230
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 10 Oct 2023
230 points (89.1% liked)
politics
19120 readers
2680 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! 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.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I don't think Israel has "all the agency." Part of the problem is that, with Hamas in charge, Israel would be trying to negotiate with someone whose stated goal is the complete destruction of Israel.
Suppose that, starting tomorrow, Israel treated the Palestinians perfectly. No military members assaulting innocent Palestinian citizens. No blockades of crucial supplies. Not even guards at checkpoints keeping Palestinians from entering/leaving certain areas.
If Hamas and similar organizations kept up attacks (because they wouldn't have achieved their goal of wiping out Israel), it would just lead to pressure to restore those measures (despite them being flawed). The more attacks, the more pressure to act as the more likely that the government would crack down again.
It's tricky because the Palestinians don't want to stop because they fear the Israelis trampling them and the Israelis don't want to stop because they fear terrorist attacks. Both fears are valid but it's resulting in a toxic cycle of violence. It would take both sides cooperating to break this cycle. Sadly, I don't think the current leaders on either side want to even attempt this.
I generally agree with you here; though as a caveat if I understand right, Hamas changed their charter to accept the the 1967 borders two-state solution as of 2017, suggesting a willingness to coexist.
Whether that's in good faith or not I don't know.