Independent Sen. Bernie Sanders said Sunday he doesn’t know that a ceasefire is possible in the Israel-Hamas war with “an organization like Hamas” involved.

“I don’t know how you can have a ceasefire, (a) permanent ceasefire, with an organization like Hamas, which is dedicated to turmoil and chaos and destroying the state of Israel,” Sanders told CNN’s Dana Bash on “State of the Union” Sunday.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness
    link
    fedilink
    -31 year ago

    That’s why it’s yes and no, the original blockade no, the much stricter one that is in effect today was however a direct result of Hamas’s first war crime after being voted into office.

    Which was a result of the first blockade. You say lesser, and while it was more lenient that doesn’t mean it was fine. Israeli actions in late 2005/2006 destroyed the Gazan economy, and had large destructive effects on the West Bank’s.

    • @bustrpoindextr
      link
      7
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I never said it was fine, but no Hamas’s first war crime in Gaza after taking control was not because of the blockade. They straight up publicly executed their political opponents in the Palestinian Authority. You can’t do that and not be labeled terrorists.

      But yeah their first war crime in office wasn’t even against Israel, it was against fellow Palestinians.

      • NoneOfUrBusiness
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Oh you’re talking about that. Yeah that’s just indefensible, but I don’t see how that meant a permanent blockade was the right move. It was nothing short of pure tyranny.

        Also, how was the blockade supposed to be temporary? It lasted for more than a year and a half and showed no signs of being lifted. It only seems to me like Israel took the chance to tighten the blockade.

        • @bustrpoindextr
          link
          3
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well, yeah so we have to take that with a grain a salt. It was claimed that the original blockade was meant to be temporary and the reason it went draconian instead of ending after the transition of power was because the transition of power was violent.

          But yeah, just because those are the claims doesn’t mean it’s actually true, you’re correct.

          Edit: found it under “description of plan” https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza

          Eventually Gaza was supposed to be opened up and have the airport rebuilt etc etc, whether you take the plan was in good faith though is another thing.