You can get a unilateral ceasefire.
It tends to be short lived and unstable, though.
The Discussion That Anti-Zionism is Not Anti-Semitism
- Thread starter shack
- Start date
It tends to be short lived and unstable, though.
When both sides think not fighting will be better than fighting and agree to terms.
Many is a very vague term. Are you able to quantify it so that we both know what the parameters are. Your sources for these numbers would be appreciated.
Have you ever accused anyone of supporting genocide or apartheid?
If you have, then you've confessed every time.
I don't have a ladder tall enough to climb back out if I go all the way down there.
One side did and agreed to the the terms proposed, working with the US.
Then the other refused.
Yes, I confess to accusing you of backing genocide and apartheid.
So that's a confession I accuse people of backing war crimes when they support war crimes.
You and other KKK have used that phrase dozens of times and don't know what it means? Clearly you already know what the phrase means.
Every accusation is a confession, hammy.
Accusing others of racism while back a KKK like Jewish supremacy through zionism is a perfect example.
I argue for equal rights and the law, you argue for apartheid and genocide.
That's fair, but then why worry about ceasefire negotiations if you believe that?
You, yourself, have repeatedly said Hamas shouldn't accept ceasefire conditions it doesn't agree to.
Why would you expect the other side to not do the same?
Your own description of the agreement excludes the Israeli government from being part of the agreement.
This is like the people who think the US and Russia should negotiate a ceasefire for Ukraine.
The situation has changed.
Ceasefire was offered and Israel chose to cross the US's red line and attack Rafah.
No, this isn't about the US. Its just become more clear that Netanyahu was dangling the possibility of a ceasefire the way he dangled the two state solution during Oslo while installing 'facts on the ground'.
Netanyahu ‘doesn’t know how to deal with this’
Rami Khouri, distinguished public policy fellow at the American University of Beirut, says Israel’s prime minister faces intense pressure from at least half a dozen different sources in the country as he struggles to juggle various forces.
Speaking to Al Jazeera, Khouri said, “He can’t achieve his war aims. He can’t look weak. He has to keep fighting and he’s probably looking at a position now where he thinks he and his right-wing partners can drive Palestinians out of Gaza.
“I think Netanyahu has a military problem on his hands. But he’s also got a political problem domestically, a diplomatic problem with the US, and the whole world is up in arms to support the Palestinians. And he doesn’t know how to deal with this.”
None of which is relevant to the point you seemed to be arguing - that a ceasefire only happens when both sides decide fighting isn't better.
In fact, this just shows I was right.
Israel still thinks it can get what it wants by fighting, so a ceasefire isn't going to happen.
Now it looks like Gantz might be the one to stop the genocide.
Discussion of ceasefires are moot now, its clear that the genocide continues until Netanyahu is stopped.
Biden won't stop him, his red lines are for show only.
There are no military goals left, Israel can't defeat Hamas and can only kill the hostages by continuing.
You aren't right though, its not Israel getting what it wants its Netanyahu trying to keep his political career at the cost of Gaza and zionism.
I find it so interesting that you repeatedly quote Israeli voices and admit that there is a vocal anti-government and pro-peace activist community but at the same time you demand they all get boycotted and the country gets eliminated.
I have many times said the Good Friday Agreement was a good model for moving forward but your only 'solution' is still eliminating the Jewish presence and ignoring any wrongs done by Palestinian leadership.
