Hamas is already back in those areas, and Hamas needs to be eliminated completely. Everything you post is just nonsense.
While Hamas has some discretion, the deal obligates them to release all living Israeli civilians, women, children and soldiers. Phase 2 and 3 cannot be achieved if they fail to act in good faith. This wasn't so different from previous hostage release deals, which Hamas honored. The sticking point previously was it must be a "permanent ceasefire", which Hamas wanted. That has now been replaced with "sustainable calm". The definition "sustainable calm" is not up to one party. Until there is a clear definition, it is ambiguous, which can give Israel room to maneuver. Israel controlled imports without a blockade prior to the war. In previous exchanges, Israel previously released hundreds of Palestinian prisoners that were children and women, many of whom hadn't yet been convicted of a crime, but were awaiting trial. Palestinian prisoners aren't automatically terrorists, not by Israel's own standard. Calling all of the Palestinian prisoners terrorists is incorrect. Compensation requires further discussion and to be worked out. It was incorrect to state it would be paid by Israel.
They were hoping - and were falsely led to believe - that trying to help Hamas establish governmental structures would help a de-radicalization, but the "Palestinian" hate ran way too deep. Your post is dumb.
One thing I appreciate from StupidMoniker is that he refrains from ad hominem attacks. Going there just weakens you. Control yourself and refrain. You can do it.
translation, he made you sound like a ****ing idiot for your moronic comparison and you're lashing out like a bich. You might as well change your avatar to "im stupid"
If they have no remaining living hostages, or kill those who remain, how is providing those bodies in accordance with the terms of the agreement acting in bad faith. As long as they provide a list by the seventh day which indicates they have no living hostages, they are in compliance with the deal. Or maybe their living hostages are male soldiers, which are the last group scheduled for release, so they can trade hundreds of bodies for thousands of living prisoners. This is a good deal how? The document (assuming it is genuine and an accurate translation) literally has a parenthetical after sustainable calm which defines it as "a permanent cessation of military and hostile operations." In what way is that ambiguous, or more ambiguous that a "permanent ceasefire"? The whole complaint before the war was that Israel was besieging Gaza. This deal calls for the siege to end (a complete end to the siege of the Gaza strip). How are they supposed to control or even monitor imports without control of land and sea ports of entry? Previously they released a number of people convicted of shootings, stabbings, bombings, etc. In fact, every female IDF soldier is explicitly valued in the text as requiring the release of 30 people convicted and serving life sentences, and 20 additional sentenced prisoners. What do you think they are convicted and serving life sentences for? Selling olives? Since there are two parties, and Hamas is clearly not saying that they are going to be paying compensation for the damages caused, that doesn't leave a lot of options for who they are talking about.
That is revisionist. They wanted to weaken the secularists. Their strategic goal was to divide and rule and to prevent a unified resistance. They mistakenly thought they could control the monsters they created. https://theintercept.com/2018/02/19/hamas-israel-palestine-conflict/ "Segev later told a New York Times reporter that he had helped finance the Palestinian Islamist movement as a “counterweight” to the secularists and leftists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Fatah party, led by Yasser Arafat (who himself referred to Hamas as “a creature of Israel.”)" “The Israeli government gave me a budget,” the retired brigadier general confessed, “and the military government gives to the mosques.” “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” Avner Cohen, a former Israeli religious affairs official who worked in Gaza for more than two decades, told the Wall Street Journal in 2009. Back in the mid-1980s, Cohen even wrote an official report to his superiors warning them not to play divide-and-rule in the Occupied Territories, by backing Palestinian Islamists against Palestinian secularists. “I … suggest focusing our efforts on finding ways to break up this monster before this reality jumps in our face,” he wrote. They didn’t listen to him. And Hamas, as I explain in the fifth installment of my short film series for The Intercept on blowback, was the result. To be clear: First, the Israelis helped build up a militant strain of Palestinian political Islam, in the form of Hamas and its Muslim Brotherhood precursors; then, the Israelis switched tack and tried to bomb, besiege, and blockade it out of existence.
Your leftist source made up many stories in the past and will - rightly - be gone soon. https://nypost.com/2024/04/15/media...-of-cash-amid-new-york-times-flap-report/amp/
So are you saying too that Netanyahu was like Chamberlain? Aren’t you the one they has been saying for years how you can’t trust or negotiate with “Islamists”? If we accept your argument then the ones who helped Hamas were the dumb ones.
I didn't make a comment on if the deal was good or not (if you want to know, just ask). I said your description of the deal is inaccurate, which I clearly pointed out why. With that said, responses are below. Deliberately killing remaining hostages to just provide bodies would be acting in absolutely bad faith and nullify the agreement. There is an expectation of them honoring the spirit of the deal. The Israelis will be making that judgment and I don't doubt they can judge. If they all happen to already be dead, th deal is probably going to be dead, and there won't be a phase 2 or phase 3. What constitutes "hostile operations" is itself open to interpretation. Minor protests, incursions, or isolated incidents could fall into a gray area. The phrasing still allows room for Israel to define the threshold before it deems the calm "unsustainable." I don't even think it rules out, if Israel wanted to, them simply claiming that as long as Hamas remains in power, there is no sustainable calm. Monitoring imports does not necessarily require an outright siege or blockade. International inspectors or a third-party security mechanism could be arranged to screen incoming goods in Gaza's ports and borders, as happens in other conflict zones. So Israel may still have realistic oversight options. And as stated before, they controlled imports prior to this war without outright siege or blockage. You are moving the goalposts. It's simply incorrect to assume all Palestinian prisoners are terrorists, by Israel's own standards. And as I stated, Israel released hundreds of children and women that were unconvicted prisoners. What were they jailed for? Many for throwing rocks during protests. It was incorrect to state Israel will pay. It's also incorrect to assume there are no other parties that might be involved in paying for the reconstruction. We simply don't know because it was not stated and the details would be ironed out later. If you want to guess, that's fair. My guess is it would involve the UN, some Arab nations and the US, along with Israel.
