173
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2024
173 points (96.3% liked)
News
39170 readers
1824 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Axios seems to have some more details in this article:
https://www.axios.com/2024/06/01/israel-gaza-hostage-ceasefire-deal-confirms-biden
Basically the deal is a temporary cease fire that would then allow negotiations for a full ceasefire after that. It's a gamble, but the US seems to think that if they can get the conflict to a very low grade state, they can convince the Israeli's not to go back in. In a vacuum this isn't a terrible strategy, but there is broad public support for the war in Israel and the ruling coalition knows their days are numbered if there is no war. Even a temporary ceasefire is better than nothing though.
It’s not something the Palestinian public can accept. Give over ALL your leverage in exchange for a temporary deal that has no incentive to prevent a resumption of war, no quantifiable guarantees of aid or allowing people to return to their homes, or advance to Two State solution? To say nothing of the West Bank pogroms and Al Aqsa incursions that triggered the Oct 7 reprisal attack in the first place.
There’s a reason Hamas originally rejected the Israeli offer; it was insultingly bad and only benefited Israel. That’s why the original offer argued over “ceasefire” versus “sustainable calm,” whatever that means.
A ceasefire is just kicking the can down the road until Hamas rearms and breaks it again. it's literally worse than nothing because it solves nothing and it undoes all the progress Israel has achieved in securing Gaza from the terrorist group Hamas.
The US should be calling for the unconditional surrender of Hamas and for the return of all the hostages and/or their remains, anything less is just kowtowing to Islamic terrorism.
I'm pretty doubtful that much progress has been made to destroy Hamas. They use Israeli unexploded ordinance to make bombs which they now have more than they know what to do with, and they couldn't ask for a better recruiting tool than this war. At a certain point you have to be realistic about the situation and realize they will have to deal with Hamas in negotiations.
The US already calls for that. And Netanyahu has said repeatedly that even if Hamas returns every hostage and surrenders the war will not end.
Kicking the can down the road in Gaza has been Israeli policy for over a decade. The strategy is called "mowing the grass". The idea being you can destroy the terrorist of the week's tactical ability to strike and buy Israel a few years of peace. Repeat this cycle every few years until ???, then magically resolve the issue.
This failed catastrophically on October 7, because the typical cycle of Gazan attack happened to allign with a catastrophic security failure on the part of Israel.
The question remains: what comes next. The US's complaint from October 8 on has been that Israel has no day-after plan. Without a day after plan, all that destroying Hamas will accomplish is have the next round be conducted by a terrorist group not called Hamas.
Every tactical move Israel makes today harms its strategic position for the day after plan. At the beginning of the war, some strategic concessions were needed to adress the very real tactical concerns. But there are massively diminishing returns.