Israel-Lebanon permanent ceasefire has been accepted, Biden says
Israel and Lebanon have agreed to a permanent ceasefire in cross-border hostilities between the Jewish state and Hezbollah militants.
您正在查看单个线程.
Sooo...what about Gaza, Biden? What about Palestine, Biden? Eh? Eh??
GOOD NEWS IS NEVER ENOUGH! WE DEMAND EVERYTHING BE FIXED AT THE SAME TIME! RAAAAHHHH
Nothing is fixed. There are no penalties whatsoever for Israel if they break this ceasefire, and that is by design. Israel wants to pause and reload. When they are ready, they will find an excuse and start right back up. They want that land, and they are going to get it with our help.
There was a ceasefire between Hezbollah and Israel from 2006 until October 8th 2023. Then Hezbollah attacked Israel for a year causing tens of thousands of Israelis to flee the north, before the IDF went in to stop the attacks.
Hezbollah should not have even been in southern Lebanon according to UNSC resolution 1701.
Was Israel really attacked In October 2023? This is the first I heard of it. So weird for something like that to just happen out of the clear blue sky to such wonderful people who definitely didn't provoke it or anything.
Sure there’s a history behind everything. This escalations started on October 7th 2023. It remains the day with the most violent deaths in one day for all of the wars involving Israel.
I'm sorry (not really) but decades of watching Israel unnecessarily provoke Palestine with apartheid dominance and unjustified illegal land grabs, I'm fucking done with "both sides". The prejudices might be symmetrical, but only Israel had the power to alter the dynamics, and they chose the path to violence.
How do you think Israel should have have reacted to October 7th 2023?
I think they should have committed genocide. /s
No answer is also an answer.
I'm just not interested in your games. The topic is what they did do. The possibilities of what they could have done are limitless, and you can nitpick the potential flaws of any response. What they did do and what they are still doing is a genocide, and the culmination of decades of Israel paving the way for it to happen.
What about Sudan Biden? What about mexico biden? What about DRC biden? What about Myanmar Biden? Eh eh eh ??!!
Is this really how your mind operates?
Are you really denying Biden clear complicity with Israel crimes?
I'm questioning the first comment's rethoric.
He is asking Biden to at least advocate for imposing pressure on Israelis if it can't do it
That's a surprising, to me, interpretation of that comment. Can you please point out to me where the comment argued for diplomacy?
Just use your deductive reasoning
Sure. Line-by-line we venture:
Sooo...what about Gaza, Biden?
No indication of argueing for diplomacy
What about Palestine, Biden?
Idem
Eh?
Idem
Eh??
Idem
In conclusion: to the best of my abilities, I fail to see how this comment argues for diplomacy.
"He is asking Biden to at least advocate for imposing pressure on Israelis if it can't do it", so far as I can see, that tought is not present in that comment.
Israel only stop what they does when they are pressured to do so. If you think that stopping arming them wouldn't make them stop the war of Gaza, I don't know what else I can say to you
Is it possible that you do not understand the meaning of the word rhetoric?
I'm sure if Hamas agreed to retreat 20 miles from the border they'd get the same deal
I am sure if Israel didn't decide to invade the West bank and Gaza in 67 they would live in peace
I'm not sure if you're joking, but if you're not, you might want to read a little about the war you're referencing.
Israel invaded those territories because Jordan and Egypt were using them to launch a surprise attack.
"Live in peace" is a bit subjective in your example lol
I love of israelis themselves expose those lies
The Egyptian Army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him. - Mossad Chief Meir Amit
This entire story about the danger of extermination was invented and exaggerated after the fact to justify the annexation of new Arab territories“. - Israeli Minister Mordecai Bentov
They attacked on a Monday, knowing that on Wednesday the Egyptian vice-president would arrive in Washington to talk about re-opening the Strait of Tiran. We might not have succeeded in getting Egypt to reopen the strait, but it was a real possibility.” - Dean Rusk, the American Secretary of State at that time
We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn’t possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn’t shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance farther, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot. And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that’s how it was. - Israeli general Moshe Dayan
You seem to have a very one sided view on this.
Nasser and his allies knew that restarting their naval blockade would be a cause for war for Israel. They massed troops on the borders, threw out the peacekeepers overseeing the Strait and then announced they would be restarting their blockade.
So was it a certainty that the muslim coalition was going to attack Israel first? No. Would a naval blockade and enemy troops ready to cross their borders from all sides be a tenable situation for Israel? I don't know if you're familiar with the map of Israel but having 'unfriendly' troops in the West Bank creates a huge strategic problem. They chose not to take the risk and destroy or scare them away.
You're certainly right that the ultrazionists made sure not to 'miss any opportunity' when it came to the spoils of war. But it's also wrong to ignore that the opportunity to do so was largely given to them by their hostile neighbours.
Of course I would be one sided when zionists leaders admitted that the plan what occupation. Nasser was ready to for a diplomatic solution but Israel decided to colonize more part of Arabs countries.
Your excuse is similar to saying Ukraine and the us knew that Russia wouldn't accept a country to join the coalition that was specifically created to fight the URSS, this doesn't give Russia the right to invade ukraine.
The quote about the Syrian side is very clear about Israel trying to provoke wars
after the formation of a large army in the wake of the establishment of the state, we will abolish partition and expand to the whole of Palestine - Israel first prime minister
Partition might be only a temporary arrangement for the next twenty to twenty-five years”. - Israel first president Chaim Weizmann It is not a coincidence that Gaza and the West bank was occupied in that time frame
Gaza is only 25 miles long and, at it's widest, 7.5 miles thick. It's literally impossible to move 20 miles from the border.
Uh... So Israel can settle it? No fucking thanks. And in the first place Gaza is only 25 miles long.
I'm sorry I have to explain this. In the case of Hezbollah, they're agreeing to retreat to a distance from the border from where they can't (significantly) attack Israel again. The poster I'm replying to questions why Israel can't (be forced to) make a similar deal with Hamas. I'm using sarcasm to point to an important reason why
I didn't see a thing stating Hezbollah agreed on that article.
Are you suggesting that Hezbollah didn't agree to the deal, or that that's not part of it? Cause I didn't see anything that either of those would be the case, and plenty of the contrary.
The Lebanese government is a basket case, and the Lebanese military is likely weaker than Hezbollah.
Any article that does not explicitly state that Hezbollah (and not simply the Lebanese government) agreed to a ceasefire is not stating anything of substance.
Now, Hezbollah said they'd make a statement today about this deal, and I haven't seen the outcome of that yet. They may have agreed to it today.
The point is, however, that this specific article didn't say what the person above said it did. Namely that Hezbollah agreed to anything.
20 miles from the border is in the Sea... Which shows again how anything short of total annihilation of anyone question Israel supremacy seems insufficient for Israel and its supporters.
Then how about disarmament within 20 miles?
If Israel also disarms in all of its currently controlled territory, which is the meaning of the 20 miles in Gaza then sure.
If Palestinians should roll over and wait for Israel to finish its genocide then obviously not.
Did Hezbollah's deal include total disarmament by Israel?
So you’re suggesting ethnic cleansing. You don’t have to say it because that’s the only possible consequence of your suggestion. Absolutely disgusting.
Is membership of Hamas or Hezbollah an ethnicity for you?
are you pretending the killing has been limited to hamas or hezbollah? thats not what the israeli leadership has been saying.
Let me ask the person that is the designated Hamas spokesman according to Israel, must have learned to read and write by now, possibly even how to ride a bicycle if Israel hasn’t bombed his school Hamas command center yet.
So youre saying divest isreal isn't anti semetic?
I'm saying anyone claiming divest israel is antisemitic should be put on a train
you missed the boycott and sanction parts. Its boycott divest and sanction.
lol@everyone ACKCHYUALLY'ing this comment.
This is what people acting in bad faith do; constantly moving the goalposts so that they are never satisfied with the people who they never intended to give credit in the first place. There could be a ceasefire in Gaza tomorrow and people would find some new shit to gripe about.
Welcome to the hamster wheel of modern political hackery.
A ceasefire tomorrow doesn't eliminate or make up for war crimes today. There should be no satisfaction until the criminals are brought to justice.
I wonder if it's a conscious choice
Hamas is free to agree to a ceasefire at any time of their choosing, contingent mostly on their willingness to hand over the remaining hostages. Allah knows they've had many opportunities thus far, so what's stopping them?
Hamas proposed a full prisoner swap as early as Oct 8th, and agreed to the US proposed UN Permanent Ceasefire Resolution. Additionally, Hamas has already agreed to no longer govern the Gaza Strip, as long as Palestinians receive liberation and a unified government can take place.
This isnt about the hostages, this is Israel engaging in Genocide to eradicate and forcibly displace the Palestinian people. Gaza has never stopped being under Israeli occupation since 1967. Hamas only exists because of the Apartheid Occupation of Israel and the daily violence that has subjected Palestinians to for generations. Israel has always been the obstacle for peace, and has been the one preventing a ceasefire.
This like saying Ukraine is free to agree to Russians and make huge concessions
Yeah if Ukraine invaded Russia, executed some children and took hundreds of hostages, then it's exactly the same
Russia occupied part of Ukraine and Israel occupied the West bank and imposing a devastating blockade in Gaza. The comparison is very accurate. Arresting people including kids in occupied West bank is literally kidnapping. Israelis been killing Palestinians including kids since it's creation
Ok so Ukraine held part of Russia after a previous conflict and was kidnapping kids there, causing Russia to invade Crimea
Sorry that's a perfect comparison indeed
Maybe you can draw parallels with the Khmer Rouge as well to clear things up for us
So you are going to ignore the valid comparison that Israel and Russia are the occupiers therefore responsible from the legitimate and illegitimate attacks by the occupied and you are going to ignore Israelis kidnapping and killing palestinians for decades?
I'm saying the history of the creation, partition and fighting over Palestine is a little bit different from the history of Russia, Ukraine and the Donbas
If you want to talk about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and all its horrors including the prisoner situation we can, I don't need you to ignore it. But it's dumb to want to pull that into a discussion on why that would somehow make the conflict the same as Rus vs Ukr
It's dumb to oppose one colonizer and defend the other. It just shows your hypocrisy
Who am I defending?
That's a weird way of saying Russia gave Crimea to Ukraine in the 50s.
Well technically the USSR took it from Russia and gave it to Ukraine.
Anyway if you go back far enough the Russians stole it from the Crimeans and later deported all of them, replacing the entire population of the peninsula with proud Russians, ready to man the naval base.
How's that for a comparison with Palestine lol
Hey, do you just speak your mind with no idea of what's actually happening?
