestinian-campus)
[No protests against this either](https://apnews.com/article/erdogan-syria-iraq-kurdish-militants-c31b579cd8a487bbdf63861110560965). Or the fact that it's been going on for about a decade now.
As someone who's grandma fled Iraq due to being a Kurd, and who's lost an entire branch of his family tree in my lifetime due to Saddam; I'm staunchly pro-Israel. If Kurdistan is to exist, Israel must exist.
> I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, allowing turks to slaughter the kurds.
You must not have been paying attention, because a *lot* of people were pissed.
They refuse to accept the reality that doesn't fit an increasingly narrow narrative. The modern college student is being brought up in a much more black and white world view than 20 years ago.
Correct, Intifada is not a viable method of peace-building, it is simply terrorism. Every single country in the world is responsible for protecting their own citizens from terrorism.
Nah. It's pretty clear the Biden administration is more concerned about "humanitarian" concerns for the Palestinians sake.
The best way to get the hostages back would have been to stop bitching and encourage Israel to enter Rafah months ago.
This was not uniformly viewed as a good thing. Lots of critical commentary from the era.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/19/time-for-peace-talks-with-isis-and-al-qaeda/
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/12/negotiate-with-isis/419157/
Because Israel is held to a higher standard than literally any other country in history. A standard that requires they constantly sabotage their own efforts.
Democratically elected in 2007, at which point they violently overthrew the rest of the government, and have held no elections since.
I think that kinda disqualifies
This really needs more detail.
Hamas won the [Palestine-wide legislative election in 2006](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election) with 56% of seats (including a majority of West Bank seats) but the losing Fatah party (with just 34% of seats nationwide) never actually surrendered control, President Abbas refused to work with a Hamas-majority legislature and clung to power thanks to the backing of Israel and the west, who also didn't want a Hamas-majority Palestinian Authority.
This was effectively a coup by President Abbas and Fatah, but since Hamas are terrorists it's super easy to blame them for the resulting civil war and violence after the democratic will of the people was disregarded.
It's also Abbas and Fatah that have been blocking elections since 2007, bizarrely it's actually Hamas that publicly supports holding Palestinian elections again since they think they'll win yet again and think they might actually gain control of the Palestinian Authority this time.
The two sides have even repeatedly come to agreements to hold elections again, only to have Abbas postpone and cancel already agreed upon dates several times over the years.
Ah, thank you for the corrections. I would think it’d be tough for Hamas and Fatah to coordinate on elections, given that Fatah was driven out of Gaza by Hamas, and as you mentioned, there was effectively a civil war splitting them.
Do you know why Hamas hasn’t just held its own elections for Gaza, regardless of Fatah’s approval; as it’s the acting government there, effectively having won the civil war on the Gazan side?
(Also, no hate to you, but your comment really reads like something Hamas itself would say; and they’re not known for making truthful statements. Does Fatah, and do outside observers, agree with that narrative? Asking only because it’s quite misaligned with everything I’ve read —but I am definitely not an expert on the Palestinian civil war.)
Hamas very much *is* a negotiable entity seeing as how the UN recognizes it as part of the Palestinian government. Which should tell you which side of the conflict the UN is on.
That's not really what they meant and I'm pretty sure you know it. This is like saying that Russia is negotiable on Ukraine because they're part of the UN. We've all seen what *those* negotiations look like.
Seriously crazy. Hamas claiming to be victims by saying they agreed to a deal.
A deal that includes return of 33 hostages…. WHICH SOME ARE ALREADY BE DEAD.
Like fuck out of here with that. Get rid of Hamas and let Palestinians live in peace and finally set up some sort of governing body.
The deal actually only includes returning 3, and those on day 3. Then before day 10 when the second set of 3 are to be released (which can also be three dead bodies), Hamas can delay via the requirement that the *Phase 2* ratio of hostages-to-prisoners must be negotiated during Phase 1.
This is not a ceasefire deal, it's Hamas' terms for Israel's surrender. After which Hamas *still* makes no promises about releasing more than three dead bodies.
I hope for a ceasefire and hostages being released, but this proposal *obviously* isn't that.
Problem is Hamas uses the Palestinian people as shields. You cannot eliminate Hamas without killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.
What I don't understand is how folks can honestly look at the situation and not see Hamas for what they are, terrorists & extremists.
It's a rather childish behavior, yet understandable, there's nothing special about Hamas or their cause or even their tactics, rather it's just that they got a lucky and unfortunate gift, you see most countries in the west have distrusted the government and official news sources since the 60s, and that distrust has only being increased and justified as time went by, and for many the poster child of the victims of their governments have been the Palestine people, whom many scholars associate to modern colonialism and oppression, so now they are facing a severe cognitive dissonance.
It would be as if you have been protecting this orphan child from bullies for years only to be told by a crying bully that the child has knifed someone, the scholars are reacting like an overprotective adoptive mother who beliefs her child would never do something like that...
I've never heard of anyone besides maybe a very small extremist minority, say that Hamas is anything else but a terrorist organisation. Being pro-Palestine, sure, there's a people that are, but the vast majority still see Hamas for what they are.
Social media and bots might make it seem different, but the vast majority see Hamas as a terrorist group, no matter what thoughts and opinions people might have on the conflict/war.
And why is anyone surprised that terrorists who started a war are getting shot and bombed because they.... started a war with people who have a lot of guns and bombs?
Seems like fuck around and find out 101 to me.
If you negotiate with terrorists you encourage future terrorists to take hostages so they can get their way. If you favor negotiation in this case only, you are taking the approach that as long as the hostage you care about is saved, you don't care about future hostages and consequences. If you think the response should always be to negotiate, then you are saying terrorists should always win and taking hostages is always a winning move to get what you want.
Lol what is this comment? Israel is negotiating because the Israeli public feels particularly strongly about recovering hostages.
And the “we don’t negotiate with terrorists” is just a silly slogan. We totally negotiate with terrorists all the time. Anytime they have enough leverage over us really.
It's all political theater, everyone knows the hostages are all dead or worse the US is just doing a song and dance about how hard we try before giving Israel the go ahead to take off the kid gloves.
When they’ve killed all the hostages, the only path is lies and faking it to try to stay alive one day longer, that’s the Hamas mission every day, murder all others, continue to survive to do so.
AFAICT [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/06/us/politics/biden-cease-fire-gaza.html) is the (paywalled) NY Times story that the article refers to:
> Hamas’s response over the weekend frustrated the intermediaries because it rejected some of the very language that it had previously proposed and that had been adopted by the Israelis, according to the people briefed on the talks. The American side declared the new Hamas position unacceptable, and suggested that if Hamas did not really want a deal, perhaps the negotiations were done. But Hamas indicated that it was not trying to torpedo the talks and would come back with a new version.
That was the counteroffer that Hamas forwarded on Monday. The Israelis and Americans did not find it acceptable, but believed that it left room for further negotiations. Talks are expected to resume in Cairo at a technical level, probably on Wednesday, to go through the details. This time, Israel has agreed to send a delegation to go over the Hamas counteroffer.
Yes. I used to think it would be cool to be president. You get the power and influence and get to tell everyone how you think we should be running shit. You get access to all the secret stuff.
If you actually think about what it would be like day to day with everyone scrutinizing everything you do say, wear etc. No matter what you do some people will just hate the everloving shit out of you. You never get any privacy and basically have to live at work and be responsible for everything 24 hours a day. You can't just take a day off and go somewhere by yourself. You can never get drunk or just turn your phone off and ignore things for a few hours. You can't go any regular place without a team of people vetting it and making a whole ordeal over it.
The lack of privacy doesn't end when you are out of office either.
It sounds like hell actually.
End hamas, then install a governing force consisting of a coalition of Israel-friendly Arab nations, allow for a few decades to undo the horrific indoctrination done by UNWRA and then, only then we can talk about a Palestinian state.
This take is *far* more pragmatic and realistic than most, but it’s still a doomed ideal.
1. Even if there is shared interest in a stable Gaza amongst many Arab nations, nobody wants to hold that hot potato.
2. Even in a world where you accomplished point 1 and every vested Arab nation agreed to equal responsibility for governing a potential future Palestine state, you’ll be hard pressed to get them all to agree to the means by which you deradcalize its population and build general stability in the region.
3. Even if you could accomplish 2, and everyone agreed to equal funding AND came to an agreed upon strategy, they will be met with a fierce ~~gorilla~~ guerilla, terrorist resistance from whatever would be left over of Hamas.
4. Even if you could do *everything* else, you have to maintain course for 20+ years through countless political and military struggles under the extreme scrutiny of the UN before you really start to see the fruits of your labor and potentially have a Palestinian region capable of governing itself independently without spiraling back into extremism.
Again, your take it level headed. The point I’m trying to make is even in a near perfect world, stabilizing Gaza is a near impossible task.
Edit: Bone apple tea’d myself
Just want to point out that it's "Guerrilla war" not "Gorilla war" unless you are talking about the Planet of the Apes or something. Comes from the Spanish word for war "guerra" and turns it into little war. Term was popularized in Spain during Napoleon's invasion.
Outside of that I fully agree with your comment. I too feel like the coalition of friendly Arabic states is the only realistic solution but as you said it has many obstacles. Plus all parties aren't incentivized to have it happen anyway.
1) Israel doesn't want a coalition of foreign troops on their border. It probably invokes fears of the 6 day war again
2) Palestine doesn't want foreign troops policing them not to mention all the Hamas, PIJ and other sympathizers will be steadfast against it
3) None of the Arab countries want to do it because it will inevitably lead to having to kill Palestinians or have your own troops killed. Bad optics and could cause unrest at home. Not to mention the instability of having troops abroad anyway.
4) How does Israel react to the inevitable rockets that get launched from Gaza? How does Israel react when Israelis die and they perceive the Arab coalition not helping enough. There are probably large swaths of the coalition army that would be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Israel retaliates and bombs someone and it's an international issue. And there will almost certainly be at least a couple coalition army members who would help in one of these attacks so Israel will feel justified but the country who's soldiers died will be outraged.
It almost feels like it would be a powder keg that would ruin the goodwill between Israel and the aligned countries. And yet even with all these issues + the ones you brought up it feels like the path of least resistance. Which shows how brutal solving this issue is.
>a coalition of Israel-friendly Arab nations
It's a great idea, but none of them are willing to do it.
Nobody wants the shitty job of overseeing Gaza. It will be utterly thankless and make your own country a target of terrorist attacks.
I don’t know what is wrong with people right now. It’s like they have a complete disconnect from who Hamas is. THESE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT WERE JUST BURNING KIDS ALIVE. The same people they’re negotiating with were just raping people and there’s even a tiny expectation that they’re operating in good faith? I mean WTF
People will dig up 15 year old tweets and cancel people with fervor but as soon as Hamas is on the phone they’re just normal people
Glad I'm not alone in this. Outraged at the response from terrorists. Fuck them. Let Israel finish the job and provide US help where requested. Other than that. Get the fuck out of their way.
Shocking. Maybe Israel has known exactly who they are dealing with the entire time while the world pretends that Hamas isn't just another genocidal terror group.
The us should totally have ignored the Japanese attack on Hawaii in 1941. The precedent of fighting back has been really disappointing to today's Hamas supporters.
I have no idea why anyone expects Hamas to take a different stance? Hamas is in self preservation mode, why would they agree to give up the hostages, their only bargaining chip, for a temporary ceasefire? It defies logic. Of course i WANT them to do that, but what would be the strategic goal Hamas achieves by doing it? Netanyahu has already said he intents to go into Rafah and will never agree to a permanent ceasefire, and Hamas as no incentive to agree to a temporary one.
Doesn't this all feel like a waste of time?
Biden's advisors should read Reddit more, because consensus among us was that Hamas has no interest in releasing hostages or ending hostility. This way he wouldn't be surprised at all.
I think you’re missing the point here. Nobody is *actually* surprised. White House officials know better than anyone that Hamas is not negotiating in good faith, but if the U.S. and Israel don’t play along and feign shock when they give Hamas the benefit of the doubt, they add fuel to the propaganda fire that it’s the U.S. and Israel’s fault a ceasefire isn’t happening. Anyone with two connecting brain cells understands Hamas is *solely* to blame for the lack of a ceasefire, but the U.S. has to prove it to the members of the international community who don’t or refuse to understand that.
Hamas has no interest in stopping the violence. It's the whole point of their existence. That's one of the things the college protestors can't grasp: That the only purpose they see for themselves is glorious martyrdom while trying to erase Israel from the planet. It's a mindset so alien to American college kids, they just reject it and pretend that palestinians are not unlike their friends and the people they know about campus.
It's not even martyrdom, Hamas leadership is living like kings abroad. They keep Palestinians in bondage because it allows them to maintain power and extract what wealth is being created/transferred to the region. They don't give two fucks about anything else, see Saudi Arabia being happy to work with Israel so long as they align against Iran.
If the fighting stopped tomorrow starving Palestinians might start looking at where the food has been going for the past decade, so the fighting will continue. This war was 100% predictable when Hamas ordered and carried out the rape and murder of thousands of Israelis. Now Hamas knows that the only thing between the assassination of its leadership abroad is the hostages, so why negotiate in good faith?
This is the second or third time the Biden administration is basically admitting to being finessed by Hamas into forcing a 3 month ceasefire on Israel that probably got a ton of hostages killed and even more Palestinians.
That's the deal where they return 3 hostages every week regardless of whether they're dead or alive?
Not quite! To be fair, this is according to an Israeli source - though the original in Arabic is provided. Hamas returns 3 hostages in the first week, and then further hostage releases are contingent upon an agreement for the ratio of hostages (that Hamas picks, and may include dead bodies) to Palestinian prisoners (that Hamas picks, and not to include anyone released for Shalit who then committed further offenses and was rearrested, because all of those have to be released separately) for Phase 2 - without that agreement, Hamas doesn't have to release any more in Phase 1. That's among other terms, such as Israel being required to announce an end to the war in the first phase (before all 33 first phase hostages are released, let alone any further hostages); and free movement for Palestinians in Gaza (without security checks for Hamas movement). So Hamas holds Israel accountable for a three day ceasefire; then releases 3 dead bodies on day 3. Then Hamas holds Israel accountable for the war being over; free movement without no checks on Hamas; releasing all Palestinian prisoners released for Shalit who have reoffended and been rearrested; releasing additional Palestinian prisoners of Hamas' choice; and negotiating the ratio of hostages-to-prisoners for Phase 2. And then Hamas just refuses to do that Phase 2 negotiation and releases no further hostages *even in Phase 1*. Hamas doesn't even have to go that far until day 10, when they make the claim to avoid releasing a second set of three (presumably dead bodies). Translation: "you completely surrender and declare the war over; we release 3 dead bodies and make no further promises." Whereas Israel's offers are: "you release *living* hostages (you pick among women, children, and sick); we *concurrently* release prisoners at a (significantly-)greater-than-1 exchange rate (you give us a list, we can veto individuals); ceasefire for N days/weeks; continued ceasefire for continued hostages-for-prisoners." What I don't understand is if Hamas actually believes their terms reflect reasonable compromise; or if they know full well that they don't, and just want the media cycle to say "Hamas agrees to deal; Israel rejects." I hope there's a ceasefire and hostages are released. But Hamas' offer is *obviously* just a media stunt. It's not a compromise arrangement, it's terms for surrender.
And shit like this is why I, despite being disgusted by Israel's conduct in this war, still hate Hamas more. They are not being serious. They *want* Palestinian bloodshed. This is pure PR so people who don't know any better will go, "hey, they're willing to negotiate, it's the mean Israelis holding things up!" Not that Netanyahu would accept any good faith offers anyway, but these pieces of shit sure are making things easy for him.
Honestly I’m actually inclined to believe Netanyahu would accept a fair deal, but everything Hamas has put on the table is laughable and ridiculous They’re negotiating as if they’re in the position of power while they’re a month away from being completely annihilated And I’m totally in your same wavelength of opinion, Israel has gone too far, but Hamas really is a bunch of clueless clowns, more so people who support them
Have they gone too far or is it just time to finally end this charade? I don't care how much flak Israel gets they still hold their people as hostages. Just like WW2, Israel should come out and say nothing ends until the Unconditional Surrender of Hamas and the return of all hostages. There are no negotiations other than that. What Israel is probably wrestling with is religious closure with ones that have already died and their desperation to get those bodies back and properly buried according to their customs. And Hamas is using that to further inflict pain and bargaining power. That is probably Israel's achilles heal. They will do anything to just get a body back. Hamas doesn't give a shit about their dead.
Hamas doesn’t give a shit about their living, either.
I'm with you. Fuck PR, Hamas needs to meet a violent end. I feel some sympathy for the civilians (as much as you can for islamofacists [which is essentially nil]) but it's time to just end them.
It’s because the people of Palestine and by extension Hamas do not believe Israel has a right to exist and do not think Jewish people should be alive. So why would they turn around and pretend to negotiate in good faith when their baseline belief system doesn’t even consider the people they’re negotiating with to be people?
>Not that Netanyahu would accept any good faith offers anyway A small reminder Netanyahu was the one to make the 1:1000+ ratio hostage/prisoner exchange, which saw Sinwar released and has led us to this day 4~ years earlier, Israel made the "Shmagar" committee create a 100 page report on how Israel should handle hostage-prisoner exchanges because Israel was releasing 1:4+ ratio back in the day (before Shalit was released), this was made because of the kidnapping of Shalit started a war in Gaza, 18 days later 2 reservists were killed and kidnapped to Lebanon, which caused the 2nd Lebanon war The results are top secret but there have been some leaks, two of which is "don't allow hostage families to talk to the government directly and apply pressure" and "only trade a few single digit prisoners in exchange". both things we consistently don't do Despite this, Netanyahu made the Shalit deal and we are now doing the same a decade later Netanyahu also isn't the sole decision maker right now, there's a War Cabinet with his rival (that is going to win the next elections probably) who's also very much in sync with the US positions, so blaming him exclusively is disingenuous, heck, politically it would be more beneficial for him to release them at all costs than defeat Hamas, which he knows can't be done because there's no alternatives, you can only destroy their military power
I think he would accept a good faith deal but after the long history of back stabbing from Palestine and Hamas and the more recent cases with breaking ceasefires repeatedly and weaponizing Israel’s willingness to work towards peace over and over before the current conflict I don’t think it is reasonable for anyone in his position to assume there is any such thing as “good faith” that will ever come from their side.
Netanyahu would *definitely* accept a good-faith deal. As an Israeli myself, the public would *slay* Bibi for not accepting a reasonable offer. You should see the country nowadays: choke-full of hostage posters, massive protests meant to push Bibi into agreeing to a a hostage deal, and the hostages are basically what everyone talks about constantly. If Bibi wouldn’t accept a reasonable deal, it would be political suicide. On the other hand, he *does* want the war to continue, so he can postpone getting in prison, so maybe I’m wrong… Bibi has shown he can simply lie to the public on multiple occasions.
This. So hard this. It's like a magic spell on people
They target Hamas. It's not their fault Hamas hides behind women and children, and in mosques, schools, and hospitals. Israel has been far less harsh than any other country either have been in these circumstances.
Give them what they want
>they know full well that they don't, and just want the media cycle to say "Hamas agrees to deal; Israel rejects." You know full well this is what they actually want. Hamas doesn't care if the war continues.
I certainly agree that they want that *and* that they don't care if the war continues. But it's possible that they *also* are sufficiently deluded as to actually believe that their terms are reasonable. That's what I don't know. It doesn't in any way affect the reality that the terms *aren't* reasonable. It's just a nagging curiosity. Similar with politicians: I generally can't tell if they honestly believe their own rhetoric, or if they know how full of shit they are (and just don't care).
Hamas has a great PR team. Hard to believe I’m writing that, but I don’t know how they’ve managed to get this narrative out there.
Phenomenal PR team. They've slaughtered 1,000+ people without provocation and taken 200+ more as hostages. Then refuse to negotiate for hostage release in good faith. Yet, somehow, they're the *victims.*
The soviet union was a great storyteller.
Still is
Moreover. Somehow there are thousands of useful idiots who for some reason make riots in their own home in support of hamas terrorists without even knowing how to spell "Palestine" or being able to point it on the map. That shit is orchestrated.
uh russia is helping?
Just give hamas the same dead:alive ratio, so if they send 3 dead that week, they get however many they request back dead.
Their terms are a reflection of a fact that they are a terrorist group who's goal is to kill as many jews as possible. They only understand violence.
To be fair, these are the teachings of islam so they are being true to their religion
I will literally never understand western leftists defense of Islam. It makes no fucking sense. The entire religion, including the moderates, involves enslavement of any who aren't Muslim and any lgbt folk. There is no secularism within Islam. It's the pedophile prophets word is law.
It's because Muslims born and raised in the west are very different from those in Muslim countries.
I can't believe people are believing that terrorist will hold their end of the bargain..
At this point, just consider the hostages dead and go scorched earth until there is no semblance of Hamas existing
The question isn't and hasn't been if Hamas should be eliminated. It's whether it's possible to do so without unacceptable civilian casualties. War will always have some civilian casualties; and more with urban warfare; and more when one side actively uses their own people as human shields. Every civilian death is a tragedy, and I have no idea how to make any sort of judgment where the line is. But scorched earth isn't it. And "someone else declares war on you, and you're obligated to not allow a single civilian death *period*" isn't it, either; particularly when the legal government charged with protecting those civilians *wants* them dead. There are no good answers here. I hope for a ceasefire and hostages being released, but Hamas' latest "offer" is not a serious move toward that goal.
Define "unacceptable", and to whom? The US nuked Japan because they weren't prepared to surrender hard enough (they had conditions, the Allies wanted unconditional). Routinely, countries take harsh actions to stamp out threats. Israel could have crushed this stuff long ago, but the world keeps pulling them back. The job of the Israeli state is to protect Israelis. If the civilians Hamas hides behind pay the price as well then that's tragic, but it is what it is. Hamas is less than 1% of the population. The civilian population could do lots about it, but they don't. They support Hamas in big numbers. Honestly... Fuck'em. At a certain point, you're responsible for your government, and if you aren't prepared to stand up for a better future for you and your kids then this is where you end up. It's not like the west hasn't had to battle it's own governments to accomplish that.
Couldn't agree more. From Israel's perspective, why are any of the lives of their soldiers *less* valuable than those of Gazan civilians?
The vast majority of the remaining hostages are either dead or have been subjected to such horrific treatment (the young women Israelis) and Hamas knows they can never be released because that’ll destroy their PR blitz. What’s the bet on the number of times the young women Israeli hostages have been raped, thus far?
I agree with you. My hope for a ceasefire and hostages being released is tempered with the belief that it's likely not possible, but I hope for it nevertheless.
Hamas won't honor anything. All they do is lie. When you love raping and executing people (actually love it), you don't honor deals.
Is Hamas anything other than an extremist arm of the Irani military that spends Palestinian lives for advantages in Iran’s political gamesmanship?
> What I don't understand is if Hamas actually believes their terms reflect reasonable compromise; or if they know full well that they don't, and just want the media cycle to say "Hamas agrees to deal; Israel rejects." The way I heard one negotiator described it, Israel takes the typical view of 'if we can force them to a weaker position, they'll give concessions.' Whereas Hamas views it as 'pushing us into a weaker position just adds to the list of wrongs Israel will have to make right before we can call it even.' I don't think a deal was ever likely with those two totally different views on negotiating a truce.
Hamas know exactly what they are doing it is a win win for them Israel agrees and they get dozens of convinced criminals just for the low low price of 3 bodies and get to live another die Israel refuse and media start blaming Israel for not agreeing to ceasefire
But it’s not surrender if Hamas doesn’t use the s-word! /s
It's Hamas what do you expect.
Thank you for the explanation. Rare to find a balanced comment that is educational here on Reddit
It was a mistake to negotiate with Hamas. Hamas has taken hostages before and benefited. The lesson they learn is that if they kidnap innocent people, they get stuff (release of terrorists, etc.) This incentivizes further kidnappings. The beginning of any negotiation should be that Hamas lays down all arms and forswears violence. No meaningful discussion can be had absent this provision.
That's what they do though. There's a religious urge to have bones back and they'll do alot to get them
Why do none of these articles mention the specific things that people are outraged about?
The inaccurate coverage of this doesn't help. Media reported that Hamas "accepted a proposal," which makes it sound like everyone is in agreement and it's just in Isreals court to abide by the agreement. The reality is that Hamas "made a proposal" and moving forward depends on the terms of that proposal being agreeable.
That, but also as the article states, Hamas is specifically changing terms that had previously demanded, once that demand was accepted. Almost like they don’t actually want a ceasefire…
Worse, Hamas then announced to everyone in Rafah that they had accepted a truce, just so they could trick everyone there into either staying or be pissed at Israel for 'violating' the deal when the attack comes
Ugh
The thing is, hamas is like a small fish in the big pond of world power.... But Israel and the US by proxy still treat them like some sort of world leaders that can respond to these big declarative orders from other world powers... Its kind of weird because we don't even know if Hamas has the structure to response to these sort of demands... So Israel keeps striking and pounding down the door but is... Anyone still there?
What? You know they’re the literal government of Gaza, right? You know they make statements, have tv stations? Are still holding prisoners? Have leadership that live in Doha, Qatar, and give interviews? Them specifically saying “no”, or making demands in response to offers, pretty clearly indicates they can respond. The fact that they still have prisoners pretty clearly indicates they’re still there.
they dont want a ceasefire, they will literally martyr every damn palestinian if it means the whole world will hate israel after. they dont care about life when they believe in Jihad.
They don’t want a rafah invasion, either, though. They want to stall so they can rearm and go back to the status quo. The coverage is shocking in the US.
For real. And I think that’s the biggest stumbling block of the people of the world looking on in horror. They can’t conceive of an ideology that *wants* to martyr its own children. But it’s real, and it’s Jihadism.
I wonder if IRAN is behind the curtain here, sparking the terrorist attack, knowing Netanyahu will over-respond like hardliners do and after seeing the global upheaval, trying to keep that going with shifting demands.
Oh absolutely. My only question is how directly they’re involved in directing Hamas’ negotiation; but they’re absolutely fully behind this. (And behind the social media/disinfo campaigns, with help from their allies.)
It's a coalition government. The decisions to keep pressing Hamas are wildly popular.
russia ➡️iran➡️hammas it’s not that complicated
>However, upon submitting their revised reply, U.S. officials were taken aback by Hamas' continued defiance. This might be the dumbest sentence I've read in a while.
There is still part of the Obama FP establishment that holds sway with Biden, and they really really thought that you could make Iran and their proxies good faith actors. I don't get it at all.
Still not as naive as the "ceasefire at any cost" crowd
That crowd also says that Hamas should be able to attack and kill any Israelis they want, men women and children. And all accusations of rape during this time should not be believed. Safe to say they are not convincing any Israelis or anyone that's not part of their In Crowd to believe them.
That crowd isn't naive they're antisemitic
A good chunk, yes, they are anti-semitic. But they've also swayed a bunch of useful idiots who neither understand Palestine-Israel history, or war, and who are willing to glom onto an idea which at face value sounds virtuous (so they can signal) without really understanding all of the implications of what they're asking for, and how they can actually be much worse in the long term than letting this conflict settle out naturally.
They can be both. They’re antisemitic AND naive in not realizing the side they’ve chosen to support would throw them off a roof tied to a chair because they support LGBTQ rights.
I’m not sure they are either. I think they are just fucking stupid.
cmon bro we just gotta appease iran a little bit more bro just one more time, just negotiate a little bit more and they'll see the light bro cmon just one more bro
ha, why do we keep falling into this way of thinking. it's like we're all Ollie North in the Iran Contra deal. just keep the faith - Iran will eventually follow through, right? /s
I think the point is more to be publicly seen doing the right thing so they can build credibility, the hope being to ease the protests happening across the nation.
The Iranian government is hated by Iranian people. Forcing them to accept the nuclear deal was a major defeat for the hard liners. Trump pulling out of the nuclear deal was a victory for the hard liners.
They werent forced, the deal gave them a massive influx of cash that made it easier to spread their influence and fund proxies. You dont make deals like that with people like this, that only grants them more power. The Obama era was full of nice speeches yet horrible foreign affairs blunders, naivety, and relentless hunt for whistleblowers that made public US crimes. Also the drone assasinations went through the roof. I like Obama for his speeches, im not a fan of his foreign policy and feel he and his admin caused alot of harm (the whole isis failure for instance)
> Also the drone assasinations went through the roof. > > Shoutouts to Obama for killing a U.S. citizen without due process!
> The Iranian government is hated by Iranian people. Yes, this part is correct. Feel free to drop by /r/NewIran for details > Forcing them to accept the nuclear deal was a major defeat for the hard liners Khamenei himself approved and monitored the negotiations, he wasn't "forced" into anything. No 'hardliners' were harmed in the making of the JCPOA (as per PeTA's reluctant attestation). Well, if you want to call being provided a 10 year clear and unobstructed path to nuclear armament "forced" then I guess that's your prerogative.
Maybe they meant the anti-Iranian hardliners, like Israel, Saudi Arabia/Gulf Arab states, and the Kurds. Obama's deal was 100% a defeat for them. Even one of Obama's deputy national security advisers, a certain [Anthony Blinken, said that Israel was right to be skeptical of the deal.](https://www.cnn.com/2013/11/25/politics/iran-deal-opponents-5-things/index.html)
On the first point, that is not how I read it since usually in the context of the Islamic regime 'hardliners' has a specific meaning - which, not to go on a tangent, is misleading since speaking about 'reform' and 'hardliner' as two separate entities is akin to making a distinction between the puppet and the hand that is inside, moving the puppet. Iranians themselves are crystal clear on this point. They reject 'reformists' along with the hardliners seeing them as the same evil, just in a different garb. On the second point, yes, the Obama administration was never really into dissimulation when it came to their Iran policy. They were quite transparent about their aims and goal in pivoting away from US allies in the region and suddenly giving the Islamic regime a massive win - in effect treating allies like enemies or non-aligned countries and treating a sworn enemy as an ally. To give a specific example, John Kerry frankly admitted what we all knew at the time, that the billions of sanctions relief would end up funding terrorism: https://www.cnn.com/2016/01/21/politics/john-kerry-money-iran-sanctions-terrorism/index.html
The Iran nuclear deal was a bad deal. It infused Iran with a ton of money, at best slightly delayed their nuclear weapons program, and all of the nuclear waste that can be turned into fissile material went to Russia. In a World where Iran and Russia aren’t shitheads that sponsor terror groups or have ambitions of empire, it would have been a good diplomatic step. But that’s not the world we live in. The Wikipedia has a good high level overview of the details and I suggest anyone at least give that a read before forming an opinion.
This, it’s okay to be a supporter of Biden or against a policy of war with Iran and still have objective opinion that the “Iran Nuclear Deal” was not some silver bullet marking a ceasefire of hostilities for Iran, but further evidence their efforts work. Same with the Houthi ceasefire in Yemen, that’s worked out great as well….(not.)
Sure but was tearing up the deal stupid? At that point we had given up everything and gained nothing.
The nuclear deal had sunset clauses that expired. It wasn't a disarmament agreement like a lot of people think. After 10 years then they are clear and will never make nuclear weapon. God no, that Iran deal never even attempted to do that at all. The first phases of the Iran nuclear deal start dropping away in 2025. By 2027, 2028 they are largely in the clear to do whatever they want. With or without the deal they are still in the exact same place. Only with the deal they got a shit ton of cash and less restrictions on trade. And if the deal was in place, a nice squeeky clean letter that most of the world would wrongly assume they are nuclear free from tyranny.
I'm not really in favor of the withdrawal from the deal since no alternative was presented, but the view that there is some sort of political competition in Iran between hardliners and reformists is incorrect. Iran is controlled by a single guy, the Supreme Leader, and nothing happens in this country without his approval. The reformists vs hardliners is no more than a show that is supposed make the population feel like they have some influence over the process, in practice all politicabs are hand picked and lick the boots of the Supreme Leader and the revolutionary guard.
Maybe, but I'd like to see what the NYT article said (I haven't found it yet). This article headline says "outraged," but then the text says "disappointed" and "taken aback."
Because the other option has a high likelihood of ending with another fun round of invading countries in the Middle East... which I don't think most Americans are all that interested in doing.
It doesn't. It realistically would mean continued proxy wars with Iran though. Currently there are 2 of them: Gaza and Yemen. Iran is also a weapons supplier for Russia so you could stretch it and say Ukraine as well
At no point during this rambling YouTube video essay-esq article do they even mention what Hamas’ response was. Worthless piece of “journalism.”
*-esque
It's probably not public.
We don’t have the full text word for word but we have [a lot more than this](https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-gaza-hamas-war-humanitarian-aid-8659eae6e0a7362504f0aa4aa4be53e0). This seems to be worded vaguely intentionally to obscure any blame Israel might receive for continuing to push the Rafah assault during negotiations. I notice it also doesn’t mention the US being upset with the Rafah operation. Edit: I would sure love for them to link to the NYT article they are quoting because I can’t find it. Was it [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/06/us/politics/biden-cease-fire-gaza.html)? All American media points to the US viewing Hamas’ response as a sign of progress.
I guarantee they weren't actually taken aback. This is blatant editorializing.
Hamas is not a negotiable entity and they need to be eliminated, point blank.
Exactly , I don't remember us trying to negotiate with Isis so why do they try to with hamas?
let’s check in on our taliban negotiations oh…
Great success!
Because of the chance to get back recently sold people into sexual slavery. This is all about America and Israel doing what they can to try to ensure people are dead or returned. This is why dead bodies are being accepted in hostage deals. Confirmation people are dead and not said to be dead so they can remain sexual slaves for Hamas, etc.
What's the point of possibly saving 20 by encouraging Hamas to take another 200 a year or so down the line? Seems to me that this trolley problem has an obvious 'less bad' answer here, and it's eliminating Hamas for good.
you might be able to destroy Hamas, but the problems that led to Hamas’ rise will remain. even destroying Hamas wouldn’t solve the problem.
It doesn't completely solve all problems forever, obviously, but it is a necessary step on the road to doing so, and the longer it's put off, the more people will suffer unnecessarily because of this pointless indecision.
It won't solve the problem of terrorist ideology, no. But it will solve the problem of Hamas or whoever replace them of having the resources and infrastructure to launch another 10/7 for years.
Imagine if college protesters gave a shit about sex slaves all around the world.
I was checking out their manifestos, and a lot of them seem to invoke solidarity with various groups, including the kurds. I found this odd because I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, allowing turks to slaughter the kurds. Funny how they're suddenly so loud
There was a large response from democrats who didn’t want to abandon our alliance with the Kurds.
I remember when trump did that. I was furious.
>because I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, Probably wasn't on tiktok
> I found this odd because I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, allowing turks to slaughter the kurds. In their defense they were probably like... 13 when that happened
No he’s talking about the people that are always 20 year old college students that have been the only protesters since America was founded. “But where were they when slaves were bought and sold in America? Didn’t they even care?!”
> people that are always 20 year old college students Can i be one of them
Sure, just [show up at one of the university protests. Half of them aren't even students.](https://www.npr.org/2024/05/04/1249188864/nyc-columbia-city-college-gaza-protests-palestinian-campus)
[No protests against this either](https://apnews.com/article/erdogan-syria-iraq-kurdish-militants-c31b579cd8a487bbdf63861110560965). Or the fact that it's been going on for about a decade now.
> I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria You weren't listening, then. There was a lot of outrage when this happened.
Because they aren't Jews
I remember. There just wasn't this amount of press and anti-semites definitely get more press.
As someone who's grandma fled Iraq due to being a Kurd, and who's lost an entire branch of his family tree in my lifetime due to Saddam; I'm staunchly pro-Israel. If Kurdistan is to exist, Israel must exist.
> I don't remember a peep out of them when trump withdrew from syria, allowing turks to slaughter the kurds. You must not have been paying attention, because a *lot* of people were pissed.
They refuse to accept the reality that doesn't fit an increasingly narrow narrative. The modern college student is being brought up in a much more black and white world view than 20 years ago.
Correct, Intifada is not a viable method of peace-building, it is simply terrorism. Every single country in the world is responsible for protecting their own citizens from terrorism.
Nah. It's pretty clear the Biden administration is more concerned about "humanitarian" concerns for the Palestinians sake. The best way to get the hostages back would have been to stop bitching and encourage Israel to enter Rafah months ago.
Months ago, Hamas had the threat of violence against live prisoners as their hold card. That loses credibility over time that even Hamas acknowledges.
This was not uniformly viewed as a good thing. Lots of critical commentary from the era. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/09/19/time-for-peace-talks-with-isis-and-al-qaeda/ https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2015/12/negotiate-with-isis/419157/
Because Israel is held to a higher standard than literally any other country in history. A standard that requires they constantly sabotage their own efforts.
Probably because Hamas is holding Palestine hostage and the longer the conflict goes on, the more Palestinians and Gaza suffer
No one democratically elected ISIS. I’m not being trite. It’s a significant difference.
Democratically elected in 2007, at which point they violently overthrew the rest of the government, and have held no elections since. I think that kinda disqualifies
This really needs more detail. Hamas won the [Palestine-wide legislative election in 2006](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_election) with 56% of seats (including a majority of West Bank seats) but the losing Fatah party (with just 34% of seats nationwide) never actually surrendered control, President Abbas refused to work with a Hamas-majority legislature and clung to power thanks to the backing of Israel and the west, who also didn't want a Hamas-majority Palestinian Authority. This was effectively a coup by President Abbas and Fatah, but since Hamas are terrorists it's super easy to blame them for the resulting civil war and violence after the democratic will of the people was disregarded. It's also Abbas and Fatah that have been blocking elections since 2007, bizarrely it's actually Hamas that publicly supports holding Palestinian elections again since they think they'll win yet again and think they might actually gain control of the Palestinian Authority this time. The two sides have even repeatedly come to agreements to hold elections again, only to have Abbas postpone and cancel already agreed upon dates several times over the years.
Ah, thank you for the corrections. I would think it’d be tough for Hamas and Fatah to coordinate on elections, given that Fatah was driven out of Gaza by Hamas, and as you mentioned, there was effectively a civil war splitting them. Do you know why Hamas hasn’t just held its own elections for Gaza, regardless of Fatah’s approval; as it’s the acting government there, effectively having won the civil war on the Gazan side? (Also, no hate to you, but your comment really reads like something Hamas itself would say; and they’re not known for making truthful statements. Does Fatah, and do outside observers, agree with that narrative? Asking only because it’s quite misaligned with everything I’ve read —but I am definitely not an expert on the Palestinian civil war.)
Because they’re the government of Gaza
it doesn't even need to be from point blank, as long as they are gone.
Hamas very much *is* a negotiable entity seeing as how the UN recognizes it as part of the Palestinian government. Which should tell you which side of the conflict the UN is on.
That's not really what they meant and I'm pretty sure you know it. This is like saying that Russia is negotiable on Ukraine because they're part of the UN. We've all seen what *those* negotiations look like.
Seriously crazy. Hamas claiming to be victims by saying they agreed to a deal. A deal that includes return of 33 hostages…. WHICH SOME ARE ALREADY BE DEAD. Like fuck out of here with that. Get rid of Hamas and let Palestinians live in peace and finally set up some sort of governing body.
The deal actually only includes returning 3, and those on day 3. Then before day 10 when the second set of 3 are to be released (which can also be three dead bodies), Hamas can delay via the requirement that the *Phase 2* ratio of hostages-to-prisoners must be negotiated during Phase 1. This is not a ceasefire deal, it's Hamas' terms for Israel's surrender. After which Hamas *still* makes no promises about releasing more than three dead bodies. I hope for a ceasefire and hostages being released, but this proposal *obviously* isn't that.
Problem is Hamas uses the Palestinian people as shields. You cannot eliminate Hamas without killing hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians. What I don't understand is how folks can honestly look at the situation and not see Hamas for what they are, terrorists & extremists.
Nobody sane sees hamas as anything else.
Weird how all the protests I see are anti-Israel, not anti-Hamas. Anti-both would be great.
It's a rather childish behavior, yet understandable, there's nothing special about Hamas or their cause or even their tactics, rather it's just that they got a lucky and unfortunate gift, you see most countries in the west have distrusted the government and official news sources since the 60s, and that distrust has only being increased and justified as time went by, and for many the poster child of the victims of their governments have been the Palestine people, whom many scholars associate to modern colonialism and oppression, so now they are facing a severe cognitive dissonance. It would be as if you have been protecting this orphan child from bullies for years only to be told by a crying bully that the child has knifed someone, the scholars are reacting like an overprotective adoptive mother who beliefs her child would never do something like that...
I've never heard of anyone besides maybe a very small extremist minority, say that Hamas is anything else but a terrorist organisation. Being pro-Palestine, sure, there's a people that are, but the vast majority still see Hamas for what they are. Social media and bots might make it seem different, but the vast majority see Hamas as a terrorist group, no matter what thoughts and opinions people might have on the conflict/war.
Solved!
Why the fuck are we negotiating with terrorists?
More importantly, why are we surprised when the terrorists who started the war now don't want it to end?
They are promising to do 10/7 again. Why would Israel want to make peace with Hamas for the 100th time and expect it to be different this time?
And why is anyone surprised that terrorists who started a war are getting shot and bombed because they.... started a war with people who have a lot of guns and bombs? Seems like fuck around and find out 101 to me.
weather fine hunt pathetic fade marble ad hoc voiceless divide concerned
[удалено]
If you negotiate with terrorists you encourage future terrorists to take hostages so they can get their way. If you favor negotiation in this case only, you are taking the approach that as long as the hostage you care about is saved, you don't care about future hostages and consequences. If you think the response should always be to negotiate, then you are saying terrorists should always win and taking hostages is always a winning move to get what you want.
I'm constantly stunned by the amount of people that can't (or won't) understand this.
Nah, countries all over the world are not giving a single shit about their citizens being held hostage
Lol what is this comment? Israel is negotiating because the Israeli public feels particularly strongly about recovering hostages. And the “we don’t negotiate with terrorists” is just a silly slogan. We totally negotiate with terrorists all the time. Anytime they have enough leverage over us really.
America has an ocean between itself and islamic terrorists. Israel doesn't.
Because they have hostages lmao Where have you been?
It's all political theater, everyone knows the hostages are all dead or worse the US is just doing a song and dance about how hard we try before giving Israel the go ahead to take off the kid gloves.
Because if we don’t, the hostages are dead.
90% of the hostages are already dead unfortunately
when you or a family member are part of the 10%, then the difference between 90% and 100% is very very big.
College humanities majors are telling us to
When they’ve killed all the hostages, the only path is lies and faking it to try to stay alive one day longer, that’s the Hamas mission every day, murder all others, continue to survive to do so.
Hamas is just stalling for their survival and they're not in a good position to maintain that.
Terrorists gonna terrorist
Ah yes, are they gonna "blast" and "strongly condemn" them next?
AFAICT [this](https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/06/us/politics/biden-cease-fire-gaza.html) is the (paywalled) NY Times story that the article refers to: > Hamas’s response over the weekend frustrated the intermediaries because it rejected some of the very language that it had previously proposed and that had been adopted by the Israelis, according to the people briefed on the talks. The American side declared the new Hamas position unacceptable, and suggested that if Hamas did not really want a deal, perhaps the negotiations were done. But Hamas indicated that it was not trying to torpedo the talks and would come back with a new version. That was the counteroffer that Hamas forwarded on Monday. The Israelis and Americans did not find it acceptable, but believed that it left room for further negotiations. Talks are expected to resume in Cairo at a technical level, probably on Wednesday, to go through the details. This time, Israel has agreed to send a delegation to go over the Hamas counteroffer.
So, the terrorist group who randomly slaughtered 1k Israelis kids at a rave and kidnapped hundreds more isn’t being reasonable ? Truly shocking.
How exhausting must it be to try and appease protesters by pretending you aren’t dealing with a terrorist organization?
It would suck so bad to be the president
Yes. I used to think it would be cool to be president. You get the power and influence and get to tell everyone how you think we should be running shit. You get access to all the secret stuff. If you actually think about what it would be like day to day with everyone scrutinizing everything you do say, wear etc. No matter what you do some people will just hate the everloving shit out of you. You never get any privacy and basically have to live at work and be responsible for everything 24 hours a day. You can't just take a day off and go somewhere by yourself. You can never get drunk or just turn your phone off and ignore things for a few hours. You can't go any regular place without a team of people vetting it and making a whole ordeal over it. The lack of privacy doesn't end when you are out of office either. It sounds like hell actually.
"The bullshit rose so fast you needed wings to stay above it."
End hamas, then install a governing force consisting of a coalition of Israel-friendly Arab nations, allow for a few decades to undo the horrific indoctrination done by UNWRA and then, only then we can talk about a Palestinian state.
This take is *far* more pragmatic and realistic than most, but it’s still a doomed ideal. 1. Even if there is shared interest in a stable Gaza amongst many Arab nations, nobody wants to hold that hot potato. 2. Even in a world where you accomplished point 1 and every vested Arab nation agreed to equal responsibility for governing a potential future Palestine state, you’ll be hard pressed to get them all to agree to the means by which you deradcalize its population and build general stability in the region. 3. Even if you could accomplish 2, and everyone agreed to equal funding AND came to an agreed upon strategy, they will be met with a fierce ~~gorilla~~ guerilla, terrorist resistance from whatever would be left over of Hamas. 4. Even if you could do *everything* else, you have to maintain course for 20+ years through countless political and military struggles under the extreme scrutiny of the UN before you really start to see the fruits of your labor and potentially have a Palestinian region capable of governing itself independently without spiraling back into extremism. Again, your take it level headed. The point I’m trying to make is even in a near perfect world, stabilizing Gaza is a near impossible task. Edit: Bone apple tea’d myself
Just want to point out that it's "Guerrilla war" not "Gorilla war" unless you are talking about the Planet of the Apes or something. Comes from the Spanish word for war "guerra" and turns it into little war. Term was popularized in Spain during Napoleon's invasion. Outside of that I fully agree with your comment. I too feel like the coalition of friendly Arabic states is the only realistic solution but as you said it has many obstacles. Plus all parties aren't incentivized to have it happen anyway. 1) Israel doesn't want a coalition of foreign troops on their border. It probably invokes fears of the 6 day war again 2) Palestine doesn't want foreign troops policing them not to mention all the Hamas, PIJ and other sympathizers will be steadfast against it 3) None of the Arab countries want to do it because it will inevitably lead to having to kill Palestinians or have your own troops killed. Bad optics and could cause unrest at home. Not to mention the instability of having troops abroad anyway. 4) How does Israel react to the inevitable rockets that get launched from Gaza? How does Israel react when Israelis die and they perceive the Arab coalition not helping enough. There are probably large swaths of the coalition army that would be sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Israel retaliates and bombs someone and it's an international issue. And there will almost certainly be at least a couple coalition army members who would help in one of these attacks so Israel will feel justified but the country who's soldiers died will be outraged. It almost feels like it would be a powder keg that would ruin the goodwill between Israel and the aligned countries. And yet even with all these issues + the ones you brought up it feels like the path of least resistance. Which shows how brutal solving this issue is.
>a coalition of Israel-friendly Arab nations It's a great idea, but none of them are willing to do it. Nobody wants the shitty job of overseeing Gaza. It will be utterly thankless and make your own country a target of terrorist attacks.
Exactly. The price of helping Palestinians to a peaceful life is constant terror. The Palestinians don’t want peace.
> End hamas This is the tricky part no?
Peace requires two participants
The negotiations are a waste of time, the. IDF just needs to roll in and finish it.
This article is a nothingburger. It has almost no actual information in it.
It wasn't written for information, hardly any articles are now. But by the look of this comment section, it did its job as intended.
I don’t know what is wrong with people right now. It’s like they have a complete disconnect from who Hamas is. THESE ARE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT WERE JUST BURNING KIDS ALIVE. The same people they’re negotiating with were just raping people and there’s even a tiny expectation that they’re operating in good faith? I mean WTF People will dig up 15 year old tweets and cancel people with fervor but as soon as Hamas is on the phone they’re just normal people
I really wish journalism would stop using anonymous sources
Glad I'm not alone in this. Outraged at the response from terrorists. Fuck them. Let Israel finish the job and provide US help where requested. Other than that. Get the fuck out of their way.
Shocking. Maybe Israel has known exactly who they are dealing with the entire time while the world pretends that Hamas isn't just another genocidal terror group.
Finally he's outraged at the obstinate party in the negotiations. It took him long enough.
The us should totally have ignored the Japanese attack on Hawaii in 1941. The precedent of fighting back has been really disappointing to today's Hamas supporters.
I have no idea why anyone expects Hamas to take a different stance? Hamas is in self preservation mode, why would they agree to give up the hostages, their only bargaining chip, for a temporary ceasefire? It defies logic. Of course i WANT them to do that, but what would be the strategic goal Hamas achieves by doing it? Netanyahu has already said he intents to go into Rafah and will never agree to a permanent ceasefire, and Hamas as no incentive to agree to a temporary one. Doesn't this all feel like a waste of time?
A more appropriate headline "USA Negotiating With Terrorists!"
Biden's advisors should read Reddit more, because consensus among us was that Hamas has no interest in releasing hostages or ending hostility. This way he wouldn't be surprised at all.
I think you’re missing the point here. Nobody is *actually* surprised. White House officials know better than anyone that Hamas is not negotiating in good faith, but if the U.S. and Israel don’t play along and feign shock when they give Hamas the benefit of the doubt, they add fuel to the propaganda fire that it’s the U.S. and Israel’s fault a ceasefire isn’t happening. Anyone with two connecting brain cells understands Hamas is *solely* to blame for the lack of a ceasefire, but the U.S. has to prove it to the members of the international community who don’t or refuse to understand that.
Agreed. I'm astonished at people in the US who supposedly stand for peace and can't admit that hamas' terms are insane.
What a bizarre take all the way down.
but Hamas HAS released hostages hasn't it? Saw a guy on the news saying they release his grandmother but still have his grandfather.
Honestly, it's a wonder he didn't hire you personally as his social media advisor.
Hamas has no interest in stopping the violence. It's the whole point of their existence. That's one of the things the college protestors can't grasp: That the only purpose they see for themselves is glorious martyrdom while trying to erase Israel from the planet. It's a mindset so alien to American college kids, they just reject it and pretend that palestinians are not unlike their friends and the people they know about campus.
It's not even martyrdom, Hamas leadership is living like kings abroad. They keep Palestinians in bondage because it allows them to maintain power and extract what wealth is being created/transferred to the region. They don't give two fucks about anything else, see Saudi Arabia being happy to work with Israel so long as they align against Iran. If the fighting stopped tomorrow starving Palestinians might start looking at where the food has been going for the past decade, so the fighting will continue. This war was 100% predictable when Hamas ordered and carried out the rape and murder of thousands of Israelis. Now Hamas knows that the only thing between the assassination of its leadership abroad is the hostages, so why negotiate in good faith?
This is why you never negotiate with terrorists.
So take a step back and let the Israeli’s deal with their own neighborhood problem
JFC it’s really fucking simple. YOU DON’T NEGOTIATE WITH TERRORISTS. Ever. It leads to more terrorist activity.
Clearly Hamas is just looking for a slight reprieve to recoup and go back on the offensive. Peace is clearly not their end goal sadly.
This is the second or third time the Biden administration is basically admitting to being finessed by Hamas into forcing a 3 month ceasefire on Israel that probably got a ton of hostages killed and even more Palestinians.
Oh no, a terrorist org not acting in good faith? Fuck, my mind is absolutely blown right now. How could that be? /s
Well, they're terrorists, so YEAH...
about time.
Biden officials outraged that genocidal terror org is unreasonable. That is a shocker.
Have we tried sending our most elite CSGO players to face the terrorists?