Yes. I condemn both. And I don’t play the “which is worse” game. They are both unacceptable evils. Israel needs to stop this immediately and, at the very least, negotiate a peace if not some sort of solution to the whole issue (hopefully including at least some right of return) and Hamas needs to return the hostages.
You don’t need to pick a side when both sides are committing atrocities.
One of these “sides” could unilaterally peacefully end the conflict. For the other side choosing “peace” just means submitting to living under an occupying force as eternal second class citizens. insert mlk quote here.
If you really think that Israel casually choosing to disarm itself doesn’t immediately end with it being destroyed, I’d invite you to look at the 2005 IDF withdrawal from Gaza, which was done as a token of goodwill on the path to peace.
Gazans then elected Hamas and immediately began launching rockets. Israel won’t make that mistake again.
Yeah, both the Fatah and Gaza because both know that Palestinian people have largely become fed up with their combined inefficacy in trying to make a country of millions with a superior military just disappear.
Not to mention Iran constantly intervening to keep Hamas armed enough to suppress dissent.
“They”, meaning the Israeli government, couldn’t force an election because they withdrew from Gaza and have no direct power there. Hamas suspended democracy to any meaningful degree because they don’t care about it. In the West Bank, elections have been suspended by the Palestinian Authority because it’s likely that Hamas would win them and create another Gaza, which Israel would not allow to happen.
Yes you can. Three examples: russia can unilaterally declare peace with Ukraine and stop the war; China can unilaterally declare peace with Taiwan and stop threatening to invade them; North Korea can unilaterally declare peace with South and maybe not reintegrate because Kim doesn’t want to give up his privileges but at least the sabre rattling can stop. So Hamas can similarly unilaterally declare peace with Israel, remove the “all Israel must die” from its constitution and start on the path toward some meaningful peace. But that’s difficult, and firing rockets is easy, so lEt’S fIrE RoCkEtS!!11!1!! And by not firing rockets at Israel they can show the world exactly how hostile Israel are towards them without the excuse of responding to their attacks, although the obvious problem with that is that it would be “not at all” which would prove the hostilities have all been exclusively caused by Hamas.
Exactly how to declare peace: we’re going to put our big boy trousers on now and just choose to end all the tit for tat. Yes we all know they just did that really mean thing but it has to end one way or another and we’re choosing to end it now by choosing a peaceful response. If the old enemy insist on continuing to attack then we will still refuse to fight and we can show the international community how awful they really are and how we’re trying our best.
But unfortunately we all know that Kim’s, Xi’s, putin’s and Hamas’ big boy trouser hangars are all empty.
The hostages are probably one of the things keeping some areas in Gaza secure. Was a effective move to gather as many as you can, not only as bargaining chips but strategically.
Hamaz will use them as human shields in important positions, Isreal gives little fucks about dead Palestinians, thing changes when it’s your own civilians you bomb.
They should not give them back if they want to be able to operate a little further and prepare for a possible ground assault by Israel.
That’s what their soldiers are more effective in, no sense in getting bombed without aa.
Yes. I condemn both. And I don’t play the “which is worse” game. They are both unacceptable evils. Israel needs to stop this immediately and, at the very least, negotiate a peace if not some sort of solution to the whole issue (hopefully including at least some right of return) and Hamas needs to return the hostages.
You don’t need to pick a side when both sides are committing atrocities.
One of these “sides” could unilaterally peacefully end the conflict. For the other side choosing “peace” just means submitting to living under an occupying force as eternal second class citizens. insert mlk quote here.
If you really think that Israel casually choosing to disarm itself doesn’t immediately end with it being destroyed, I’d invite you to look at the 2005 IDF withdrawal from Gaza, which was done as a token of goodwill on the path to peace.
Gazans then elected Hamas and immediately began launching rockets. Israel won’t make that mistake again.
why did they simply not have another election? or has another entity completely stopped that?
Yeah, both the Fatah and Gaza because both know that Palestinian people have largely become fed up with their combined inefficacy in trying to make a country of millions with a superior military just disappear.
Not to mention Iran constantly intervening to keep Hamas armed enough to suppress dissent.
You know you can read about it yourself instead of asking strangely suggestive questions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Gaza_(2007)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Governance_of_the_Gaza_Strip
“They”, meaning the Israeli government, couldn’t force an election because they withdrew from Gaza and have no direct power there. Hamas suspended democracy to any meaningful degree because they don’t care about it. In the West Bank, elections have been suspended by the Palestinian Authority because it’s likely that Hamas would win them and create another Gaza, which Israel would not allow to happen.
Hamas wants all Jews gone. So I don’t see how that is in any way better?
How do you unilaterally declare peace?
deleted by creator
You can’t unilaterally declare peace. That’s just an oxymoron.
Yes you can. Three examples: russia can unilaterally declare peace with Ukraine and stop the war; China can unilaterally declare peace with Taiwan and stop threatening to invade them; North Korea can unilaterally declare peace with South and maybe not reintegrate because Kim doesn’t want to give up his privileges but at least the sabre rattling can stop. So Hamas can similarly unilaterally declare peace with Israel, remove the “all Israel must die” from its constitution and start on the path toward some meaningful peace. But that’s difficult, and firing rockets is easy, so lEt’S fIrE RoCkEtS!!11!1!! And by not firing rockets at Israel they can show the world exactly how hostile Israel are towards them without the excuse of responding to their attacks, although the obvious problem with that is that it would be “not at all” which would prove the hostilities have all been exclusively caused by Hamas.
Exactly how to declare peace: we’re going to put our big boy trousers on now and just choose to end all the tit for tat. Yes we all know they just did that really mean thing but it has to end one way or another and we’re choosing to end it now by choosing a peaceful response. If the old enemy insist on continuing to attack then we will still refuse to fight and we can show the international community how awful they really are and how we’re trying our best.
But unfortunately we all know that Kim’s, Xi’s, putin’s and Hamas’ big boy trouser hangars are all empty.
The hostages are probably one of the things keeping some areas in Gaza secure. Was a effective move to gather as many as you can, not only as bargaining chips but strategically.
Hamaz will use them as human shields in important positions, Isreal gives little fucks about dead Palestinians, thing changes when it’s your own civilians you bomb.
They should not give them back if they want to be able to operate a little further and prepare for a possible ground assault by Israel.
That’s what their soldiers are more effective in, no sense in getting bombed without aa.
Was raping them and recording it also to keep Israel at bay?
No, that was the work of really depraved men. It’s not excusable, and I wish them the worst death has to offer.
My comment went more into a tactical, not a moral direction.