This article essentially says “These protests are unlikely to change government agendas because governments currently don’t support a ceasefire.” it doesn’t explain why this is the case.
That point is neither enlightening nor interesting.
This article does a horrible job of explaining it.
Russia-adjacent countries have a strong incentive to support Israel if they want to purchase missile defense systems. Finland signed a deal earlier this week. Many countries around the world use Israeli-made/designed military systems, and they don’t want to jeopardize their continued access to those systems.
The other factor is non-public intelligence - tack this sentence before every IDF tweet: “We have shared intelligence with our allies and are making a tiny bit public:”
Or they support Israel against terrorism because that’s the moral thing to do
There is no moral war, stop spouting nonsense.
So countries like Vietnam did not have a moral ground to fight against their french, american or chinese invaders?
I’d be careful with blanket statements.
No, there is no moral war.
Wars are fought for things not ideals.
Should Hitler have been allowed to complete his final solution?
Should Ukraine just give up 20% of their nation?
Wow bro are you glorifying Hamas right now?
Are you fucking dumb?
Well you said the defender has the right to defend themselves against occupation. While what Hamas did Oct 7 was completely within the international laws, it was still a bit rude.
no but there are strategically needed war. Lets take France.
During 7th October attack France saw 30 of her citizens murdered, tortured and raped directly by the HAMAS and there are still french hostage in Gaza. I want to note this is an act of war France could perfectly respond to with the full might of its armament. This happen in spite of the tens if millions of euros they send each year to Gaza in humanitarian aid and their political condemnation of Israeli colonization. France suffered a terrorist attack motivated by an international Jihad partly supported by HAMAS around the same date. On the wider spectrum, France as a large Christian population who regularly send loads of pilgrims in Israel and Palestine, therefore the HAMAS is indeed a very real threat to french security.
So yeah France is not going to blame Israel for destroying the HAMAS However France has spearheaded vast humanitarian effort for Palestinians since the beginning of the slaughters, from taking part in the EU airlift to sending an hospital ship to Gaza, the French Republic has been resolute in preserving civilian life while letting HAMAS die in their hole
This is the best summary I could come up with:
“It’s always very hard to make a crystal-clear causal connection between a demonstration and the effect it has on politics,” says Jacquelien van Stekelenburg, a professor of social change and conflict at Amsterdam’s Vrije Universiteit.
In the wake of Hamas’ October 7 attacks, in which Israeli authorities initially said 1,400 people were killed — a figure later revised down to 1,200 — and another 240 were abducted, Anthony Albanese used the “defend itself” line.
By early November, Foreign Minister Penny Wong was warning at a press conference that the “international community will not accept ongoing civilian deaths”.
Canberra’s ambassador to the UN, James Larsen, said the fact “the resolution did not recognise terror group Hamas as the perpetrator of the October 7 attack” meant his country couldn’t vote.
Jewish leaders have highlighted rising anti-Semitism since the war began in October, including at some demonstrations Australia, and Israel has warned its citizens to reconsider any travel abroad.
In the days before the march, White House national security spokesperson John Kirby said Israel had agreed to daily four-hour humanitarian pauses in fighting.
The original article contains 1,058 words, the summary contains 180 words. Saved 83%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
“Oooooo, you see. We don’t listen to you.”
(backroom talks)
“How do we make it less obvious!?”
A ceasefire does nothing to stop Hamas from existing, it literally helps those piece of shit terrorists to regroup and settle in with more human shields.
But it does help palistinian babies to exist.
Actually yes, considering Hamas uses them as human shields.
Its ok to shoot the hostage now?
okay, how do you propose destroying hamas and saving the kids? :3
btw~ you’re being attacked from three different countries, you’ve got limited time here
Not by making the same mistakes the US did in afganistan and iraq.
Bombs dont kill terrorists, it creates them
dats not answering the question X3
how do they get rid of hamas quickly and efficiently? remember the being attacked from three different countries part!
You’re talking as if hamas appeared a month ago. Israel had many oportunities to get rid of hamas and chose not to do so.
Israel seems to know the precise location of every tunnel (at least the ones below refugee camps and hospitals), and yet failed to see 1000 terrorists training at its doorstep for more than a year.
If you’re thinking that the current situation is not desired by Netanyahu, you are severely mistaken.
And no, i dont need to bring peace to middle east to know that killing children is wrong.
thats not answering the question tho! it’s happening now, war in gaza, israel forces searching for hamas and hostages. what do? :o
Sure you win. Lets kill all the babies, i’m sure the parents wont become terrorists in the future.
Removed by mod
it’s not a concentration camp! that implies gaza is being forced to work X3
the word you’re looking for is Prison! :3 whiiiich is kinda strange because then apparently Egypt is in on it too 3:
Prisons have running water, hospitals, food, and the people in them are mostly criminals, with a few guards and staff. Prisoners still have human rights. None of that is true for Gaza.
The people living in Gaza are children, with a few terrorists, and foreign aid workers.
Concentration camps need not be work camps. They are defined by what motivated their creation (segregating a specific group of a population).
But you’re not arguing in favor of destroying Hamas. You’re supporting genocide. Which, incidentally, will radicalize any survivors, leading to more joining Hamas.
Since you haven’t your own question, how about just shut the fuck up??
hatsune miku does not support genocide!
Sadly enough they are not chanting release the hostages.
Is this the talking point now?
Whenever someone says stop bombing children, you immediately criticize them for not saying release the hostages?
It’s implied. A ceasefire gives a chance to negotiate for hostages and for peace.
People are not good with history. Take a gander at how Hamas reacted with literally every ceasefire in the past. What happens when there’s a ceasefire and Hamas strikes in the middle of it and more people die. What will people chant then? “We are sorry you got killed”?
do you have evidence? :o
Here’s a list. I know next comment is going to be “but but but IDF source”. You have the dates, google them. And that’s 2014 only. You can look up 2018. as well.
thank you!
You are welcome. I wish ceasefire would be used to humanitarian effort but it’s not.
You don’t gotta look far, actually. I know I’m probably simplifying it a little but the 7th of October is the latest time Hamas broke a ceasefire.
huh wonder why you’re downvoted. i mean that is what happened.
Good question! (Insert X variant online mov) someone prolly just didn’t like the answer. Some folks like rooting for the underdog so much they’ll do it even if its a literal terrorist organization.
It’s very much so not implied.
