Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
For one, this resolution would have granted the security council more powers to push for a ceasefire. A ceasefire would still have to be agreed on by both Israel and Hamas.
On the flip side of your comment, if Israel wanted the hostages released, they’d agree to a ceasefire. There really is no point in pretending they’re being handcuffed here. Hostages were released in the last ceasefire but not before, so it should be assumed that ceasefires = hostage releases, but not that hostage releases = ceasefires.
How fervently would you like it? I think it’s totally bizarre to single me out, considering my demands mean literally nothing (sorry, don’t have a direct line to Israel or Hamas) and I haven’t called for a ceasefire once.
At the end of the day, it’s less than 200 hostages vs thousands of innocent people dead. What do you think, honestly, should get more effort to put an end to?
A ceasefire involves two parties, and “they started it” is not a valid excuse to do whatever you want.
I highly doubt it, considering you’re busy making excuses for why Israel shouldn’t even agree to one in the first place.
|
Historically though it kind of is, Israel have the 'legal' right (not that I think international law is worth the paper it is written on) to engage in any length of offensive action and 'conquer' Gaza from end to end in order to defeat Hamas and if possible release it's citizens, it has an obligation to minimize but not prevent or avoid Civilian deaths.
The only side right now that has any reason to stop this is Hamas, they release all the prisoners and leave Gaza or surrender and it ends straight away, truth is though they dont give a tinkers