Israel Rejected a Cease-Fire. The Media Isn’t Telling Us.
Israel Rejected a Cease-Fire. The Media Isn’t Telling Us.
Israeli officials just rejected a cease-fire deal that could have brought hostages back because Israel wants to continue waging war. This should be a scandal — but American mainstream media isn’t reporting on it.
Why not? Because they've done this before and it's getting ridiculous. The process goes thusly.
- Isreal announces a ceasefire plan they are sure Palestinians will reject
- Palestinian officials accepts the ceasefire
- Isreal goes "Well screw it then, now I don't want to do it" and continues their genocidal ways.
And so on, and so forth.
No that’s republicans and border control
It's an ancient political tactic of "I was just defending myself". What was it the Nazis said about Jews? Oh right, they were just "defending themselves".
Porque no los dos?
The plan they rejected was made by Egypt and.. Qatar (maybe)
Definitely not one of their own proposals.
So your argument here is false.
Israeli officials charged that its terms were “far from” their “obligatory demands.”
Those Israeli obligatory demands being starving and killing thousands of civilian men, women and children in Rafah.
Yeah, pretty much. This story goes into some details. If that's accurate, then the objections the Israelis have to the current plan boil down to:
- They want the deal to allow them to keep fighting the war and keep troops in Gaza (after its terms are fully implemented, which generally isn't how a cease fire works)
- They want to be able to keep Palestinians they have ("Iraeli veto over prisoners") while demanding the fast release of all Israelis that Hamas has ("Hamas has suggested a framework that would stretch out the hostage release")
This little section I think gets to the heart of it:
Israel has consistently opposed any deal that explicitly calls for a permanent cease-fire or an end to the war, and has said it would not agree to either until it felt its military offensive had achieved its goals. Ehud Yaari, an Israel-based fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said that the Hamas timetable would commit Israel to ending the war while Hamas still holds hostages, leaving Israel without any leverage.
It's a very cunning little construction. The deal involves the release of all hostages, of course, in exchange for the end of the war. He's placing "commit Israel to ending the war" (after the deal) next to "Hamas still holds hostages" (before the deal) and getting all upset that they can't have the benefits of the deal before agreeing to their side of it, and also they want to avoid having to uphold substantive parts after agreeing to it.
Hamas must be deposed for meaningful safety, they've said they want to do October 7th over and over again. This is a last minute deal for them to try and weasel their way out of ultimate consequences for what they have done.
Occupying Gaza is probably also a good call considering their unilateral withdrawal arguably led directly to October 7th. I expect they will stay, try to implement a puppet government, do a little nation building, and only leave once Gaza is pacified. If this is not possible, expect more annexations and settlements.
At this point IDF can rape your family and biden would imprison you for anti semeticism for bringing it up.
biden
* congress, and maybe your local police force depending on which university you go to
would imprison you for anti semeticism
* would pass a resolution vaguely implying that you're anti Semitic
for bringing it up
* for having a weekslong protest about it
Would Israel get their hostages back in this cease-fire agreement? No. So why would Israel agree to it and allow Hamas to regroup and rearm?
Would Israel get their hostages back in this cease-fire agreement?
Yes. Hamas wouldn't get all of theirs back.
No.
Wait, which agreement were you looking at? The Qatari proposal releases all the Israeli hostages during the second of three phases.