zlacker

That's not surprising. They remember the scenes of ecstatic celebration on the streets of Gaza and the West Bank on october 7. And the fact is that the people of Gaza could end the conflict whenever they want. All they need to do is surrender and hand over the hostages. You might think i'm oversimplifying but actually that's really it.

>>Friday+(OP)
> All they need to do is surrender and hand over the hostages. You might think i'm oversimplifying but actually that's really it.

“The people of Gaza” have about as much chance of doing this as the ICC has of arresting and putting Netanyahu on trial.

>>Aeolun+r4
Maybe maybe not but i see no major movement in Gaza towards surrendering. Of course seeing how the UN and most media outlets are working so well to supress any anti hamas narratives in Gaza (it's either that, or everyone in Gaza supports hamas, an absurd suggestion but one which would ironically fully vindicate Israel. The dishonesty of the UN upsets me) , even if there was we would be unlikely to hear about it.

>>Friday+(OP)
Imagine if your city was invaded by a powerful enemy. They bomb the place to rubble. They blow up every hospital. They enact a blockade and hinder aid organizations from providing basic food. They do this for nearly two years straight and show no sign of stopping.

They say, “just surrender and it will all be over.” Are you going to trust that?

>>Friday+(OP)
What does surrender even mean here? How do Gazans surrender?

>>Friday+65
> Of course seeing how the UN and most media outlets are working so well to supress any anti hamas narratives in Gaza

... You have evidence of this? Or, are you making things up without any evidence at all to smear the UN; as we've seen Israel do countless times during this holocaust?

>>Friday+(OP)
The former prime minister of Israel Ehud Olmert has said Israel is committing war crimes in Gaza, and that “thousands of innocent Palestinians are being killed, as well as many Israeli soldiers”.

Olmert, who was the 12th prime minister of Israel from 2006 to 2009, wrote in an opinion piece for the Israeli newspaper and website Haaretz that “the government of Israel is currently waging a war without purpose, without goals or clear planning and with no chances of success”.

He added: “Never since its establishment has the state of Israel waged such a war … The criminal gang headed by Benjamin Netanyahu has set a precedent without equal in Israel’s history in this area, too.

https://www.haaretz.com/opinion/2025-05-27/ty-article-opinio...

>>wat100+Y9
Yes. In military terms it's known as a "defeat".

>>Friday+(OP)
I keep hearing the “the killing would end if Hamas would just release the hostages”. But the Israelis keep offering ceasefire terms that include full release of hostages but no permanent cessation of hostilities, only 60 days and not even temporary full withdrawal from Gaza.

Why do you think the Israelis want to keep their tanks in Gaza even after all the hostages come back? Why won’t they offer a full and permanent ceasefire? I think this hostage justification is just Israelis buying time so they can keep on doing what they actually always wanted, full ethnic cleansing of Gaza.

>>bglaze+I91
Nonsense. Anything less then a full military occupation of gaza for the medium term at least would be unacceptable. This is so blindingly obvious that it doesn't even need to be explained. Anyway it would benefit the gazans far more then a war every 5 years.

If they wanted to ethnically cleanse gaza they would have done so long before October 7. You don't seem to understand the reality of war and the consequences of being on the losing side. Nor of the constraints Israel would be forced to work with if they had total control of Gaza.

>>Friday+Ad1
You didn’t answer the question. Why won’t Israel commit to a permanent ceasefire if “the war ends when the hostages are released”? Why do they insist on being able to start the war again in 60 days if the hostages are all they want?

>>Friday+DT
Historically, being “defeated” by an enemy that’s committing mass murder of civilians doesn’t typically stop the killing.

>>bglaze+kg1
The hostages aren't all they want. from wikipedia:

>Israel's campaign has four stated goals: to destroy Hamas, to free the hostages, to ensure Gaza no longer poses a threat to Israel, and to return displaced residents of Northern Israel.

Pretty clear and i never suggested otherwise. I'm not sure where you got that idea from

>>Friday+gn1
Please, I really don’t think you’re discussing this in good faith.

“And the fact is that the people of Gaza could end the conflict whenever they want. All they need to do is surrender and hand over the hostages”

So no, Israel decides how and when the killing ends and apparently that’s when “Gaza no longer poses a threat”. Who knows what that means but apparently it involves mass starvation, firing tank rounds into crowds, and destroying every hospital.

>>bglaze+It1
I can't comment on specific actions, but it would definitely mean the destruction of hamas and islamic jihad as well as systematically removing all weapons from the gaza strip and the destruction of all tunnels and terror infrastructure. If they surrender the process can happen without loss of life (even the death of all militants can be avoided with a negotiated surrender)

Gaza was a pretty enormous threat, so neutralising it takes an enormous amount of effort. If you cared about the death and destruction of gaza you would be calling for the end of Hamas. It's not like Israel wants to be stuck in an endless conflict in Gaza i think it has shown many times in the recent past that it is prefers peace to war.

The word surrender is carrying quite a lot of meaning but it's still good faith on my part.

>>Friday+Ad1
Israel is currently paying contractors 5000 shekels per house they destroy in Gaza.

Is this a “reality of war”? Complete destruction of infrastructure? Perhaps every uninhabited house is actually Hamas.

If this isn’t ethnic cleansing, what is it?