DOHA, Feb 7 (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Wednesday total victory in Gaza was within reach, rejecting the latest offer from Hamas for a ceasefire to ensure the return of hostages still held in the besieged enclave.

Netanyahu renewed a pledge to destroy the Palestinian Islamist movement, saying there was no alternative for Israel but bringing about the collapse of Hamas.

“The day after is the day after Hamas. All of Hamas,” he told a press conference, insisting that total victory against Hamas was the only solution to the Gaza war.

  • @IchNichtenLichten
    link
    English
    8811 months ago

    “Total victory”?

    Sounds like this stain on humanity wants some kind of “final solution”

    • InfiniteGlitch
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2911 months ago

      The thing is, it will never happen.

      Sure, they might “win” in terms of military and/or stealing land. But as long as they keep oppressing, stealing and murdering - there will be people fighting against it.

      Even if there’s no Palestinian left on Palestinian ground. There will be people from different countries fighting back. One way or another.

      “If peaceful revolution is not possible, violent revolution is inevitable”.

      This whole thing seems to be a never-ending cycle which makes me immensely sad. For both, the Palestinian people and the normal civilians of Israel.

      From what I have read and heard, Israel haven’t seen any actual peace ever since they made the state. I think, they’ve been on ‘high alert for attacks’ ever since being made. Correct me if I’m wrong though.

      • @IchNichtenLichten
        link
        English
        1211 months ago

        I wouldn’t say “never”.

        Peace can happen but the Israelis need to remove Netanyahu and elect somebody who actually wants a two state solution. After that, there’s a whole lot of diplomacy from both sides needed, free Palestinian elections, stolen land being returned, removal of blockades and control of infrastructure, and so on.

        It’s not impossible, just really, really difficult. Especially with leadership on both sides not being especially interested in peace. That’s why Bibi needs to be slung out of office ASAP. Nothing good will happen while that monster has power.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness
          link
          fedilink
          611 months ago

          You’re right in general, but Bibi is a symptom, not a cause. The Israeli public has always been pro-genocide, and they’re shifting to, not away, from the right. We need to recognize that a solution is only possible if the international community forces Israel to compromise.

          • @IchNichtenLichten
            link
            English
            111 months ago

            They need to decide if the next asshole strongman who promises to keep them safe is worth their vote, because the current one has completely failed them.

        • @Crashumbc
          link
          English
          -4
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          No, because you’re forgetting, Palestines don’t want peace either. They’ll accept any deal they can get. But a soon as they rebuild…

          Bang fighting starts again.

            • @Crashumbc
              link
              English
              -1
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Yes, well most of them.

              It’s literally in their fucking charter… Do you read?

              NOT that Israel is any different, they don’t plan on stopping until they have taken all that land… And probably finished the genocide their currently committing…

      • @EvergreenGuru
        link
        English
        311 months ago

        That’s just the price of being an invader nation. By definition, Israel can never know peace, only armistices between further acts of war. Unless they manage to genocide Palestinians world wide, they will always face attacks on their invader population/infrastructure/society. It’s a feature of colonization. Netanyahu knows this, but is trying to maintain his position by bringing home an unattainable victory.

        • @Crashumbc
          link
          English
          011 months ago

          It’s not just Palestines, it’s most of Muslims…

    • @thesprongler
      link
      English
      911 months ago

      He thinks he’s playing Risk. Except Palestinians are not little wooden cubes, they’re fucking people.

    • themeatbridge
      link
      English
      111 months ago

      No, Bibi is just training to climb Mount Midoriyama 完全制覇

  • @apfelwoiSchoppen
    link
    English
    41
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Genocider openly stating genocidal intentions, again.

  • @givesomefucks
    link
    English
    1811 months ago

    “Every visit from Blinken, instead of calming things down, it just makes things worse, we get more strikes, we get more bombing,” said mourner Mohammad Abundi.

    Probably because Biden has spent literally 50 years pledging unwavering support to Israel no matter what…

    They know that as long as Biden is in office, they can do whatever they want.

    And if it’s trump, they just have to stroke his ego occasionally.

    Israel wins no matter what, neither option will hold them accountable

    • @Rapidcreek
      link
      English
      611 months ago

      Biden is only continuing a support of a country since that country’s creation. No different than any other President since Truman.

      At least Blinken is doing his job trying to make Peace.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1211 months ago

    Wearing the military strategy hat for a second, how exactly can he/the IDF achieve “total victory” over Hamas and de-militarize Gaza?

    • Can the IDF actually physically achieve that goal (irrespective of laws or decency, just raw power) given the loss of people, machinery, and support from allies already felt?
    • Can the Israeli state afford that kind of protracted engagement, given the use of reservists causes a huge negative cash flow with lost taxes and soldier payouts? War is expensive enough just from materiel and consumables.
    • Can they afford to be occupied in Gaza that long, while Hezbollah continues to fire missiles across the northern border?

    No, or not at least without putting the Israeli state as a whole at significant risk. It’s absurd to pretend that Gaza can be demilitarized, even if the IDF demolishes every house they can see. Before Hamas there was Fatah, before Fatah there was the fedayeen, before the fedayeen… you cannot kill the ideal of Palestinian statehood without a genocide.

    • FuglyDuck
      link
      English
      111 months ago

      They have nukes. So, like. It’d be fairly pyrrhic….

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        611 months ago

        Nukes. Against who exactly? Nukes only hold value against nations and battle groups, not terrorists on your doorstep

        • FuglyDuck
          link
          English
          4
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Did I not say it would be pyrrhic?

          You asked if they had the military power to wipe out Hamas, which, yes. They do. Using nukes would likely harm them at least as much as Gaza/west bank, even if it didn’t proceed to trigger mutually assured destruction.

  • Infiltrated_ad8271
    link
    fedilink
    1111 months ago

    “Continued military pressure is a necessary condition for the release of the hostages.”

    Wait, they still haven’t changed their excuse? Even if it’s known that it’s the IDF that are slaughtering them?

  • @Aceticon
    link
    English
    9
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Going for a “Final Solution” for the “Palestenian Problem” …

    • @Aceticon
      link
      English
      011 months ago

      For fks sake, MediaBiasFactCheck is a propaganda op who even give a Highly Trustworth rate to the Times Of Israel who regularly publish proven bullshit.

  • @ghostdoggtv
    link
    English
    311 months ago

    Israel embraces war and war will never let them go

  • @BaardFigur
    link
    English
    1
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    deleted by creator

  • @Arete
    link
    English
    -711 months ago

    Would America have accepted a full withdrawal from Afghanistan and truce with Al-Qaeda 4 months after 9/11 in exchange for ~3000 American hostages?

    Some certainly would, but I think the majority would take a “we don’t negotiate with terrorists” stance.

    • NoneOfUrBusiness
      link
      fedilink
      811 months ago

      You’re talking like Afghanistan was a massive success and not part of how ISIS became what it was at its peak.

      • @Arete
        link
        English
        011 months ago

        Ignoring for the moment that ISIS is from Iraq and Syria, I was purely commenting on what would have popular support in Israel. I did not advocate for anything.

        • NoneOfUrBusiness
          link
          fedilink
          211 months ago

          Ignoring for the moment that ISIS is from Iraq and Syria,

          They absorbed militants from the weakened Al Qaeda.

          • @Arete
            link
            English
            111 months ago

            Yes, but those are from AQI (Al-Qaeda in Iraq). We’re talking about Afghanistan, which is like 2000km away from where ISIS operates.

            And again, whether you think the American response to 9/11 was good or not is irrelevant to my original comment.

    • @Maalus
      link
      English
      611 months ago

      Except in your scenario, Al Qaeda was funded by Bush and rose out of a population that was bombed, abused, relocated and killed for decades before.

      These two situations aren’t comparable.

      • @Arete
        link
        English
        511 months ago

        … The CIA funded Al-Qaeda, which rose out of a population bombed, abused, relocated, and killed for decades before.

        It’s like, exactly comparable.

        • @ralphio
          link
          English
          911 months ago

          Close. The CIA is thought to have funded the Mujahideen, funneling money and arms through Pakistan. Some of them would become the Taliban later.

          As for Al Queda, it’s possible that they did as well, but generally thought to be unlikely. The reason being is that Bin Laden had more than enough money personally since his dad was a wealthy construction magnate with ties to the KSA royal family.

          As a side note, the push by the US and KSA to put religious extremists in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets undoubtedly played a role in the strength of the Taliban and Al Queda in the 90’s.

          • @Arete
            link
            English
            311 months ago

            Agreed completely, I was oversimplifying and largely not drawing a clean distinction between the various groups.