HRC on a ceasefire.

[Mosby]

Link to tweet

She's completely right, as usual.

[wnylib]

1. Yes, she is right again. And a sad state of world affairs

that she is right. As she said, it didn't (or shouldn't) have to be this way, but since it is, it's necessary now to work through it.

[brer cat]

2. She knows.

[Cha]

3. Thank You & Hillary..

[peggysue2]

4. Right on both counts

A ceasefire would benefit Hamas, in the same way a ceasefire in Ukraine would benefit the Russians. And . . .

Israel has the responsibility (as an indisputably superior military power) of limiting civilian death and injury where and when they can.

Pragmatic approach in a tense and emotionally charged issue. Which is something I've always admired about Hillary Clinton--strip it down to what is practical and doable. She's not always right. But pretty damn close.

[Torchlight]

5. Speaking Realpolitik is often jarring, but her experience watching

many nation-states and alleged governments demand a mile after being offered an inch gives her more than enough credibility with me.

[ffr]

6. What an immense waste of talent and knowledge. HRC should have been president in 2016.

But thanks to those voters who bought Fox/Putin's messaging, we got Fox/Putin's slobfather, the fast food chomping grifter instead, 3 RWNJ SCOTUS judges, and $8T in additional debt.

I miss HRC so much. How things should have been different.

[WarGamer]

7. +1000 nt

[Cha]

9. TY ffr.. and the Lies of Jill Stein and Sarandon.

[MyNameIsJonas]

8. People who call for ceasefire just want a one-sided ceasefire.

They'll collectively shrug at Hamas lobbing rockets into Israel. For many, it's 'Free Palestine by any means necessary'.

[maxsolomon]

12. No, most want Hamas rockets to cease as well. That's what a ceasefire is.

You're attacking Straw Men.

[kwolf68]

17. Right

The good thing about all this (sarcasm) is under the guise of Israel "getting Hamas", we all know what will happen? Israel looks as though they are going to kill 10s of 1000s of innocent Palestinians. They may get Hamas in the meantime, though so far they look pretty incompetent or not interested in getting a higher % of Hamas fighters as compared to CHILDREN, but all this will do is become a recruiting tool to further radicalize the entire Arab world. Viola' Hamas Part 2. Different names, different faces, but the same message. All leading to Holy War. That will be fun.

[maxsolomon]

19. Wait, calling for a ceasefire is a slippery slope to holy war between the monotheisms?

Or not calling for ceasefire is?

How would you go about "competently" fighting Hamas (estimated to be 35 - 40 thousand strong, in tunnels a kilometer under Gaza) without killing children?

10/7 was an atrocity designed by Hamas to put Israel in this bind - to defend itself against an enemy killing innocents, it must kill innocents.

[MyNameIsJonas]

20. lol no it's not. I'm sorry.

Anyone calling for a ceasefire is either naive or just want Israel to end its assaults. There is no possible ceasefire with Hamas. There is no ceasefire to support and when you scream out, "CEASEFIRE NOW" you're ignoring reality - or perfectly okay with Hamas continuing to attack Israel unabated.

But there is no scenario where Hamas abides by a ceasefire, so you can't support a ceasefire anymore than someone in the 1940s supporting the idea that maybe Hitler would just agree to stop gassing the Jews if asked nicely.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

21. All true

Which is why I'm coming around to the idea of ceasefire...all of the pearl-clutchers will be happy, Hamas will break the ceasefire in about 10 minutes, and Israel can say "Hey we tried, but this will be the last time we do so", then resume their war against Hamas apace.

[MyNameIsJonas]

35. Unfortunately, the same people would again attack Israel for responding.

But you're right in the sense that it would remove that talking point.

[maxsolomon]

22. Specifically, I was responding to the assertion

that those calling for a ceasefire only want Israel to stop bombing and don't want Hamas to stop bombing.

They probably do, and they might even think Hamas would abide by it somewhat. But that's what naive people do, believe in things that aren't going to happen.

[MyNameIsJonas]

34. It's impossible for me to take someone seriously who is calling for ceasefire if that isn't their belief.

Because I can't fathom someone would actually trust that Hamas would abide by ceasefire. So, yes, it's my assumption that those who push the idea of a ceasefire now are more focused on Israel abiding by the ceasefire because no one would ever trust that Hamas would abide by it.

Furthermore, we've seen the exact level of response we would see if a ceasefire was agreed to and Hamas broke it. Those same people demanding a ceasefire after Hamas' brutal massacre would still demand Israel not retaliate because that's pretty much what they're demanding right now. A ceasefire when the enemy wants to wipe you off the face of the earth and refuses to acknowledge your right to exist is absolutely one-sided.

[maxsolomon]

40. Maybe we should ask a person calling for a ceasefire if they want it to include both sides.

There's plenty of them on DU, and they haven't been shy about it. It's a different issue than whether they are naive enough to think Hamas will abide by it.

Hamas' janky missiles are so ineffective against the Iron Dome system that it almost doesn't matter if they abide by a ceasefire.

[ShazzieB]

42. This deserves a mic drop!

"But that's what naive people do, believe in things that aren't going to happen."

[GuppyGal]

24. +1000

[paleotn]

28. Seen the recent events at Cornell? And elswhere?

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/29/us/cornell-university-antisemetic-threats-online-investigation/index.html

https://wapo.st/3QmasBj

Yea, right.

[maxsolomon]

41. What does that have to do with whether a call for a ceasefire means both parties?

Whoever is making those threats isn't a party to the conflict in Gaza. No Hamas fighters attend Cornell.

[GuppyGal]

55. Except Hamas doesn't abide by a ceasefire there was one in effect on October 7th so who broke that?

Can you negotiate with ISIS...? Then why would you think Hamas would operate in any kind of good faith?

[maxsolomon]

56. Why are you making this point? Did you not read my other posts?

I responded to this already. See post #22.

My point was specific: those who want a (new) ceasefire (I'm not particularly one of them) likely want BOTH SIDES to abide by it. I've not seen anyone saying it should be one-sided.

Whether or not Hamas would abide by it is irrelevant to my point. I did not say I thought Hamas would operate in good faith.

WAS there an actual ceasefire in effect prior to 10/7? A defacto ceasefire? I was under the impression that Hamas rocket attacks were a somewhat common occurrence these last years, but ineffectual due to the Iron Dome missile defense.

[David__77]

10. I wonder if she would oppose humanitarian corridors to allow non-combatants out.

[dlk]

13. The more pertinent question is whether or not Hamas would allow it

n/t

[David__77]

15. The combatants would need to allow that.

[paleotn]

31. They won't. You're living in the dream world.

[ShazzieB]

44. I think that's exactly the point that David_77 was making.

Th combatants would have to allow it, and they're not going to.

[Cha]

16. Yeah.. I don't get why the poster would Even ask that?!

Last edited Mon Oct 30, 2023, 09:52 PM - Edit history (1)

Please see post # 14

[Cha]

14. Why would you even ask that?

Link to tweet

[The Magistrate]

37. It Is Their Responsibility, Ma'am

Certainly if they consider themselves the armed force of Arab Palestine it is not just their responsibility but their duty to protect the civil populace they fight on behalf of. It is certainly not the responsibility of their enemy to safeguard their opponent's civilian populace, and it is not, as a practical matter, a duty falling on the United Nations. Unless of course Hamas is willing to accept a force of UN peacekeepers of sufficient heft to prevent further hostilities by Hamas....

It is certainly the responsibility of Hamas to refrain from taking up positions in which engaging them will necessarily endanger civilians. That regulation has no balancing test. The opponent is still bound to attack such positions only if the direct military advantage to be gained is sufficient to outweigh the risk of harm to non-combatants. There is nothing similar in the prohibition of taking up positions placing non-combatants at risk from enemy action against you; you don't get to do it if the military advantage gained outweighs the risk to civilians. Israeli judgement of the gains and costs of a specific attack may prove faulty in instances, but the use of the civil populace as cover is in every case a breach of law.

[ShazzieB]

45. It absolutely is the responsibility of Hamas to avoid putting civilians in unnecessary danger.

But they've made it abundantly (and heinously) clear that they don't intend to accept that responsibility.

They are only concerned about their "cause," which is destroying the state of Israel and killing every Jew in the place. How many other people (INCLUDING PALESTINIANS) get hurt or killed in the process is of no concern to them.

That kind of fanaticism cannot be reasoned, negotiated, or compromised with. Those who think any of those things is a possibility with Hamas are badly mistaken.

[muriel_volestrangler]

38. It seems a reasonable question - Netanyahu has closed the corridors

See eg a tank firing on a car that was trying to turn around and go away from the tank:

So the question is does she support the Israeli tactics completely, or are there actions that she does not?

[ShazzieB]

43. Wow.

That confirms all my previous impressions of Hamas' "concern" for the welfare of Palestinian civilians; i.e., that it's nonexistent.

This needs to be spread far and wide. It might not change the minds of those who insist on seeing the Palestinians as the 3 little pigs* and Israel as the Big Bad Wolf, but it would give those who are less sure/on the fence something to think about.

*The irony and possible inappropriateness of this analogy (pigs/Palestinians) are duly noted, but I can't think of a better analogy for "helpless innocents" threated by a more powerful enemy at the moment - and that is how a lot of naive people seem to be (mistakenly) viewing this situation.

[Cha]

48. Yeah, HAMAS has NO Concern Except Shedding the Blood

of Israelis.

There was a "Ceasefire" on May 13, 2023.. HAMAS Broke the Ceasefire".. Hamas Won't Stick to Any Agreements. Israel knows the.

Israel and Palestinians agree to cease-fire ending days of fighting and bloodshed

May 13, 2023

TEL AVIV — Israel and Palestinian Islamic Jihad have agreed to a cease-fire ending five days of fighting between the two sides, one U.S. official and one Israeli official told NBC News on Saturday.

The cease-fire was mediated by Egypt and will start at 10 p.m. local time.
“Now, this agreement has been reached thanks to continuous Egyptian effort. We appreciate this effort,” Mohamad al-Hindi told the Al Kahera Wal Nas channel.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/israel-palestinians-agree-ceasefire-ending-days-fighting-bloodshed-rcna84300

[paleotn]

30. Can you tell who's a non-combatent?

Other than obvious cases of children or the elderly, do you have a "non-combatant" detector? If so, I'm sure the IDF wants to talk to...you.

[sheshe2]

11. HRC is correct.

[Elessar Zappa]

18. She's almost always right.

Such a travesty that Putin and the Republicans put the Orange piece of shit in office over her.

[comradebillyboy]

52. Don't forget the Green Party and the far left all who worked

overtime to stop Hillary at any cost.

[GuppyGal]

23. I asked this the other day...a ceasefire with whom? Hamas cannot be trusted to act in good faith for fucks

sake.

[Bmoboy]

25. How about a ceasefire with mass shooters?

[LetMyPeopleVote]

26. Hillary is right yet again

[GP6971]

29. enjoy your stay!!

[TexasDem69]

32. I was a proud Hillary voter in 2008

And President Obama turned into the best president of my lifetime so no regrets there. A proud Hillary voter again in 2016 and the outcome in that election was the most tragic political event of my lifetime. The folks that are opposed to Israel’s actions today are the same that opposed Hillary in 2016 and resulted in the Trump presidency.

[Cha]

33. Hamas doesn't want a Cease Fire Why should

Israel?

[David__77]

36. I hope she opposes deporting millions from their homeland.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/israeli-ministry-proposes-transferring-gaza-civilians-to-egypts-sinai-2f99301e?authId=1

[lapucelle]

58. Oh look! A concept paper, just like the one Trump waved around in Bedminster

to try to prove that General Milley wanted to start a war with Iran.

[David__77]

59. Ethnic cleansing of a different thing. I hope the US doesn't game on plan that.

[lapucelle]

60. I don't think that our ally Israel is seeking to engage in "ethnic cleansing".

That the US would stand by and let it happen or that Secretary Clinton might approve of such a measure is beyond the pale.

[RocRizzo55]

39. I'm sorry

But any comment I might make about how I feel about this would immediately be taken down, and my account suspended.
The only thing I will say is that I cannot, in any way, condone the killing of children, ON EITHER SIDE!

[ShazzieB]

46. I'm sorry, too.

I don't think there is anyone here who would say they "condone the killing of children." But Hamas has purposely put Israel in an impossible situation.

The leaders of Hamas have CHOSEN to use their own people as human shields in pursuit of their goal to wipe out Israel. The deaths and suffering of Palestinians are of NO concern to Hamas, but they know that these things will make Israel look bad, and that pleases them greatly. They are more than willing to use ther own people for this purpose.

Any harm that comes to Palestinian civilians of any age is the direct result of Hamas' deliberate actions and therefore on Hamas.

[RocRizzo55]

49. And then

IDF decided to kill more babies. Still inexcusable on BOTH SIDES.

[Cha]

47. This is on Hamas that Butchered babies and children with their own GD Terrorist

Hands.

Israel is Not Targeting babies and children like Fucked UP hamas did.

[RocRizzo55]

50. When they level entire towns

They are not targeting children? Give me a break!

[Cha]

54. This is; ON HAMAS.

[lapucelle]

57. No, Israel is not targeting children.

Israel is targeting Hamas. Hamas uses children as human shields. They've been doing it for 15 years.

https://stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfiles/hamas_human_shields.pdf

[betsuni]

51. But she attended a fundraiser at George Clooney's house and got paid for speeches

and knew how to get things done, so idiots believed she was immoral and corrupt and evil. Now they pretend it never happened.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

53. Hillary Clinton is right yet again

Link to tweet