Wonder if this will be another vaporware cease-fire like the one that was in place last October 6th that Hamas decided to ignore on the morning of October 7th.
Netanyahu told “Face the Nation” on Sunday that a hostage deal would delay the Rafah operation, but said Israel would still move ahead with the operation at a later time.
Lol you mean the ceasefire that was in place that Israel kept breaking constantly bombing, killing, and arresting thousands of Palestinians? And the one they keep breaking by building illegal settlements? Or are we just pretending that there was no history of apartheid violence in the 70 years before the 7th of October?
Actually, Documentary evidence outside of the New Testament is limited to put it mildly. Everything else is just second- or third-party claims from decades after he supposedly lived by a few Jewish and Roman scholars, most of which weren’t even alive at the time.
The false notion that there’s a credible secular consensus stems from a bunch of Christian historians (the concentration of which is higher than in every other specialty within history, for obvious reasons) agreeing with each other that of course their imaginary friend’s son who’s also his own dad and a disembodied spirit TOTALLY existed as a historical figure, nothing religious about believing so! 🙄
Limited, sure, but not absent. How much of the article you linked did you read? The second and further sections of that article make a fairly compelling case for there having been someone who fit most of the criteria, and it also specifically addresses your "bunch of Christian historians" bit.
“These are all Christian and are obviously and understandably biased in what they report, and have to be evaluated very critically indeed to establish any historically reliable information,” Ehrman says. “But their central claims about Jesus as a historical figure—a Jew, with followers, executed on orders of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius—are borne out by later sources with a completely different set of biases.”
Yeah, both you and Ehrman are taking a LOT on faith (yes, that was intended) that really isn’t borne out by any reliable sources, critically no contemporate ones.
If there really HAD been a man like that, don’t you think that just a few people would bother to notice and tell others about him?
All the supposed “evidence” is a bunch of cobbled together rumors that REEK of confirmation bias to a degree that it can’t possibly be taken as proof.
I think it is well beyond rumors when a historian four generations later writes about you. You're welcome to disagree though. That's the nice thing about opinions is that everybody gets to have their own.
You do realize that all ceasefires between Palestinian resistance (not Hamas because the one you're thinking of was with PIJ) and Israel are just return to the status quo ante bellum? Both Israel and the other party agree to just do things as usual for the time being. Gazans sure as hell were being bombed before October 7th.
Don’t have any idea where you’re getting misled from but there were quite a few ceasefires between Hamas and Israel and the last one was mediated by Egypt in 2021 and was broken by Hamas on the morning of October 7th. Also, if you guys think Hamas cares one iota about any of the Palestinian civilians, can you explain why they wasted millions of dollars building tunnels to shelter their terrorist leaders instead of one single shelter for any civilian? Please stop getting your news from social media and sites telling you what to think.
And did Israel stop bombing Gazans during that ceasefire? Did they lift the blockade? (Hint: The answer is no) If no it's worthless. That's why I said these "ceasefires" are returns to the status quo ante bellum.
A blockade is the act of actively preventing a country or region from receiving or sending out food, supplies, weapons, or communications, and sometimes people, by military force. A blockade differs from an embargo or sanction, which are legal barriers to trade rather than physical barriers. It is also distinct from a siege in that a blockade is usually directed at an entire country or region, rather than a fortress or city and the objective may not always be to conquer the area.
A blockading power can seek to cut off all maritime transport from and to the blockaded country; although stopping all land transport to and from an area may also be considered a blockade. Blockades restrict the trading rights of neutrals, who must submit for inspection for contraband, which the blockading power may define narrowly or broadly, sometimes including food and medicine. In the 20th century, air power has also been used to enhance the effectiveness of the blockade by halting air traffic within the blockaded airspace.
Close patrol of hostile ports, in order to prevent naval forces from putting to sea, is also referred to as a blockade. When coastal cities or fortresses were besieged from the landward side, the besiegers would often blockade the seaward side as well. Most recently, blockades have sometimes included cutting off electronic communications by jamming radio signals and severing undersea cables. Blockades often result in the starvation of the civilian population, notably during the blockade of Germany during World War I and the blockade of Biafra during the Nigerian Civil War.[1]
According to modern international law, blockades are an act of war.[2] They are illegal as part of a war of aggression[3] or when used against a civilian population, instead of a military target.[4] In such case, they are a war crime and potentially a crime against humanity.[5][6]
I dont think the person you are responding to is the one who knows nothing about what they are saying.
Yikes, the citations on that last paragraph are scary bad. That’s why you never trust Wikipedia at face value, but rather check what sources it’s citing.
Heck, there is an entire section of the article that contradicts that paragraph.
blockade, an act of war whereby one party blocks entry to or departure from a defined part of an enemy’s territory, most often its coasts. Blockades are regulated by international law and custom and require advance warning to neutral states and impartial application.
Or Oxford public international law:
A blockade is a belligerent operation to prevent vessels and/or aircraft of all nations, enemy and neutral (Neutrality in Naval Warfare), from entering or exiting specified ports, airports, or coastal areas belonging to, occupied by, or under the control of an enemy nation. The purpose of establishing a blockade is to deny the enemy the use of enemy and neutral vessels or aircraft to transport personnel and goods to or from enemy territory (Transit of Goods over Foreign Territory).
Or are all these sources wrong and you just so happen to know better?
Well, you keep citing sources that don’t support the original statement. Both of these definitions mention blockades being used in wars, not that they themselves were an act of war
I misspoke. the ceasefire Egypt brokered between Hamas and Israel was on May 14th, 2023 and no, Israel did not bomb Gaza until their retaliation to Hamas breaking the ceasefire with their terrorist attack on the morning of October 7th. the blockade was not even mentioned in the ceasefire and I have no idea why you would think it was. There were quite a few ceasefires since Hamas rolled into town and to be honest ALL of them were necessary because Israel answered Hamas attacks.
no, Israel did not bomb Gaza until their retaliation to Hamas breaking the ceasefire with their terrorist attack on the morning of October 7th.
You know people can tell when you lie, right? Israel has never stopped bombing Gaza due to a ceasefire. Not in 2008, not in 2013, and sure as hell not in 2022 or 2023. Also the 2023 ceasefire was, as I said, between Israel and the PIJ, not Hamas.
the blockade was not even mentioned in the ceasefire and I have no idea why you would think it was.
It's not. Therefore it's a return to the status quo ante bellum, not a ceasefire. Because the blockade is an act of war.
I mean I'm 100% sure I can find many since Israeli bombing of Gaza is a daily occurrence, but I've already stated that the 2023 "ceasefire" was between the PIJ and IDF. Hamas has nothing to do with it. Are you intentionally ignoring that part?
Doubtful but the most important thing at this moment is to stop the killing and destruction and solve the humanitarian crisis. Once that is done then a solution can be worked on, though frankly I am pessimistic due to the level of anger and hate at the moment.
That’s the thing. Nobody wants to propose an actual solution. Letting Hamas regroup and smuggle in more weapons just returns things to the status que that got us into this situation in the first place.
That’s the thing. Nobody wants to propose an actual solution. Letting Israel continue its slow motion genocide and cause more brutal oppression and deaths over decades returns things to the status que that got us into this situation in the first place.
The only way there can be peace is for Israel to be dismantled and Netanyahu trialed at the Hague for crimes against humanity.
I didn’t know how else to interpret the dismantling of Israel because they specified punitive actions against the government of Israel separate from the dismantling of Israel.
This implies Israel should cease existing as a nation. Which implies its people would be at the whims of whomever can conquer the land. Which implies the potential scattering of people from their homes. Which is a genocide.
If preventing the Palestinian people from having a proper government, leaving them at the mercy of their nation-state neighbors, is wrong, then dismantling Israel and leaving them to the same fate is also wrong.
Then you are not somebody to be taken seriously. Live your dream and move to a failed state where anarchy reigns, die from dysentery, and stay out of geopolitical conversations.
Literally yes. Israel's Apartheid is inherently unsustainable and has been surviving using international support (mainly from the US and UK in recent years). Take away the biggest pillar and the whole thing will collapse. Maybe by, say, not vetoing UN resolutions or sending Israel aircraft carriers.
Support UN enforcement of the resulting resolution for a ceasefire
Stop funding Israel
Apply the same kind of sanctions the US applied to Ethiopia when it was committing similar human rights abuses in Tigray a couple of years ago.
Israel is currently killing people directly at a rate of about 3.6% of the population per year. That's not a situation that's bern going on for 75 years.
Support UN enforcement of the resulting resolution for a ceasefire
No country on earth is dump enough to send peacekeepers to that garbage fire. You might as well line up a thousand of your own men and march them one by one into a cattle grinding machine. It would be far far cheaper and more humane.
If the US withdrew support that would be it. If Israel lost the West's support I don't think it would attack the UN forces and Hamas has hardly any capabilities.
Wouldn't surprise me if the African Union was up for it if it had world support.
I doubt, it their entire party coincidentally picks whatever portion of the Bible is convenient for them that day and pack it up for their moronic base to rally behind.
These people believed Russia was the devil a few years ago and suddenly they don’t care about Ukraine anymore.
Add comment