Agreed.I have no idea if they should.
My instinct is yes, because I generally think less killing is better than more and usually ceasefires - even temporary - are where negotiations can move towards extending them.
That said, ceasefires are tactical things.
If a ceasefire is found to not be helping, people shouldn't agree to it.
I don't know nearly enough to make that call for either side.
Did you not just argue that maybe this one isn't good enough?What I do know is that people who loudly insisted that a ceasefire must happen NOW were mostly lying because the moment one was offered they said it wasn't good enough.
Agreed.I do know that people who said "Hamas can end the war instantly by returning the hostages" were lying because the Israeli government made it very clear that they weren't going to stop just because hostages were returned.
The stated goals of Israel were the return of the hostages AND the elimination of Hamas.I do know that people who said "Hamas can end the war instantly by returning the hostages" were lying because the Israeli government made it very clear that they weren't going to stop just because hostages were returned.
By killing all of Hamas, how far does that go?The stated goals of Israel were the return of the hostages AND the elimination of Hamas.
IMO, if Hamas returned all of the hostages and fully surrendered, then yes Israel would cease their current aggression.
If only 1 of those 2 goals is achieved, it is not enough. I'm pretty sure that Israel/Net has been clear and consistent on that since Day1, Oct.7.
