Hamas said to reject Israeli offer of two-month pause in war for release of hostages

[Mosby]

Hamas has rejected Israel’s proposal for a two-month ceasefire during which the terror group would release Israeli hostages in exchange for Palestinian security prisoners, said a senior Egyptian official on Tuesday, speaking to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity.

The official said that Hamas leaders have also refused to leave Gaza and are demanding that Israel fully withdraw from the territory and allow Palestinians to return to their homes.

Under Israel’s proposal, Yahya Sinwar and other top Hamas leaders in Gaza would be allowed to relocate to other countries.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/hamas-rejects-israels-offer-for-two-month-pause-for-release-of-hostages/

[Voltaire2]

1. Why would they accept that?

It was a deliberate non-starter.

[Mosby]

2. A two month break?

And all they had to do was release the hostages.

Holding the hostages is a war crime.

[Voltaire2]

3. The only bargaining chip they have is the hostages.

Giving that up for a 60 halt in the slaughter, followed by a resumption of the slaughter, is a non-starter.

[JI7]

7. They slaughtered people in Israel and took hostages

so they are probably fine with people being slaughtered.

[Amishman]

46. If Hamas wanted to avoid slaughter, perhaps they shouldn't have started this

There can be no peace while Hamas rules the Palestinians.

[mcar]

58. The hostage are human beings

referring to them as "bargaining chips" is dehumanizing. Oh, and Hamas did the slaughter on Oct. 7 - or did you forget that?

[Cha]

66. Mahalo for Pointing that out to the Poster

calling the Israeli Hostages "bargaining chips" .

[mcar]

68. The dehumanization of these people is disgusting

Some on this thread are LOLing at hostages and rape victims.

[Cha]

72. Yeah.. Isreael is the one Offering Humanitarian

Aid and the Butchers of HAMAS is the one shooting Palestinians who try to get it.

Why is that?@

[AloeVera]

97. That's rich.

Coming from the side that has labelled 2.4 million human beings "human shields" in order to justify bombing them indiscriminately.

[Coventina]

102. Human Shields is what the ICC calls them.

And the use of them, as Hamas is doing, is a war crime.

[AloeVera]

111. Using the human shield statute as an excuse for indiscriminate bombing, which is also a war crime, is the issue.

Of course the use of human shields is a war crime. The Statute of the ICC defines it as encompassing:
“utilizing the presence of a civilian or other protected person to render certain points, areas, or military forces
immune from military operations.”

So for example firing rockets near a school, in the hopes that your adversary will not strike back at your position for fear of civilian casualties (hoping to make that position immune) is a crime. That is the extent of what the ICC Statute says. It's meant to prevent the use of human shields. It does not legitimize or allow for the killing of those human shields without first applying the principles of proportionality, distinction and military necessity. Even then, the onus would be on Israel to prove they were near a legitimate military target.

When a civilian becomes a "human shield" that civilian is still entitled to all the protections of international humanitarian law. They are not to be indiscriminately butchered in their homes and places of shelter simply because of proximity to something or someone Israel deems a military target.

Israel uses the existence of the ICC human shield statute to justify its indiscriminate and massive bombing of civilian homes and infrastructure. In effect they are telling the world "we had no choice but to bomb 60% of the housing stock in Gaza, 200 schools and 200 mosques, water storage facilities, bakeries, office buildings, roads etc. because Hamas was in every location and the families living there or people in the vicinity are just unfortunate human shields - it's not our fault! That is morally and legally questionable and a war crime also. I think the ICC is in fact looking into that very issue now.

[Coventina]

119. If you think what the IDF is doing is indiscriminate, that tells me

that you don't actually know what true indiscriminate bombing actually looks like.

[AloeVera]

121. Worse than Mariupol.

Buildings flattened, block after block after block. You should view some recent drone videos. Nothing spared, one building after another.

If bombing and attacks are not based on the principles of proportionality etc, targets are expanded to non-military sites and employ 2,000 lb dumb bombs or even smart ones in a dense urban area - then the bombing is indiscriminate.

I really have seen enough and thought about it enough to know what I am seeing is the result of indiscriminate bombing cleverly disguised as an unfortunate by-product of the use of human shields.

[Coventina]

123. This is clearly not something that we will not agree upon, as I do not see it as you do.

I don't want civilians to die, that's always wrong.

Hamas could stop all this tomorrow by releasing the hostages and surrendering themselves for their crimes.

They started this, they wanted this. Israel is going to make sure that Hamas is not going to be able to do such crimes again.

It seems to me that if the world judging Israel has such great ideas as to how this could be done better, they should be offering to help the IDF do better.

But no. Everybody just wants to hate on Israel for doing what any other nation would have done with the same provocation.

Heck, the rich Arab states could have given every Palestinian a top education and livelihood and a strong infrastructure, if their Muslim brothers meant so much to them. But instead they have sat on their hands on purpose to let the situation get ever more dire so that Israel is made to look like the bad guy for defending itself against terrorism. (Funny how the only Muslim country to help is Iran, and then only to provide weapons and terrorism training, not help in getting better lives).
(I am not excusing the asshole settlers on Palestinian lands, that is a whole other issue that Netanyahu, the criminal, has encouraged and aided).

The whole thing stinks to high heaven of anti-semitism and Jew hate, on a global scale.

on edit: fixed typo

[AloeVera]

137. Two points of agreement! And a question.

Actually there are two things we agree on! The asshole settlers of course. Also that Hamas wanted this.

I think the pertinent question we need to think about is the reason why Hamas wanted this. It was essentially a suicide mission for them and a portion of their people. Why would they do that?

[Mossfern]

145. I think that Hamas was counting

on other Arab nations to support them and offer aid.
They figured wrong.

[mcar]

108. Hamas uses them as human shields

That is a fact.

[AloeVera]

112. See my response #111 above.

[Mossfern]

144. I think he meant that Hamas

was using the Israeli hostages as "bargaining chips." And that is exactly what they are doing. It's Hamas that is dehumanizing Israelis.

[Cha]

60. Why Should the Gang Rapist Butchers of HAMAS GET A

"Bargaining chip"? they need to be Eradicating.

[Voltaire2]

69. So, just to be clear, you think Hamas will accept this offer?

[Cha]

74. I know this.. the Palestinians Would love to have 2 months of

Humanitarian Aid and a Ceasefire..

The fucking Butchers of HAMAS cold give a shit about Palestinians but I was Hopeful they would.

I'm Grateful Israel Offered.

[Voltaire2]

76. So we agree that the offer is a non-starter.

[Cha]

80. I Don't "agree" with you on anything.

[Voltaire2]

84. Oh. My mistake. So you think Hamas will agree to this.

[The Magistrate]

81. Hamas Will 'Accept' No Offer But Israel's Surrender

And you do seem fine with that....

[Voltaire2]

83. They would likely accept a permanent ceasefire

in exchange for the hostages.

And no, again, I am not fine with any of this. But thanks for jumping on the dog pile.

[The Magistrate]

89. Bullshit: There Is No 'Permanent' Cease-Fire Absent Conclusive Defeat Of One Side Or the Other

So long as one or both sides remained determined on the other's defeat, and willing to use violence in attempts to achieve this when conditions seem favorable, no ceasefire will be permanent.

Any statement to the effect that Hamas 'shouldn't' or 'can't be expected to' accept this, stop shooting, and release captives, or surrender their corpses, is simply admitting Hamas thinks it is better served by more killing and maiming in Gaza. It is tacit support for a body which, if one judges by actions rather than words, is bent on collective suicide for the people of Arab Palestine.

[elias7]

105. The slaughter was in large part because of the taken and kept hostages. You're really ok with that?

[former9thward]

113. Hamas are war criminals.

But some are defending their position.

[tritsofme]

4. Right, but obviously not generous enough for the Hamas fan club.

[BannonsLiver]

13. Indeed. The masks are translucent at this point.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

51. This thread has been enlightening

[mcar]

59. It's mind boggling

that people are blaming Israel for Hamas' rejection of a cease fire agreement.

[NoRethugFriends]

5. So concerned about their citizens, Hamas clearly is.

[Voltaire2]

40. Obviously they aren't.

I'm glad we agree that this proposal has zero chance of being accepted.

[jimfields33]

6. For real?

That seems very reasonable for Israel to offer. We now have proof that Hamas is not interested in peace.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

8. And that the "Ceasefire Now" crowd isn't interested in the hostages' return

[tritsofme]

11. As we've seen in this thread, that crowd has literally morphed into explicit supporters of Hamas

If they ever had to actually morph, but at least now they’re not pretending.

It’s good to know where people stand, I suppose.

[Cha]

79. Rgith.. so

touching

[Chainfire]

42. That is patently untrue and you know it.

Some of us are just concerned that over 25,000 people, most of them NOT Hamas, many of them women and children, have been killed. It doesn't mean that we do not have compassion for the Israeli victims of terror. It is not a one or the other proposition.

I have never been a supporter of terrorists, any terrorist or terrorist orginazations or governments, including Hamas, and now Israel.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

45. So you believe Israel are terrorists

Good to know - thanks for admitting your beliefs.

[Chainfire]

48. Yes, they are writing a new chapter in the book on terrorism in Gaza.

Of course, I know that some people believe that Israel is always right because they are Israel. I don't buy that. I wouldn't buy it if it were the UK, Canada, the U.S. or any other nation killing civilians by the hundred either.

What Hamas did in Israel was wrong. What Israel is doing in Gaza is wrong; it is not that complicated.

[Coventina]

73. So please explain to me what Israel should do to get rid of Hamas?

And don't say "surgical strikes" because we already know Hamas is using human shields, hence the death toll so far.

[Happy Hoosier]

118. Civilians die in urban conflicts...

It is a sad, but true reality. In a two week period in 1945, 125,000 civilians died in the Battle of Berlin. Was that “terrorism?” Of course not. The attempt to cast civilian casualties as “terrorism” and “genocide” undermines legitimate criticism of Israel with hyperbole.

[AloeVera]

122. But not at this ratio.

In the Battle of Berlin, about 175,000 soldiers died, roughly equal between Germans and Russians. Compared to 125,000 civilians. That's still an awful ratio but nothing like Gaza. Even if you believe the 2:1 ratio claimed by the IDF.

Now if you take just the ratio of IDF deaths to civilian deaths, it's even worse. I don't know of anything recent coming close.

Yes, civilians die in urban conflict. But not at this ratio and that's why you see the global protests.

[Arazi]

127. Every war is different

This one has a high civilian death rate because that’s how Hamas has structured their strategy.

That’s on Hamas. It’s tremendously sad but focus your ire on the organization that decided to wage tunnel warfare under civilian areas.

Israel is actually fighting Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. Hamas is a proxy for a larger consortium of forces.

Again, singling out Israel only for opprobrium because Hamas’ strategy is to force as many civilians into the battle zone, stinks of…

[AloeVera]

131. Or what, Arazi?

That's the third time.

That's not just disheartening and a personal slur but it's infuriating. You can figure out why.

You stand with Israel, right or wrong. You blame Hamas, right or wrong. Yet I don't repeatedly insinuate that you are Islamophobic or an Arab-hater or a racist or an ethno-supremacist. I think your views are wrong but that is separate from your motives or character. You may be a fine and moral person in real life. You are here on DU and that in itself says something good about your values in my eyes.

It's not ok for you to .... me. And if you are going to do it, be brave or foolish enough and SPELL IT OUT.

Good day.

On edit: corrected typo in title

[Arazi]

132. It's not personal

[Happy Hoosier]

130. The "ratios" are a BS talking point.

Hamas DELIBERATELY embedded themselves in the civilian infrastructure precisely to achieve this result. Wanna blame someone? Blame the fuckers who hide behind the civilians!

I never see the anti-Israel posters call for Hamas to surrender, or to stop hiding behind civilians. Nope it's always (((their))) fault.

[EX500rider]

134. "I don't know of anything recent coming close."

Except every conflict since the '80's?

For a urban environment fighting non-uniformed opponents they are doing better job at keeping civilian casualties low compared to other recent wars.

All the posts about the "25,000" dead act like they are all civilians.

25,000 - 10,000 hamas is 60% civilians, lower then avg (someone will be along shortly who trusts hamas figures with no question to question the IDF numbers)

This graph puts the avg at 78% from the '80's on

[WDLAL]

135. If, on Oct 7, Hamas had butchered, raped and abducted a few thousand more Israelis, would that be an acceptable ratio?

If several thousand more IDF soldiers had been killed to date, would that make it more acceptable to you?

[AloeVera]

136. That's uncalled for and offensive.

No unnecessary deaths are acceptable to me.

How many more deaths are acceptable to you?

[The Magistrate]

140. It Is Neither Uncalled For Nor Offensive

To say Israeli action is indefensible because so many more residents of Gaza are being killed than Israelis is to invite that question. So here it is in a possibly more palatable form: what would you consider a proper, more acceptable ration of deaths between the sides?

I note a bit of semantic slight of hand in your comment as well.

You say: 'No unnecessary deaths are acceptable to me.'

And follow it with: 'How many more deaths are acceptable to you? '

Switching categories like that is mere dirty pool, not forensic one-upmanship.

Obviously, were one to play along, the answer would be 'No more than are necessary to achieve the objective.' It's not an answer much to your taste, I suppose, but you have allowed that some deaths are necessary to achieve the contender's objectives, by stating opposition to unnecessary ones. Or you could take a stand on the proposition that all deaths in this are unnecessary, because neither side has any objective worth killing for in the first place. This is a coherent view, even one sustainable in debate, perhaps, but requires disowning the whole 'Palestinian resistance' fraud to do so, and so is unlikely to be pressed by someone in agreement with its purported goals.

[AloeVera]

141. Hard to provide simple answers to your questions.

To ask if more horrific deaths on October 7th would mean a more acceptable ratio to me personally is offensive and uncalled for. If you do not find it so, that is perplexing. The question implies that my wish is to balance things out by more killing rather than plead for less killing and an end to the war.

Further, October 7th has nothing to do with the ratio of civilian vs military deaths in the war on Gaza, which I raised to rebut the argument that this is a war just like any other.

Unnecessary deaths and unacceptable ratios are ones that involve aggression beyond the need for immediate self-defense. I believe Israel passed that point long ago.

Things are never simple. I struggle to reconcile my support for the Palestinian cause with my opposition to terrorist tactics in general. I accept that occupied people have the right to resist but am at a loss how that can happen acceptably or morally in the power and military asymmetry they face. I also struggle to reconcile my opposition to Israel's policies an actions concerning Palestinians with their need to defend themselves against rockets and random acts of terrorism and any possibility of another October 7th.

I also question the mindset of "whatever it takes to achieve the objective". It's too Machiavellian for my liking.

The one thing I am absolutely certain of is that this war needs to end. It's a display of savagery and mindless destruction that is morally unjustifiable. The suffering there is unbearable to watch, I can't imagine what it would be like to experience. I am also very suspicious that the end-game of expulsion and displacement has always been a major goal, which would mean the end of the Palestinians' fight for their own state.

[The Magistrate]

157. It Was Made Brutally Simple On October 7, Sir

It is not just what Hamas did, but that what Hamas did was greeted, in the streets of Gaza, in the Islamic world generally, and by segments of the Western left, with applause and adulation, rather than denunciation and disgust. This is just one of the things people who 'support the cause of Palestine' need to face up to: that atrocity is not just the chosen tool of the 'Palestinian resistance' in arms, but that atrocity is popular among the people of Arab Palestine in whose name these enormities are committed. This makes the matter quite simple: the 'Palestinian resistance' is unclean, it has been rendered so foul as to taint irrevocably anyone who exerts themselves on its behalf. I am no more prepared to listen to reasons and rationalizations on its behalf then I am to listen to such bean-breeze in explanation of why Nazis got real support in Germany and elsewhere in their campaign against Jews. The 7th of October revealed there is no functional difference between Gaza and some Mississippi lynching town in Jim Crow days, where the folk turned out in droves to cheer when they burnt that black boy on the courthouse steps.

Another thing which needs honest reckoning with by those raising hue and cry about the great harms done in course of the Israeli effort to liquidate Hamas is that not one bomb would be dropped on Gaza, not one person there killed or maimed, but for the spree of sadistic rape and murder Hamas indulged its killers in on October 7. This is past dispute, it is a fact, which ought to be acknowledged as such regardless of which side one aligns with. It is an uncomfortable fact for those crying up claims Israel is simply engaged in massacre of 'innocent Palestinians', because reference to it calls to mind why the bombs are dropping, and makes it difficult to keep focus on the idea Israel acts out of malice, which is essential to the project of trying to halt Israel's campaign while Hamas remains a body capable of future atrocity. Which we both know it has declared its intention to do. And which we both know is the aim of demonstrators chanting 'Genocide Joe' here in our country.

That Arab Palestinians have a 'right to resistance' is a platitude, which does not improve with repetition as bombs fall. The question is not whether there is a right to resist, but whether in extant circumstances armed resistance is the right thing, the wise thing, the thing most likely to produce a favorable result for the effort. It is obvious the answer to these questions is no. Over the whole course of this matter, from the close of the Great War and on to the present day, every indulgence in violent resistance by the 'hard men' of Arab Palestine has ended with the people of Palestine in worsened condition, with their circumstances more straitened and their prospect more limited. It is beyond argument that, had the UN partition of the Palestine Mandate been accepted by the nationalist leadership of Arab Palestine, and by neighboring Arab powers, the condition and prospects of the people of Arab Palestine today would be incomparably better than it is.

Another fact people who 'support the cause of Palestine' need to face up to is that the goal of Palestinian resistance has been from the start driving out the Jews, not the establishment of a state coexisting with Israel. When people began declaring 'Palestine must be free', they were referring to land where 'the Zionist entity' held sway, and once the Jews were gone, the land they had stolen would be Free Palestine. No one even talked of Jordan disgorging to Palestinian sovereignty the portions of the Jordan valley its troops seized during the fighting in '48. Even today, it is open to question whether the goal of a Palestinian state would not be gathering capabilities for a serious assault on Israel. The example of Gaza, which has had control over its internal affairs for a couple of decades, is not an encouraging one. A good many of those years, and a great deal of money and labor, were devoted to making a fortress of the place, so that the fighters, at least, had a chance of surviving the bombardments certain to follow whatever attacks on Jews in Israel they could contrive. So long as there is reasonable doubt on this point, resolving the matter by two states coexisting as neighbors must remain an aspiration, rather than a plan. I would it were otherwise....


"He made two mistakes. His second was making the first, like it always is. That's all you get: Two mistakes."

[AloeVera]

126. Absolutely.

I would add that it is the way the war is conducted, in violation of international law leading to the high ratio of civilian deaths, that we have a problem with. It is unbearable to watch and to know we can't do anything other than speak up whenever and wherever we can. It is disheartening to read some of the comments.

[Goddessartist]

128. I just came back after

a few day break because of the disheartening comments, and accusing others of supporting Hamas.

I agree with everything you and Chainfire have said. It's very disheartening to be accused of the above by other posters.

I stand with the Palestinian people.

[AloeVera]

138. I stand with the Palestinian people too.

[Goddessartist]

139. I am grateful,

and as the late, great, Helen Thomas once said to me, 'It's good to have friends.'

[AloeVera]

143. You are lucky to have known her.

We sure could use her courage and outspokenness today. No one like her today.

[Goddessartist]

153. Yes.

I do hope someone like her will come along. It's still amazing to me how many just hold the Palestinian people in contempt.

[AloeVera]

156. It started that way and not much has changed in 100 years.

Worse over time. I cling to the hope though that this war has opened a few eyes at least. Change may come.

[Goddessartist]

159. Hopefully it will come

soon, change. It has gotten worse over time. It's been incessant anti Palestinian propaganda for many years. I became aware of it over 30 years ago. One sees how it has manifested.

Sorry for the late response - been very busy with house things the past few days.

[claudette]

29. Maybe

Last edited Tue Jan 23, 2024, 05:44 PM - Edit history (1)

they don’t trust the people whose leader says he will overtake Gaza

[AloeVera]

94. And clearly announced no state for Palestinians.

In the middle of negotiations.

Which side is not interested in peace?

Talk about masks coming off.

[AloeVera]

98. Actually for real??

Declaring openly in the middle of negotiations that there is no "space" for a two-state solution?? We now have actual proof that Israel is not interested in peace.

[jimfields33]

101. One thing you don't understand is of Gaza goes it alone,

How will they survive without Israel providing everything to them? Without Israel they will have no electricity, water, food or money. I don’t think they thought this through,

[questionseverything]

103. There are gas wells off the coast of Gaza worth billions

They could easily buy what they need

[jimfields33]

104. That's great. Why not start now?

Stop excepting Israel giving them stuff and go it alone. I bet they’d be happier.

[questionseverything]

109. Because Israel has them on lockdown

Israel only has to “give them stuff “ because Israel has cut them off from the world

[Mosby]

110. Gaza borders Egypt.

The Egyptians won't let a single Gazan thru...

Link to tweet

[Coventina]

120. The rich Arab nations have sat on their hands for decades

so that the Palestinians plight gets worse and worse so Israel will take all the blame.

It's so obvious, but everyone seems to want to blame the Jews.

[AloeVera]

107. I believe they are supported by international aid.

Are you sure about your information?? Does Israel really "provide everything"? Those aid yrucks waiting at the border are international and UN, as they have been for years. Not Israeli.

Under the blockade, Gaza's economy tanked. Manufacturing was destroyed as they were not allowed to export at all for a time. Unemployment skyrocketed. Making them ever more dependent on international aid.

They would be more self-sufficient ifthey had theirown state and were allowed to trade with the world a d control their own resources. Their gas fields are worth billions.

[EX500rider]

133. "They would be more self-sufficient if they had their own state.."

...and didn't spend all their money on tunnels & rockets & trying to kill Jews.

[Mossfern]

146. Honestly .....

Hamas and many of their Palestinian supporters don't want a two state solution either.
They want to eradicate Israel and kill all the Jews.

[AloeVera]

147. You may be right.

At this point it looks like each just wants to kill the other. How absolutely tragic that it's come to this.

But one thing is undeniable: only one side has the actual capability to get that done, is doing some of that now, while the other side threatens and commits terrorism while fighting the IDF in flip-flops and with inferior weaponry.

One more: only one side has a state now.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

148. Only one side ever had a state,

Palestinians had a chance to have a state of their own, but was rejected by the PA., this kerfuffle is on them, not Israel.

[Mossfern]

149. I don't agree

Israel just wants to be left alone, not to kill all Palestinians.
They left Gaza, but Gaza continued to fire rockets and and attack and kill Israelis.

It doesn't matter that people who want to kill all Jews wear flip-flops or combat boots.
Are you insinuating that because Israel is better equipped that they deserve to be murdered?

All that needs to happen is for the hostages, dead or alive, to be returned to Israel, perpetrators
and planners of the October 7th attack be handed over to Israel for trial, Gazans to stop firing rockets
into Israel and the path to a sustained and prosperous peace will begin.

Do the people of Gaza really want peace?
Will they renounce the Hamas mission to eradicate Israel and kill all Jews in Israel and the rest of the world?

[AloeVera]

150. If Israel wants to be left alone...

It should get the 700,000+ illegal settlers off Palestinian lands and end the brutal occupation as the first step to a lasting an prosperous peace.

How likely is that to happen under the current regime in Israel or given the Israeli public's support for that? I think you know it's not very likely. So I can ask the same question: does Israel really want peace?

I admire your optimistic take but I really don't think it's very realistic. Even if the war ended tomorrow, there is no way towards peace without Israel making some concessions and I don't see that happening. All I see happening now is that Gazans will be forced off their small strip of land because it's no longer fit for human habitation. And I am very angry and discouraged about that.

As for the flip-flop/combat boots comparison, it's symbolic of the asymmetry but also meant to point out that the fear of Hamas killing all Jews, though understandable, is not borne out by reality. In real life, far more Palestinians are killed and are living in fear as well. But living in fear is intolerable so maybe it's time to face the fact that peace comes at a cost for both sides.

[Mossfern]

154. I do agree with you regarding the settlements in the West Bank

I have always been against settlements there, since the settlement movement began decades ago.
If you look back at my history here, you'll see that.

But the West Bank is not Gaza. Israel removed all settlers from Gaza- not one Jew left there - yet the murders of Israeli citizens continued from there, cease fires were violated by Hamas. Gazan children are taught in UNRWA schools to hate and aspire to murder Jews and become martyrs. It will take generations to undo that damage.

Netanyahu and Likud need to be forced our of power- even before 10/7 there were mass demonstrations against them in the streets of Israel. Even if that were to happen, the Left in Israel will not tolerate the murder of it's people- rightfully so.

While reasonable people look for solutions, radicals of both sides will work against that.

[maxsolomon]

9. So, your objection is that the offer isn't a permanent end to the incursion?

Seems like it is very much a starter.

Exile for Hamas leadership seems fairly generous, since the preferred option is a drone strike.

[Voltaire2]

75. My objection is that it is a non-starter.

It is not a serious offer.

[maxsolomon]

78. Then Hamas should counter offer.

Unless they don't want a ceasefire that could facilitate the release of Palestinians languishing in Israeli prisons.

[Happy Hoosier]

10. This response is..... curious.....

Why would they accept a 2 month pause in fighting in exchange for illegally held hostages being released? Seriously? What do you think they should be offered? Pardons for Oct 7? Perhaps a parade!?

[tritsofme]

12. It's pretty simple. They want Hamas to have no restrictions on killing Jews, but also prohibit any response from Israel.

Not very complicated.

[Voltaire2]

17. Uh no, I personally want the hostages released and

the slaughter in Gaza stopped.

My point was simply that Hamas is not going to agree to a temporary ceasefire in exchange for the hostages. Does anyone here think they will?

If we all agree that Hamas is clearly not going to accept this, then quite obviously it is a non-starter.

[AloeVera]

99. You are using logic.

If you don't stop doing that, you are obviously a Hamas supporter who doesn't care about the hostages.

[Voltaire2]

15. A permanent ceasefire would work.

The IDF withdraws from Gaza and the hostages are released.

At some point the IDF will withdraw. The siege is not going to be permanent. It is pretty clear that the IDF is not going to eliminate Hamas. So perhaps rescuing the hostages ought to be the priority?

[yardwork]

16. There was a permanent ceasefire. Hamas broke it on Oct 7, and subsequently.

Why would Israel trust Hamas now? This is a serious question, not rhetorical.

[Voltaire2]

19. Nah, there was a permanent state of low level

hostilities. Gazans were being routinely killed by the IDF, Hamas and other groups were routinely lobbing their rockets into Israel.

At some point that will once again become the status quo. The only real issue to be resolved is the fate of the hostages.

[Happy Hoosier]

23. So to be clear... you are FINE....

with the those who unleashed rape parties onto Israel just conituing on as normal!?

My daughter is a rape victim. It galls me every damned day that the fucker that did it got away with it and I can;t do anything about it.

Opting to let these monster not only get away with it, but to plan to NEXT one is unconscionable IMO. Time to rip the band-aid off with these monsters.

I certainly don;t approve of everything Israel is doing or how they are doing it, but one thing I can agree with them on is that any solution that leaves Hamas in power is immoral and unacceptable.

[Voltaire2]

24. lol.

Understanding the reality of the situation does not equate to support for the shitty behavior on both sides.

[Happy Hoosier]

25. So you find the pain of rape victims lol-worthy?

The "reality" is that Hamas' time as rulers of Gaza must be at an end.

No other outcome is acceptable, IMO.

[Voltaire2]

37. Nope. I find the endless 'if you don't agree with me you support rape' laughable.

[The Magistrate]

90. That's Not What Anyone Says, Dear

No one says 'because you disagree with me you support rape'.

What people are saying is that you seem to be running interference for sadistic rapists and murderers, and have a damned odd sense of when it's appropriate to laugh, let alone of what it's appropriate to laugh at or near.

[yardwork]

35. What a truly repulsive response to a rape survivor's father's pain.

Do better.

[Voltaire2]

38. The 'rape survivor's father' accused me of supporting rape.

Because, apparently, I don't agree that Netanyahu's proposal has any chance of being accepted.

And yes the endless 'if you don't agree then you support rape' bullshit is laughable.

[yardwork]

85. Rape is never laughable.

You can argue your position without leading with "lol" in response to a poster's statement that their daughter was raped. Argue content, don't ridicule.

We can do better than this.

[Voltaire2]

88. Lol. Not what I said, of course.

But do go on.

[yardwork]

91. Your subject line is literally "lol"

[tritsofme]

39. They're becoming more and more like the Hamas monsters they so admire.

[Redleg]

65. Fer fuck's sake

I don't see anybody here at DU admiring Hamas. Criticism of Israel's government does not equate to admiration for Hamas. Concern for the welfare of Palestinian non-combatants does not equate to admiration for Hamas. Some issues aren't black and white. I can despise Hamas for it's misrule in Gaza and for it's heinous attack on Israel and at the same time dislike Netanyahu and his cronies for what they do.

[mcar]

61. You respond to a post about a daughter's rape with "lol?"

What are we becoming here?

[Happy Hoosier]

20. Would it? Of course not. And you know it.

1) There was a permanent ceasefire in place before Oct. Hamas violated it. They will violate ANY ceasefire when it suits them. You KNOW this. Allowing Hamas to remain in power just sets a new waiting period until the NEXT Hamas attrocity.

2) A permanent ceasefire means NO accountability on Hamas' part for teh Oct 7 attrocities. You are willing to let the men who planned and executed these deaths squads and rape parities to continue in power with NO consequences

Maybe you think it's worth it. I certainly do not. HAMAS MUST BE REMOVED FROM POWER.

[EX500rider]

49. Why is it pretty clear they are not going to eliminate Hamas?

I'd say it is pretty clear they are, 10,000 dead hamas so far in 4 months, it may take time but if they kill 2.500 a month they will get it done Looks like 8 more months or so.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

55. I thought it was kind of odd a few days ago

When someone posted an article about how badly IDF was doing and that they'd only killed a THIRD of Hamas in 3 months. That seems pretty good to me, especially since they've killed less than 1% of the overall population.

[EX500rider]

63. Yeah for a urban environment fighting non-uniformed opponents they are doing better job

at keeping civilian casualties low compared to other recent wars.

All the posts about the "25,000" dead act like they are all civilians.

25,000 - 10,000 hamas is 60% civilians, lower then avg (someone will be along shortly who trusts hamas figures with no question to question the IDF numbers)

This graph puts the avg at 78% from the '80's on

[Cha]

53. GD Fucking BUTCHERING HAMAS SHOULD ACCEPT

IT FOR the PALESTINIANS to GET AIDE BUT That's Too FUCKING MUCH For those HEARTLESS SADISTIC FUCKHEADS.

[mcar]

57. It's a legitimate offer

that murderous terrorist rapists won't take because they want more Palestinians to die.

[Cha]

71. Fuck GD HAMAS.. fucking Butchers.. Good on Israsel

Offering 2 Months of a Humanitarian Ceasefire.

[Mosby]

14. Testimony from two of the hostages.

"At this very moment, someone is being raped in a Gaza tunnel...If it were your daughters, your young boys, what would you do?"

Released hostage Aviva Siegel, 64, and her daughter Shir say that both women and men are being raped in Hamas captivity.

“The terrorists bring inappropriate clothes for the girls, the clothes of dolls. They turned our girls into their dolls, that they can do whatever they want with,” Aviva said. “I want to tell you that the boys go through these things too…And something must change now.”

"Where is the cabinet that will hear these things... the really important people are being ignored. The decision makers don't hear these stories... what are they busy with?” Shir demanded.

We MUST make sure every leader hears this and work every moment of the day to bring each and every one of the hostages home!

Link to tweet

[yardwork]

18. Where is the UN?

The problem is that at least 50 nations are majority Muslim. Israel is the only Jewish majority nation in the world. Jewish people make up a tiny percent of the world's population. Islam is the faster growing religion on Earth and the second largest religion now.

Nobody cares about Jewish people. It's teibalism and Muslims have the edge.

[Happy Hoosier]

21. Meh (((they))) are the bad guys, remember?

The suffereing of Jews isn't relevant, apparently.

[maxsolomon]

22. Fairly evident that the US Govt cares about Jewish people.

To the point that Biden's re-election is at risk from supporting Israel's right-wing Govt.

Is that "nobody"?

[claudette]

30. Is that

fact or speculation? How do they know for sure. Plus. Palestinians are wing murdered by the thousands

[AZSkiffyGeek]

47. Good to know who believes terrorists and not their victims

But not really surprising...

[EX500rider]

52. Since they were Hamas hostages why would I not believe them?

Should I believe the terrorists and their fans instead?

[mcar]

62. So you don't believe the words of actual hostages

but do believe what Hamas claims? Interesting.

[Cha]

82. I Believe it.. AND HAMAS Started this SHIT and NOW

they Won't Accept a 2 Month Humanitarian Ceasefire..

IT's STILL ON the GD Gang Raping Butchers of HAMAS.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

117. Wow, as I live and breathe, you seem to believe the Hamas rapists over the actual hostage's accounts

of what happened to them.

[Johnny2X2X]

26. If Hamas agreed ti this, the pasue would be permanent

Because the terms of this have Hamas leaders leaving Gaza. There would be no one left for ISrael to target if they left.

Hostages freed, Hamas gone, the war is over, that's what Israel is offering.

[claudette]

27. It should be

an END of the war. Not a pause. Over 25,000 dead Palestinians. So sad

[EX500rider]

64. So hamas can rebuild and do 10/7 all over again? great plan which means many more dead Palestinians in the long run

Are you sad for the 15,000 dead civilians or also for the 10,000 dead terrorists?

[Cha]

93. TALK to GD HAMAS THEN!! They're the ONES Who STARTED

IT & WON'T END IT!.

[Arazi]

28. And the usual pro-Pal gang is silent...

Quelle surprise 😒

Their “outrage” at civilian casualties appears hollow in the face of this offer. The Palestinian civilian suffering could end immediately if Hamas took Israel up on this.

Unfortunately for them this lays bare the truth of the matter - Hamas is perpetuating this war. Hamas wants the casualties and suffering. Hamas refuses to take ANY steps towards a resolution.

I see above the goalposts are now moving. It’s not enough that Israel has offered a temporary ceasefire - now it must be permanent.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

77. They're not silent

They’re busy calling Israel the real terrorists and saying Hamas shouldn’t give up their leverage to spare the deaths of Gazans.

[Nanjeanne]

92. Well I'm a Pro-Palestinian Jew. Not sure what I'm supposed to post here. I'm not a Hamas supporter if that's

what you meant to say.

This isn't a surprise - 2 days ago Hamas made a proposal that Israel rejected. It wasn't a good deal for what Israel wants and I wasn't surprised that Netanyahu said no. Now Israel made a proposal that Hamas rejected and I'm not surprised by that either.

The only winners right now are Hamas and Bibi. Unfortunately the Palestinians are losing. The Israelis are losing. The hostages are losing. And those who wish for peace are losing.

Hope that helps - from one of those Pro-Pal people.

[Arazi]

100. Thanks

Israel isn’t going to accept Hamas remaining in charge. I think pretty much everyone would agree that’s a nonstarter.

Just as Palestinians will never agree as long as Netanyahu is in charge.

A temporary ceasefire seems reasonable atm. Israel hates it since it allows Hamas to regroup and re-arm. They live to fight another day. Hamas hates it since the hostages are released.

Palestinian civilians are the winners here. They get a reprieve from the fighting

[Goddessartist]

129. As opposed to the Anti-Pal gang?

Some of us take a break as some of the posts here, like yours, are very divisive and accusatory towards other posters. It also appears that many of the Anti-Pal gang have contempt and no compassion towards the Palestinians.

I stand with the Palestinian people, and am horrified at Israel's vindictive, over the top response to Hamas' horrific October massacre. Collective punishment is not acceptable.

As for the deal, others have explained to you why it won't work.

[Prairie Gates]

31. Not sure "Hey, let everybody go so we can kill you all" was ever much of a serious offer

[AZSkiffyGeek]

32. Who says they were going to "kill your all"

I must have missed that part of the ceasefire offer.

[Prairie Gates]

33. What happens when they resume the fighting?

I thought the goal was to absolutely eliminate Hamas, no? Is it not?

[AZSkiffyGeek]

34. So you don't think Hamas should be eliminated?

And you don’t believe Israel will honor a ceasefire.
Interesting….

[Prairie Gates]

41. LOL

Good Lord.

[AZSkiffyGeek]

43. Lol - kidnapped Israelis are funny!

Good lord.

[yardwork]

87. It's horrible. We're watching dehumanization in real time.

[atreides1]

70. It's a nice thought.

But reality has shown that you can't kill an ideology. What Hamas represents is an ideology, and unless Israel actually kills every single member of Hamas, to include all of their leaders and allies outside of Gaza...that abhorrent organization will keep rising up, just like ISIS has done!!!

Granted ISIS is not what it once was, but it's still considered a threat.

[Cha]

95. And, Why the HELL Not Eradicate the Terrorist

org the Gang Ra[ing Butchers of HAMAS?

[Arazi]

36. That's what war is. One side is destroyed or they surrender

Hamas glorifies their “martyrs”.

They openly celebrate death. It’s a death cult. They started this war knowing exactly what Israel would do to them.

Israel has made no bones about their military objective: destroy Hamas. No nation on earth would tolerate living next to a terrorist neighbor whose founding doctrine is to exterminate them. One of them has to go and tbh, I side with Israel on this

[maxsolomon]

56. So... you think Hamas should keep its Israeli hostages?

Because releasing them leaves Gazans in danger of IDF attacks?

[yardwork]

86. I didn't see the post you're responding to before it was removed.

Unfortunately, it is clear that disinformation about this conflict is all over the internet. Thus, some DUers may be inadvertently repeating falsehoods that are indeed the work of Hamas and their supporters (Iran, Russia, China, random billionaires). The purpose always comes back to attacks on Biden.

[keithbvadu2]

67. It is obvious that Israel is not the one refusing a ceasefire.

[ColinC]

96. Because if they revealed they are all dead, there is no longer a bargaining chip?

=

[Deuxcents]

151. That is my fear..hostages may not be alive and that's why the rejection to the offer.

[EX500rider]

155. Or have been treated so horribly that releasing them will be a huge PR hit & infuriate the IDF even more

[Turbineguy]

106. Accepting would be the right decision. Hamas would never do that.

If they did, next thing you know you have a two-state solution and peace and you'd have to go out and find a real job.

[AloeVera]

125. Looks like you missed the big news of the week.

See Netanyahu.

[sarisataka]

114. It seems more than a few people

are concerned that Hamas gets a good deal for the hostages they hold.

I would think people who do not support Hamas would be more concerned about the hostages. Apparently they are just stock to trade.

[JI7]

124. Yup, there never was a concern for the Hostages by the anti Israel side

And this goes back to the start. Israel did not hit back right away . But instead of focusing on saving the hostages we already had people justifying the attacks. Which explains the current response where people respond as if it's unfair to Hamas.

[Takket]

115. this is what i seem to see out there......

The world: fuck Israel for not having a cease fire.

Israel: okay let's have a cease fire.

hamas: fuck you

it takes two to tango

[sarisataka]

116. You missed a line

The world: fuck Israel for not having a cease fire.

Israel: okay let's have a cease fire.

hamas: fuck you

The world: Israel is unreasonable and just wants to slaughter Palestinians

[Cha]

142. TY & 2 Sides For a

Ceasefire.

[bottomofthehill]

152. Much like Trump and the boarder, hamas wants the issue more than the peace

Return the hostages, the bombing stops, sounds simple to me.

[Cha]

158. KICK