The United States Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield warned that if the Algerian proposed resolution calling for humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza were to come up for a vote as drafted, it would not be adopted by Washington.
The only thing that worked was negotiation. Pretending any of this is about releasing hostages just makes it clear you either haven’t been paying attention, or more likely, don’t actually have that as a primary goal.
It’s not pretending. Asking Israel to stop the conflict without demanding Hamas’s release of hostages is not only absurd but also unjust. Unless the goal is not a ceasefire but to let Hamas win by any means possible
it’s not pretending. Asking Israel to stop the genocide and slaughter of children.
There, fixed that for you.
What justice exists for the tens of thousands of west bank civilians held under military detention without trial? Are they not hostages? Or do only Israelis deserve to be called hostages?
The only absurdity here is a blood soaked baby murder justifying fuck using the word justice.
I repeat again: the only thing that worked for the Israelis to secure the release of their people was negotiation. So, how many hospitals do you want destroyed for ‘justice’? How many orphaned children do you want to undergo amputations without anesthesia? How many tent camps bombed? How many people do you want to die of starvation with bellies full of grass as sick fuck Israelis hold a rave in front of the trucks full of food so the trucks can’t enter?
What percentage of the Gazan population must die before your blood list is slaked? It’s already over 1% and well on is way to 2.
Again, the only thing that worked was negotiation. So using the hostages as a justification for the continued slaughter is probably just a pathetic attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
I gotta ask, how does 1 or 2% equal genocide. If you left that word out, your points would be more meaningful. I skipped all of what you said the first time I read that word. Not really sure what caused me to give it a second look. But most people won’t. And the rest of your points are good ones.
Because Genocide is a process, not an outcome. Literally. That is what the ICJ is going by, and why they found Israel is plausibly committing genocide.
Finally, the starvation is the real fucking kicker, as it is in most genocides. It just takes awhile to kick in. It takes awhile for food stores to deplete when you cut off access to food, then it takes about a month, give or take, for the first people to die, then it really starts to ramp up fast. The first Gazan’s died from starvation this last week.
Also, almost like it is a well known fact and useful for the people implementing the starvation, children die first in those conditions.
That 1 to 2 percent was the result of active killing from things like bombs, artillery, tank fire, and sniper fire. These are the most inefficient forms of killing an undesirable population.
A good rule of thumb is that any government withholding food, medicine, and potable water to a population that government considers undesirable is a government intentionally committing genocide. It’s not the official definition, but it works well for a shorthand.
You could go on for days I know. But the bottom line is if Hamas releases no hostages there will be no ceasefire. Rhetoric serves no purpose in achieving the goal of a ceasefire. BTW, a ceasefire means all hostilities cease, not just one party.
At this point, more have been killed by Israel.
The only thing that worked was negotiation. Pretending any of this is about releasing hostages just makes it clear you either haven’t been paying attention, or more likely, don’t actually have that as a primary goal.
It’s not pretending. Asking Israel to stop the conflict without demanding Hamas’s release of hostages is not only absurd but also unjust. Unless the goal is not a ceasefire but to let Hamas win by any means possible
There, fixed that for you.
What justice exists for the tens of thousands of west bank civilians held under military detention without trial? Are they not hostages? Or do only Israelis deserve to be called hostages?
The only absurdity here is a blood soaked baby murder justifying fuck using the word justice.
I repeat again: the only thing that worked for the Israelis to secure the release of their people was negotiation. So, how many hospitals do you want destroyed for ‘justice’? How many orphaned children do you want to undergo amputations without anesthesia? How many tent camps bombed? How many people do you want to die of starvation with bellies full of grass as sick fuck Israelis hold a rave in front of the trucks full of food so the trucks can’t enter?
What percentage of the Gazan population must die before your blood list is slaked? It’s already over 1% and well on is way to 2.
Again, the only thing that worked was negotiation. So using the hostages as a justification for the continued slaughter is probably just a pathetic attempt to justify the unjustifiable.
Never Again meant nothing to you, obviously.
I gotta ask, how does 1 or 2% equal genocide. If you left that word out, your points would be more meaningful. I skipped all of what you said the first time I read that word. Not really sure what caused me to give it a second look. But most people won’t. And the rest of your points are good ones.
Because Genocide is a process, not an outcome. Literally. That is what the ICJ is going by, and why they found Israel is plausibly committing genocide.
Finally, the starvation is the real fucking kicker, as it is in most genocides. It just takes awhile to kick in. It takes awhile for food stores to deplete when you cut off access to food, then it takes about a month, give or take, for the first people to die, then it really starts to ramp up fast. The first Gazan’s died from starvation this last week.
Also, almost like it is a well known fact and useful for the people implementing the starvation, children die first in those conditions.
That 1 to 2 percent was the result of active killing from things like bombs, artillery, tank fire, and sniper fire. These are the most inefficient forms of killing an undesirable population.
A good rule of thumb is that any government withholding food, medicine, and potable water to a population that government considers undesirable is a government intentionally committing genocide. It’s not the official definition, but it works well for a shorthand.
You’re so concerned with jingoistic rhetoric you forget the end goal is a ceasefire and it has to be a positive for both parties.
Okay, so what is the positive for the people of Gaza? An end to child murder?
An end to genocide?
Genocide encouragers such as yourself don’t get to use the word jingoistic.
One of us is arguing for an unconditional end to genocide.
The other believes genocide can be justified with the right words.
Tell me, what does Never Again mean to you?
You could go on for days I know. But the bottom line is if Hamas releases no hostages there will be no ceasefire. Rhetoric serves no purpose in achieving the goal of a ceasefire. BTW, a ceasefire means all hostilities cease, not just one party.
What does Never Again mean to you?
Is genocide ever justifiable?
Answer that, but I think you’re too much of a coward to do so.
That soapbox of yours is mighty high.
And you’re a sick fuck genocide justifier.
Soapboxes don’t have to be high at all to be taller than that.
You also didn’t answer the questions. Everyone reading this knows why.