He just wants genocide. It's infuriating seeing world leaders pretend they don't get that so they can get what they want out of Palestinian deaths.
I’ll tell you a secret: he doesn’t want to get the hostages back yet. They’re serving as a casus belli right now.
Bibi doesn’t want peace, he wants genocide.
In Bibi's eyes, every day that Hamas continues to exist is a good day. If Hamas ever ceases to exist, Israelis might go back to questioning his corruption charges.
That's not very HaBibi of him
I'm amazed the comment above this got downvoted lol like just have a laugh and move on with your life
Well, color me surprised... he's seemed so interested in a peaceful resolution.
He doesn't give a shit about hostages.
If he did, they wouldn't be blowing up all of Gaza.
If any die from IDF strikes, he'll just say that Hamas killed them and use their deaths to justify more bombings.
That’s right. So far 60 hostages have gone missing due to Israeli strikes. So, yeah. They don’t give a single shit.
Dude had a chance to stop the whole thing in its tracks and didn't take it.
This has always been about taking the land.
All he cares about is escalation. The United States needs to ditch Israel before they get us attacked too.
Yep, he's seeing the opportunity to finally kick the Palestinians out.
Kick out? More like gun down.
Before? Dude, radical islamic extremists have been calling us "the great Satan" for decades lol
They hate us for our support of Israel and thousands of people have already died because of it.
At this point he doesn't have a choice. Hamas offered to release about a dozen hostages for a ceasefire.
The Israelis repeatedly declared that there won't be any ceasefire without the release of all the hostages.
If he accepts anything else he's most likely to loose all control.
He'll rather kill them all with his own hands rather than stop the war. The moment genocide is over he's next in line to get fucked. So long hostages. This is what you get for electing sociopaths I guess.
Of course he did.
The hostages are much more valuable to Israel in captivity, so they can continually exploit them for genocidal justifications.
This is simply not true.
There were talks about up to 15 hostages, of 239 in demand for 4 days of ceasefire. Hamas needs this ceasefire desperately to regroup and assess the damages. The chaos now serves Israel well and apparently it puts much more pressure on Hamas. The ground invasion proves very effective. Maybe as Hamas becomes more desperate the "price" for the hostages will drop. Alternatively, if Israel will allow them to regroup, the war will take significantly more time because it will be much harder to eradicate them. Maybe the Israelis know where the hostages are held and after a ceasefire the hostages will be transferred to a different hideout, or smuggled via the tunnels to Egypt and from there to who knows where.
Neutral and Israel alligned countries have been calling for a humanatarian pause on purely humanitarian grounds. Even if you don't care about the hostages, that Hamas was willing to offer them means that they had an interest in such a pause as well; making Israel the only obstacle to it happening. That is to say, the severity of the humanitarian disaster in Gaza is squarly on Israel's shoulders. The most charitable reading of the situation is that they have determined that the tactical advantage of blocking a humanitarian pause outways the civilian lives they put at risk by doing so.
Of course he doesn't want to de-escalate the situation.
If he did that, things might calm down and fewer people will vote based on his promises of being strong on security. Also if he did that, his hard-right backers (who need a hot conflict to keep taking Palestinian land politically acceptable) will attack him for being 'soft' on security.
The logic of it all is genocide of course, but Bibi wants that if the alternative is him being out of office and back in court defending himself against corruption charges.
For some of the hostages. Not all of the hostages.
Which is a very important distinction that people here seem to overlook. If you give in to a terrorist's and hostage taker's demands you're inviting more terrorism and hostage-taking because it worked.
I think Netanyahu has a similar look about his eyes as Putin? It's like they're monsters inside and are communicating how little empathy and concerns for others they have inside, almost as a warning. Anyone else feel the same thing?
I think it's the military training plus a little extra sociopath on the side.
One source with knowledge of the talks, which slowed after the Israeli ground invasion, said a central point of discussion was a demand by the Israeli side for Hamas to provide a full list specifying the name and details of each person held in Gaza. The Israeli side was unwilling to cease bombardments without receiving this list.
Hamas responded that it was unable to provide the list without a pause in the fighting, as the estimated 240 hostages were held by a number of different groups in places across Gaza. That suggested even Hamas leaders do not know for sure how many people are held captive, their locations or the number who have survived the bombardments.
Another source said Hamas originally demanded prisoner exchanges, fuel and other supplies in return for the hostages, but these demands were dropped in favour of a halt to the airstrikes alone.
“Each time the Israeli counter-demand got harder,” the source said. Members of Hamas have previously said they took hostages in order to exchange them for the thousands of Palestinian prisoners held in Israeli jails.
...
Sources briefed on the talks told Reuters that the group discussed allowing small amounts of fuel into Gaza for humanitarian purposes, which Israel has so far refused, as well as the deal to free a small number of hostages in exchange for a ceasefire of one or two days. The outcome of the talks, however, remained unclear.
It sounds like these sources may be members of Hamas' negotiating team, which I don't exactly know that that's a reliable source.
It doesnt sound like complete BS that Hamas probably doesnt know the exact number, names and placement of hostages at the moment. They probably have a good idea but no definite list.
When Putin was invading Ukraine everyone was calling for the Russians to just kill Putin. When Hamas invaded everyone was calling for the Palestinians to kill Hamas themselves.
Awfully silent these days though now israel is the party committing war crimes.
Telling Palestinians to kill Hamas leaders is useless because the top Hamas leaders are actually living abroad, unlike Putin who stay cooped in Russia.
Globally, we're going to need to develop approaches for de-radicalizing large groups of people. Even if we can start on the direction towards peace in this situation, both the Israeli and some segments of Palestinian people seem radicalized to the point of no return, where no true solutions is even possible. I see the same thing in the US with whatever tf you want to call the Republican party. They're over the cliff. No pulling them back. Yet we need a way to de-radicalize these people otherwise there is no path forward.
You dont have to leave Israel and palestine to find more groups. Have you seen what kinds of people bibi is courting to stay in power? Ultra-orthodox far right netters who are publically asking for a cleansed ethno-state.
Scum propping up scum as always.
Considering it wasn't a return of all of the hostages and additionally Hamas said they intend to repeat the terrorist attack that sparked this, what motivation does Netanyahu have to stop until Hamas is destroyed?
That Hamas did was abhorrent, as was the response of Israel.
What motivation do Hamas have to just take the current occupation of Gaza and living in such a way? Genuinely curious.
This just seems like nobody will win and everybody will suffer. For what?
Well, lucky for him he didn't even entertain the ceasefire to see if he could have gotten them all back.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Benjamin Netanyahu rejected a deal for a five-day ceasefire with Palestinian militant groups in Gaza in return for the release of some of the hostages held in the territory early in the war, according to sources familiar with the negotiations.
Negotiations resumed after the launch of the Israeli ground offensive on 27 October, but the same sources said Netanyahu had continued to take a tough line on proposals involving ceasefires of different durations in exchange for a varying number of hostages.
An estimated 240 people were taken hostage after fighters from Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and other groups based in Gaza, as well as civilians, crossed the reinforced border fence separating the territory from Israeli towns and kibbutzim.
According to three sources familiar with the talks, the original deal on the table involved freeing children, women and elderly and sick people in exchange for a five-day ceasefire, but the Israeli government turned this down and demonstrated its rejection with the launch of the ground offensive.
On Thursday the US national security council spokesperson John Kirby said Israel had agreed to daily four-hour “humanitarian pauses”, with the aim that the small breaks in bombardments could aid the passage of hostages out of Gaza.
In mid-October, the former Mossad operative David Meidan, who negotiated the release of the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit from Gaza over a decade ago, told Haaretz: “There’s no doubt that the first issue the state has to deal with is the matter of the captives … The window of opportunity for this is very narrow.
The original article contains 1,382 words, the summary contains 257 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. 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.
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.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/