News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Honestly don't understand how hostages weren't a required part of that resolution.
Edited to include the "required" component. There is nothing requiring a hostage release with the ceasefire, to clarify my initial statement.
It was. Just not the way Israel wanted. So the US vetoed it for them.
It wasn't the way the us wanted it. They've held since the beginning of this that hostages must be released if a ceasefire is established. This resolution did not require that.
https://usun.usmission.gov/explanation-of-vote-on-a-un-security-council-resolution-on-the-situation-in-the-middle-east/
Everyone knows Hamas would not have accepted releasing the hostages unconditionally. This ceasefire proposal was the product of weeks/months of back and forth and where everyone on both sides agreed was the best way to move forward as it involved concessions on both sides. The US then vetoed it last minute since the killing Palestinians is more important than anything else.
The source I provided does not support your opinion.
https://press.un.org/en/2024/sc15723.doc.htm
Hamas and the Palestinian Authority both accepted this resolution.
Sinwar did not accept it, so no, Hamas officially did not accept it. While members of Hamas had taken it favorably, he did not, and that's what counts.
Hamas did accept it.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/hamas-accepts-un-ceasefire-resolution-ready-negotiate-over-details-official-says-2024-06-11/
The person who could make that decision did not, and they proposed a new agreement, which is not accepting the proposal put forth. If only Sinwar agreed to it, then Hamas would actually have accepted it. But the person in the article who said they accepted it was not able to make that decision because this decision was up to Sinwar.
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-october-17-2024/
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-october-9-2024/
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-august-7-2024/
Again, Hamas did accept it. Giving me random quotes from government officials who just vetoed the best chance for peace does not mean Hamas rejected the deal. The deal was accepted. Israel and the US just refuse to play ball.
Sorry, the subsequent events and descriptions detail exactly what happened. I'm sorry you don't like the source (based on your own personal opinion), but that does not make it wrong. Your source quotes someone we discovered did not have the authority to make the decision without Sinwar, so no, Hamas did not actually accept it. New information and all...
Have a good day!
What events? All you've given me are statements from a government intent on prolonging the conflict. That's not an event.
I posted facts.
Have a good day!
...No you really didn't. Hamas did accept a ceasefire proposal and it was sabotaged by the US and Israel.
Mmk
Salty and wrong is a great look on you
I'll let you know when I'm either.
Looool sure buddy
Probably because Israel has never been serious about negotiations to free the hostages. It's their excuse to continue their genocide, after all.
https://www.cnn.com/2024/11/20/middleeast/netanyahu-offers-5-million-and-safe-passage-for-returning-hostages-intl/index.html
Okay and? Doesn't change his attitude towards ceasefire negotiations. In other words, if you wanted a ceasefire resolution that demands returning the hostages at the same time as the ceasefire we had one in June and it predictably went nowhere.
Yes it does, if he's willing to do that wouldn't that open up options for negotiations? And why did resolution 2735 go nowhere?
Because Israel didn't seriously engage with Hamas to free the hostages. It was pretty clear when Israel learned of the resolution and reaffirmed their goal to destroy Hamas instead of saying literally anything about a ceasefire.
The resolution itself says Israel accepted it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_2735?wprov=sfla1
While initially Netanyahu grumbled, Israel accepted it.
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-june-24-2024/
While members of Hamas had accepted the proposal, and after bad faith negotiations from Hamas, the one guy who actually had the power to accept it did not. Netanyahu's fear of losing power aside, had Hamas actually accepted the proposal, this would have panned out better. It would force Netanyahu to rebuff the acceptance of the proposal without being able to say Hamas made unworkable demands.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-phase_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war_ceasefire_proposal
...
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-october-17-2024/
https://www.state.gov/briefings/department-press-briefing-august-7-2024/
Uh... Yeah. I don't think I need to say anything else.
Thanks, you're right, my sources very accurately describe what happened when Hamas did not accept the ceasefire.
I do. Hamas won't give them up, so a ceasefire including them is irrelevant. They'd much rather blame the israe for noncompliance