WDSmart

Again, I agree that Hamas wants to continue to rule Palestine, but their motive is not just to "terrorize Israel." They do that as one of their tactics to drive Israelis out of what they consider to be their land. And I agree that this is not a totally acceptable tactic now, but one that has been used worldwide countless times. It's what a small group can do to a larger group that has more military might to cause chaos in their opponent's ranks. Here are two links with the information you asked for. Both sides' "provocation" is the goal of possessing the entire territory for themselves — a one-state solution. The first details a history of the conflict: History of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict - Wikipedia The second speaks specifically about rape and sexual abuse by the IDF during the current events: UN experts speak out about sexual assault and mistreatment of Palestinian women and girls by IDF | The Independent

This happened to me when I was working in India. They have a lot of monkeys everywhere. Like this woman, I was walking back to my apartment from a local open-aid market carrying a small bag of produce. A monkey snatched my bag and tore it open. I immediately turned around and moved toward him, stamping my foot on the ground. He looked up at me and snarled, bearing his teeth, so I just backed off and let him have the produce. 😦

I agree that referring to Hamas militants as "freedom fighters" is controversial, but there is a thread of truth in that. They are fighting for the freedom of the Palestinian people to live in and control their own state. I now refer to them as "militants," which is defined in the online Oxford Language Dictionary as: "favouring confrontational or violent methods in support of a political or social cause." That definition, by the way, also should apply to Zionists in Israel but not to all of the IDF. There are plenty of instances of Israeli militants torturing, killing, "raping and sexually abusing Palestinians." This has happened countless times over the past 80 years. However, I've never read about a single instance as directed and horrific as the Hamas Oct 7 terrorist attack.

I agree with that, and also hope the same happens with Zionists governing Isrealis.

That's a good question, and, of course, I don't have the answer, but I do have three possibilities: 1. They might not be able to do that since some/many of the hostages are being held by factions that Hamas does not directly control. Compiling a list like that might be very difficult for them to do without a ceasefire to allow them better communication. 2. They might know that many of the supposed 130+ hostages are now dead, and that would be a very distressing thing to have to reveal to Israel and increase the value of the 30 hostages proposed in the ceasefire. By that, I mean if there were 130 hostages, releasing 30 would still give them 110 left. If they only had 60 live hostages, releasing 30 now would only give them 30 left. 3. They might not want to reveal all the hostages' names, ages, genders, etc., to prevent Israel from demanding the release of 30 specific hostages, like 30 women and children. Hamas might want to keep some hostages like these because they know they are valued more by Israel. That's the only three reasons I can think of...

Okay, here's what I heard on CNN this morning: Hamas has returned a counterproposal that eliminates the demand they release the 30 hostages' names before the ceasefire. That's the only condition I remember being reported, but I'm sure there are more. My point is this is still a negotiation and still has about three days left before the "deadline.". I just found a CNN link... Hamas responds to ceasefire proposal but accuses Israel of ‘stalling’ (msn.com)

I generally agree with you, but IMO, a two-state solution is the only solution that will even come close to creating an environment for a lasting "peace." I've said repeatedly that as long as the extreme, right-wing, nationalistic factions on both sides are in the leadership, this will be virtually impossible. However, if the Palestinians abandon Hamas and Israelis abandon the ZIonits, AND the UN and other third parties put pressure on them, just MAYBE a two-state solution can be negotiated.

Okay, how about this one then? Israel-Hamas war: Agreement on ceasefire, release of hostages in Gaza edges closer | Newshub

I've assumed Rafah is a city in the "state" of Gaza, so I just used "Gaza." But, yes, I agree, the Israelis are threatening a ground invasion of Rafah

No, I don't think it was unreasonable..., but this is a negotiation, and I realize Hamas may have concerns and other items they'd like to see addressed. But, the supposed deadline for an agreement is not until the start of Taylor Swift's Eras Tour concert in France, which is only three days away now. Also, even though the deal offered was only for 30 or so hostages in exchange for 400 prisoners and a six-week ceasefire, as soon as Hamas releases hostages, they are gone. Israel can agree to a ceasefire but start operations again whenever they want. that will, IMO, mean Hamas will have to make sure that any FINAL release of ALL hostages will have to include a PERMANENT ceasefire that some third party, like the UN, enforces.

The last report I saw on CNN said Hamas did respond with a counterproposal and is now waiting for a response. Here is a link to another source that gives more details on the counterproposal. US, Israel responsible for any ceasefire deal failure: Hamas - IRNA English

I also think the Oct 7 attack was "barbarism," but such attacks and raids, although smaller, have been conducted by both sides for at least the last 75 years. And, yes, Hamas will "milk" their hostages because that, right now, is their most valuable bargaining chip. Israel's most valuable chip is its military might. I, too, would like to see Hamas "out of the picture." I would like to see the Zionist faction in Israel "out of the picture" also. Unfortunately, right now, both sides are led by these ultra-right-wing, nationalistic factions, and that doesn't bode well for any long-term agreement that would include a two-state solution. But, for now, we'll have to wait and see what happens with this current proposal, which involves a trade of 40 or so hostages for 400 prisoners Israel has and a six-week ceasefire. We shouldn't have to wait too long to find out if this will happen since Israel has said it must be agreed to before the next Taylor Swift Eras Tour concert in France, or they will start a ground invasion of Gaza.

Yes, I've heard about the proposed ceasefire on CNN. The proposal is as you say above, and Hamas' inability or unwillingness to give Israel more information about the hostages is the sticking point right now, or so it has been reported. Hopefully, this can be worked out, and a six-week ceasefire will commence on the start date of Taylor Swift's Eras Tour first concert in France. I hope that during those six weeks, more talks can produce a subsequent, more permanent ceasefire agreement that will include the return of all hostages and, as I keep saying, talks on a two-state solution.

Yes, It's in Hamas' hands now. I suspect they will come back with a counteroffer which will be something like: - a release of ALL hostages and an exchange of prisoners; - a PERMANENT ceasefire; - a UN peacekeeping force on site to enforce the agreement; - a beginning of negotiations on a two-state solution. All to be enacted before the begining of the Taylor Swift concert in Nanterre, France or Ramadan, depending on the calendar you go by.

Well, that depends on what you mean by "surrender." If you mean that Hamas agrees to... - return all the hostages; - commit to a ceasefire also; - engage in talks to establish a two-state solution; ...then, I think Israel might not accept that. If you mean that Hamas agrees to... - return all the hostages; - commit to a ceasefire also; - accepts living in a one-state solution under complete Israeli control; ...then, I think Israel would gladly accept that.

There's a new Topic on this Forum about the recent UN allegation of rape and other mistreatment of Israeli civilians on Oct 7 and now of the hostages that Hamas has. I'm sure it would also be of interest to those on this Topic. Its link is:

I don't doubt that this is true, and this should make these current negotiations that reportedly include a six-week ceasefire for an exchange of about 30 of the suspected 130+ hostages and many prisoners being held by Israel more pressing. I hope the negotiations are expanded to include a PERMANENT ceasefire in exchange for ALL hostages and prisoners.

I could call for that, but Hamas will not listen to me. I could also call for Israel to implement a ceasefire, but they will not listen to me either. The hostages are the only bargaining chip Hamas has. They will not release them without receiving something in return. Military superiority is the main bargaining chip Israel has. They, too, will not cease fire without receiving something in return. I've detailed my suggestions on an agreement many times before, and I hope I am seeing something like what I've been suggesting starting to develop now. We'll have to wait and see what happens, but whatever happens will be in the next week, before Ramadan.

None.

No! Many people here have a flawed logic. They think that because some historical events were violent and unjust, and the victors wrote the history books, we should accept them now. That is wrong. For instance, in the history of my country, our ancestors killed many native Indians. We also dropped two atomic bombs on Japan to end the war faster and claimed that it was a "life-saving" decision. That was a terrible thing to do, and we should never condone it now.

Oh, I agree with that! Both sides, IMO, are to blame. Neither side's right-wing, nationalistic factions want anything but a one-state solution. But now, hopefully, with pressure from the UN (and the US), they will try to come up with some kind of two-state solution that will be, if not "desireable," at least "tolerable" for both.

"Arafat’s war of terror (the so called “al-Aqsa Intifada”) was unparalleled in the scale and relentlessness of its terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians. A total of 1,184 Israelis were murdered." I guess that's no longer "unparalleled in the scale and relentlessness of its... attacks on ...civilians." it's now estimated that over 30,000 have been killed in Gaza, or 20,000 civilians if you assume about 1/3 of those were actual Hamas militants.

Do you mean the Yasser Arafat who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994?

Of course, no one can say for sure, even the "experts" on this subject, but I suspect it was because it was just before 1948 (why do some here cite 1947? See the link at the end of this post.), the Palestinians occupied the land and made up about 60% of the population, and the Jews only made up about 30% of the population. The Palestinains considered it there land and did not like some third party (the UN) giving a little over half of it to the Jews. The Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel | Ministry of Foreign Affairs (www.gov.il)

What about the Zionists that want a 2 state solution? I suppose the Zionists could have various sub-factions that have different ideas as to how to succeed in the "development and protection of a Jewish nation in what is now Israel." I've never heard of any that would accept a two-state solution. If there are, I hope they start speaking up more firmly, especially right now when the negotiations for a temporary ceasefire and return of some hostages/prisoners are being discussed.