Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line
He just wants genocide. It’s infuriating seeing world leaders pretend they don’t get that so they can get what they want out of Palestinian deaths.
Bibi doesn’t want peace, he wants genocide.
In Bibi’s eyes, every day that Hamas continues to exist is a good day. If Hamas ever ceases to exist, Israelis might go back to questioning his corruption charges.
That’s not very HaBibi of him
I’m amazed the comment above this got downvoted lol like just have a laugh and move on with your life
I have a Jewish colleague who calls him Bibi. What’s the deal?
His first name is Benjamin, his family had other Benjamin’s, they nicknamed him Bibi.
deleted by creator
Well, color me surprised… he’s seemed so interested in a peaceful resolution.
He doesn’t give a shit about hostages.
If he did, they wouldn’t be blowing up all of Gaza.
If any die from IDF strikes, he’ll just say that Hamas killed them and use their deaths to justify more bombings.
That’s right. So far 60 hostages have gone missing due to Israeli strikes. So, yeah. They don’t give a single shit.
Dude had a chance to stop the whole thing in its tracks and didn’t take it.
This has always been about taking the land.
Hamas has stated they will repeat attacks like Oct 7th until all Israel is wiped out, and you think they will honour a ceasefire and actually accept peace?
Hamas only wants a ceasefire so they can regroup and rearm before attacking Israel again.
All he cares about is escalation. The United States needs to ditch Israel before they get us attacked too.
Yep, he’s seeing the opportunity to finally kick the Palestinians out.
Kick out? More like gun down.
I’ll tell you a secret: he doesn’t want to get the hostages back yet. They’re serving as a casus belli right now.
won’t somebody think of the warmongers?
Found the Crusader Kings player
casus belli
casus belli /kā″səs bĕl′ī, kä″səs bĕl′ē/
noun
-
An act or event that provokes or is used to justify war.
-
A matter or occasion of war; an excuse or a reason for declaring war: as, the right of search claimed by Great Britain constituted a casus belli in 1812.
-
An act seen as justifying or causing a war.
(The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition)
-
He’ll rather kill them all with his own hands rather than stop the war. The moment genocide is over he’s next in line to get fucked. So long hostages. This is what you get for electing sociopaths I guess.
At this point he doesn’t have a choice. Hamas offered to release about a dozen hostages for a ceasefire.
The Israelis repeatedly declared that there won’t be any ceasefire without the release of all the hostages.
If he accepts anything else he’s most likely to loose all control.
Of course he doesn’t want to de-escalate the situation.
If he did that, things might calm down and fewer people will vote based on his promises of being strong on security. Also if he did that, his hard-right backers (who need a hot conflict to keep taking Palestinian land politically acceptable) will attack him for being ‘soft’ on security.
The logic of it all is genocide of course, but Bibi wants that if the alternative is him being out of office and back in court defending himself against corruption charges.
For some of the hostages. Not all of the hostages.
Which is a very important distinction that people here seem to overlook. If you give in to a terrorist’s and hostage taker’s demands you’re inviting more terrorism and hostage-taking because it worked.
And yet nowhere did anyone claim otherswise 😕 nor does it improve the situation or change how Bibi is viewed now
(judging by how you phrased this comment)
The headline implies otherwise.
I think Netanyahu has a similar look about his eyes as Putin? It’s like they’re monsters inside and are communicating how little empathy and concerns for others they have inside, almost as a warning. Anyone else feel the same thing?
I think it’s the military training plus a little extra sociopath on the side.
Globally, we’re going to need to develop approaches for de-radicalizing large groups of people. Even if we can start on the direction towards peace in this situation, both the Israeli and some segments of Palestinian people seem radicalized to the point of no return, where no true solutions is even possible. I see the same thing in the US with whatever tf you want to call the Republican party. They’re over the cliff. No pulling them back. Yet we need a way to de-radicalize these people otherwise there is no path forward.
You dont have to leave Israel and palestine to find more groups. Have you seen what kinds of people bibi is courting to stay in power? Ultra-orthodox far right netters who are publically asking for a cleansed ethno-state.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a deal for a five-day ceasefire with Palestinian militant groups in Gaza in return for the release of some of the hostages held in the territory early in the war, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.
Negotiations resumed after the launch of the Israeli ground offensive on 27 October, but the same sources said Netanyahu had continued to take a tough line on proposals involving ceasefires of different durations in exchange for a varying number of hostages.
An estimated 240 people were taken hostage after fighters from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups based in Gaza, as well as civilians, crossed the reinforced border fence separating the territory from Israeli towns and kibbutzim.
According to three sources familiar with the talks, the original deal on the table involved freeing children, women and elderly and sick people in exchange for a five-day ceasefire, but the Israeli government turned this down and demonstrated its rejection with the launch of the ground offensive.
On Thursday the US national security council spokesperson John Kirby said Israel had agreed to daily four-hour “humanitarian pauses”, with the aim that the small breaks in bombardments could aid the passage of hostages out of Gaza.
In mid-October, the former Mossad operative David Meidan, who negotiated the release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from Gaza over a decade ago, told Haaretz: “There’s no doubt that the first issue the state has to deal with is the matter of the captives … The window of opportunity for this is very narrow.
The original article contains 1,382 words, the summary contains 257 words. Saved 81%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
Considering it wasn’t a return of all of the hostages and additionally Hamas said they intend to repeat the terrorist attack that sparked this, what motivation does Netanyahu have to stop until Hamas is destroyed?
That Hamas did was abhorrent, as was the response of Israel.
What motivation do Hamas have to just take the current occupation of Gaza and living in such a way? Genuinely curious.
This just seems like nobody will win and everybody will suffer. For what?
For what?
To keep the wheels of the military industrial complex turning
What motivation do Hamas have to just take the current occupation of Gaza and living in such a way? Genuinely curious.
Less lives lost, even in the long term. We won’t know what would have been, but there may well have been a diplomatic solution that got Gazan independence. But Hamas is built on violence is the answer.
Your answer is basically “suffer forever so nobody dies trying to stop the suffering”.
Well, yeah, if you care about lives on both sides…
That’s a bit silly. Sentencing a whole population to “suffer forever” isn’t caring for them.
It’s like you didn’t even read what he said.
Nah, I think people just didn’t get that I was saying the reason someone would view how Gaza was like before 10/7 as good, could only be because you only care about Israeli civilian deaths and not Palestinians.
Explaining jokes kind of ruins them, but I guess in this case I overestimated people.
Use the /s
So your comment was sarcastic? (which kind of seems obvious in hindsight, woops)
I don’t really get your explanation to be honest and how what you said relates to that.
Why would a two state solution continue the suffering?
In the West Bank, with no Hamas presence, Israeli settlers backed by the IDF come kill them and take their homes. The Israeli leadership doesn’t want a two state solution because extreme Zionists are in power.
Also, the Gaza settlements were dismantled in 2005, before Hamas came to power in 2007.
They went from occupation to siege. Not much improvement. I also wasn’t talking about Gaza so try to stay on topic.
They weren’t in power when Hamas came to power. Both sides have been pushing each other towards wanting to annihilate each other. But do you think a two state solution would minimize the suffering, but is not a feasible outcome?
A two-state solution was viable before Israel settled people in the middle of the west bank.
As an intentional tactic of Zionist settlers, it is now impossible to have a defensible border.
The only way forward now is to end apartheid and give full rights to the civilians living in the West Bank and Gaza.
Zionists will claim this “destroys Israel” or other nonsense we heard from South African defenders of apartheid.
The Zionists I’m talking about funded and propped up Hamas. Likud is not younger than Hamas. You seem to have a very limited understanding of this.
For the time being, and prior to cutover 7th, the two-state solution was either perpetually on hold or completely unworkable because of Israel (in both cases). Will it help stop the stuffing from moving on? Maybe if it’s implemented properly, yes.
Well, lucky for him he didn’t even entertain the ceasefire to see if he could have gotten them all back.
The ceasefire would have happened in return for some of the hostages. Why would they give them more?
Ceasefires end, otherwise it’s called a truce. Hamas probably didn’t want to give up their strongest negotiating chip. In saying that, keeping hostages in this way is a war crime too.
Negotiating is the only path forward. Netanyahu rejecting the offer outright leads to more death and violence in the short and long term.
If Israel don’t negotiate in good faith, why would Hamas stop terrorist attacks? Your rhetoric goes both ways.
Netanyahu rejecting the offer outright leads to more death and violence in the short and long term.
Just the short term really. The least deaths in the long term from a game theory perspective is to make the value of the hostages zero or even negative.
Israel’s biggest mistake in the hostage back and forth was in the past giving up like 1000 fighters for some hostages.
Instead Israel should occupy like an additional acre of Palestine everytime a hostage/day is taken. Domestically the loss of territory seems to be the only thing that matters to Palestinians, in terms of political support. So they need to take that away.
Your game theory is only considering the lives of hostages in the short and long term. Thousands are dying in the meanwhile.
Thousands more would die in the next war for hoatages if they’re allowed to be viable. Long term, peace on the '67 borders is the only way to minimize total casualties.
Hamas has proven over the last 20 years that it will continue to attack Israel no matter what. It’s proven that it doesn’t care about the lives of Palestinians.
I took agree that peace leads to less death. The question is how to get there.
Hamas are a terrorist organisation who committed a horrible act. Hamas are not in power in the west bank, yet the Palestinians there have suffered apartheid and lose land to Israeli settlers in breach of international law. This is happening for years.
If we look at stats from before October, the loss of lives is clearly on the Palestinians side to a much higher degree. If we look at since October, it’s the same.
Hamas commits horrible acts. Israel commits horrible acts.
Keeping civilian hostages as human shields is a war crime. Indiscriminately bombing civilians and civilian infrastructure is a war crime.
The way I read it was a ceasefire in return for some of the hostages. Nobody floats their final offer with the first contact.
- Some of the hostages for humanitarian lanes
- Most of the hostages for a 7 day ceasefire with monitored evacuations
- All of the hostages for a 14 day ceasefire
- All of the hostages and known leaders of HAMAS for an indefinite ceasefire, contingent on zero future incursions or military operations (you have to offer at least one impossible option past what you want)
Israel needs to reset the value of hostages in the long run. They can’t afford for hostage taking to be viable in the long run. And as long as they are successful militarily; there’s no real reason for them to budge from their position.
The deal that went off was before that statement by Hamas.
Of course he did.
The hostages are much more valuable to Israel in captivity, so they can continually exploit them for genocidal justifications.
This is simply not true.
There were talks about up to 15 hostages, of 239 in demand for 4 days of ceasefire. Hamas needs this ceasefire desperately to regroup and assess the damages. The chaos now serves Israel well and apparently it puts much more pressure on Hamas. The ground invasion proves very effective. Maybe as Hamas becomes more desperate the “price” for the hostages will drop. Alternatively, if Israel will allow them to regroup, the war will take significantly more time because it will be much harder to eradicate them. Maybe the Israelis know where the hostages are held and after a ceasefire the hostages will be transferred to a different hideout, or smuggled via the tunnels to Egypt and from there to who knows where.
It’s not about the hostages any more. They are the excuse Israel needs to eradicate a whole country.
This gives Brandon an opening to separate from Israel, if he can get out of his coffin.
