Hamas Says Gaza Truce Possible 'Within 24 To 48 Hours' If Israel Accepts Terms
Hamas Says Gaza Truce Possible 'Within 24 To 48 Hours' If Israel Accepts Terms
A senior Hamas official told AFP on Sunday that a ceasefire in Gaza may be secured "within 24 to 48 hours" if Israel accepts the Palestinian group's demands in ongoing talks.
"If Israel agrees to Hamas demands, which include the return of displaced Palestinians to northern Gaza and increasing humanitarian aid, that would pave the way for a (truce) agreement within the next 24 to 48 hours," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue, as negotiations were set to resume in Cairo.
You're viewing a single thread.
Hamas has offered Israel multiple very tenable peace deals that include the immediate release of all Israeli prisoners and absolutely no demand for reparations for rebuilding the strip that is now thought to be uninhabitable for 70 years. Israel has denied every single one.
They have always wanted palestinians to be exterminated. This is Israel's dream scenario.
I think the word you're looking for is "uninhabitable"
Corrected!
Source on previous offers from Hamas?
Here's a history of ceasefire proposals and rejections
Thank you for providing some sources. I haven't read it all yet and most of the links don't mention offers from Hamas. But I did see on Feb 20 Hamas offered to release some hostages in return for a temporary ceasefire and return of Hamas prisoners. This was rejected by Netanyahu.
I remember hearing one that was basically surrender and leave Israel
There were no such propositions and they have refused to give number of alive hostages since that was a condition for continued talks.
Here's a link to proposed cease-fires, courtesy of user Keeponstalin.
Bullshit they proposed no such deals.
Here's a link to proposed cease-fires, courtesy of user Keeponstalin.
Wow, good point.
I've heard similar things in the opposite direction, that early when Israel was being split up, they offered Palestinians reasonable deals to have part of the land, including Jerusalem, that they refused because they wanted the whole thing, and therefore Israel got it all. No sources of course, just interesting that both sides say similar things.
If someone entered my house and was trying to illegally force me out I also wouldn't want to settle for only losing half my home.
What do you mean? They didn't own it beforehand, Britain did.
We're doing colonialism apologia now? Colonial occupiers do not rightfully own the land they occupy.
I'm not saying Britain rightfully owned the land beforehand, but they did own it, and both Jews and Muslims have historical claims to the land, neither more valid than the other.
No. Palestinians lived on the land. Zionist settlers settled on the land, segregated themselves from its native inhabitants, and built an explicitly (by their own words) colonial project on it by ethnically cleansing 750,000 Palestinians within only the first two years of its founding. European and other settler Jews never had the right to disposses Palestine's inhabitants.
Okay, if someone convicted me to fight the ones that took my home in exchange for getting my home back and then giving away half my home to someone that is slowly taking more and more of my home...
That's a revisionist version of the peace process and what happened
Partition has always been used as a way to take more Palestinian land, while Palestinians were repeatedly advocating for a Unitary / Binational State
If i lived in a country where rich settlers were displacing my communities for decades, I too would reject "offers" to forever split my homeland in half based on the whims of guilty white supremacists on another continent.
The answer is right there. The Israelis drove them out and then required a deal to let people try to come home after the violence.