The keyword “netanyahu” is currently trending, with over 20,000 searches, primarily due to significant statements and developments involving Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A recent article from The Times of Israel highlighted comments from a top aide to Netanyahu, indicating that Hamas will have 60 days to disarm or face a complete military response from the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). This ultimatum suggests a critical escalation in the ongoing conflict, drawing significant public interest and concern.
Additionally, Netanyahu’s remarks reported by BBC regarding Iran’s nuclear program have contributed to the rising search interest. He stated that Iran must abandon its enriched uranium production, a topic of global importance that affects regional stability. This direct engagement from Netanyahu raises questions about potential military or diplomatic responses, prompting heightened scrutiny and inquiries into his policies.
Furthermore, an opinion piece in The New York Times critiquing Netanyahu’s strategies in relation to American Jews and his alignment with former President Trump has also sparked discussion. The article suggests a complex web of political maneuvering that could have implications for U.S.-Israel relations, captivating the attention of readers interested in both domestic and international political dynamics during this tense period.
Watch the Moment
Internet Reacts
C
IDF is not starting another unpopular major offensive in 60 days with elections so close, unless there is an opportunity for a quick win, and “dismantle the weapons, destroy the tunnels, and secure its citizens” does not sound like a quick win to me. Sadly Hamas knows this so they will not disarm. Of course, there is a small chance of Israel having another pager-like ace up its sleeve. Seems unlikely though, given it did not get used earlier.
T
Hamas needs to GO! Any deal that leaves them in power is a failure.
C
What’s extremely telling is that None of the pro Palestinian people see saying Hamas should disarm. They say that Israel should, or that Hamas demands needs to be met, or that there is no reason to disarm. For a group of people that swears they don’t support Hamas, they do seem very worried about Hamas actually having to disarm. And all the people saying resistance is justice and all that. They support Hamas.Full stop. This thread wouldn’t be hundreds of comments defending Hamas right not to disarm. It wouldn’t be filled with saying how important and justified resistance is It would be people agreeing Hamas needs to disarm, while hoping Israel does not restart the war. That is the pro Palestinian position… Well in the western progressive head at least. In reality it’s what we see right here. Hundreds of comments lamenting the fact Hamas has to disarm. Saying they shouldn’t. Speaking about resistance being justified and all that. Make no mistake, these pro palastinian people are pro Hamas. Otherwise they would want Hamas to disarm. There is no other reason.
W
Hamas never agreed to disarm, that’s there opinion. Just because someone repeated a different person’s opinion, doesn’t mean they support that opinion. Stating that Hamas never agreed to disarm, keep a conversation factual. Instead of pretending they agreed to that. Hamas has very few bargaining chips remaining. Thus they are going to not play the disarming one till someone concrete for the Gaza/Palestinian future gets met. People just want the Palestinians to have no weapons or hope. So they get cleansed from Gaza and the WB,
O
Well said. It doesn’t matter who supports Hamas and who doesn’t. What matters is whether they will voluntarily disarm with no assurances from Israel, AND what will happen if Hamas is “defeated.” And the answer to that is, another group comes in to replace Hamas. This will continue to happen until Palestine is free.
W
Why would Hamas voluntarily disarm with no assurances from Israel? Makes zero sense, but you do and think and say things that won’t happen.
C
It’s not about an agreement, it’s about whether they WANT Hamas to disarm. And they do not. They also keep supporting the resistance and saying it’s justified while saying that Hamas shouldn’t disarm. Don’t incorrectly frame my argument as some misunderstanding about a legal document. I’m talking about the overall support of Hamas. And how all the Pro Palestinian folk do not want them to disarm and will defend their right to keep weapons and defend how important the resistance is. None say Hamas should disarm for the good of Gaza. None say they are not representative of Palestinian resistance. To the contrary, they support their actions as Palestinian resistance and want it to continue. They want Hamas to stay armed. They support Hamas. Period. They support Hamas. Your deflection to a legal agreement has been noted and discarded.
W
Is Israel not acting in a tyrannical manner to the Palestinians. Look at how Settlers do terrorism while directly protected by the IDF. Then the actions of the settlers of creating outposts get “legalized” by the Knesset. Who would surrender to a country that’s doing that? If Israel wasn’t being horrible, then people would say Hamas should disarm. But the problem is Israel is being horrible. On top of international law saying that armed resistance against occupation is legal. It’s not a straight forward topic of Hamas bad, thus they should disarm.
C
Actually it is. Hamas is a terrorist organization and should disarm. So you support Hamas. You don’t want them to disarm. You want Hamas to stay armed in Gaza. Your excuses don’t matter. You support Hamas. After 2 years of pro palastinian swearing they don’t. Turns out, they were lying the whole time.
W
The IDF is a terrorist organisation. Are you a Likud supporter?
C
No on both. But you support Hamas. The terrorist organization. You not only support them and want them to remain armed, but see their violence as justified and morally right. You support hamas so much that you actually see them as protecting Palestinians, and resisting Palestinian oppression. You support Hamas. Just like the others in this thread. And after two years of screaming they you don’t, and that Hamas doesn’t represent Palestinians, all of a sudden you do support them and they do represent Palestinians. I think it’s reprehensible to support Hamas, especially considering their treatment of Palestinians. But, at least now you guys finally admit you have been lying this whole time, and do in fact support Hamas and see them as protectors of the Palestinians.
W
Was the IDF formed from terrorist organizations, yes or no?
T
You’re sure think most people in Gaza are like enough already. Dayenu. This has undoubtedly been a brutal war for civilians. Food supplies are good now, how about some peace? But there’s going to be a hard core of jihadis that won’t be happy until they get to be shitheels or shaheeds or whatever they call em. That’s the element of this conflict that so hard to analyze, the jihadi factor. It’s real hard to make peace with people who want you to kill them. Death by IDF is their fondest desire. Ideally you’d get international forces in there to disarm Hamas.
O
>Ideally you’d get international forces in there to disarm Hamas. In another universe this might be possible
E
Let’s say they do disarm peacefully. Would a dual state/recognition policy be in place if so? I can’t imagine they’ll lay down arms without statehood as a guarantee.
N
Israel will never let a “Palestian” state to be born, not without a major change in their society and leaders, and it’s not about hating the “Palestinians”, it’s about security. As long there is more than just ‘majority’ in those areas, of people who hate Jews, Israel can’t allow them to form a state and power to act on this wish. Especially when this “country” will stand above Israel (look at the topographic map bellow) and be a running distance from Israel’s center, where more than half of the population live. https://preview.redd.it/ef5k1ea1c5kg1.jpeg?width=900&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=993a3df81207e318a261ee3e4c77f2c417ef3805 No county will agree to live in such conditions, especially Israel, a country that felt A LOT of wars. The only thing that could ever lead to a “Palestinian” state, is if the vast majority of the “Palestinians” will stop dream about murdering Jews, and their government will cooperate with this wish.
O
They never asked for statehood. Their sole mission is the destruction of Israel. Don’t put words or motivations on them, they didn’t put on themselves.
E
Based on the negotiations over the last few years, it certainly sounds like they’d settle for statehood. Especially based on the most recent peace plans. And like I’ve been saying in other comments, if they laid down arms for statehood, they wouldn’t be able to pursue their goal of destroying Israel and be dismantled as external peacekeepers serve as the buffer.
O
You’re putting words in their mouths. They have never once offered a permanent 2SS, or accepted any of the more than 5 offers for such. Stop being part of the problem with your west splaining. It’s paternalistic towards them and kind of bigoted to be honest. When they say shit, listen
E
I guess you didn’t read the proposals over the last year? I never said that they agreed to a 2SS, simply that they would lay down arms if Israel acknowledged their statehood. Israel also hasn’t offered 2SS recently either, so there’s not much space to negotiate.
O
>I guess you didn’t read the proposals over the last year? Whose proposals? France? What has the PA or Hamas actually proposed?
E
Literally the peace plan proposal that’s actively going on at the moment lol The one proposed by Trump and the “board of peace” that’s already in phase 2.. You know, the one that got the hostages back in phase 1?
O
The one which Hamas never agreed to disarm or to a 2SS as anything more than a temporary base from which to attack? That one? Show me statements and commitments from Hamas, not the West.
O
If they disarm peacefully then all signs point to Israel trying to complete their ethnic cleansing campaign. And then a new resistance group will emerge. Because that’s how this works. When there is oppression, resistance forms.
C
Does Hamas pose a threat to Israel? Because I keep hearing it’s not an actual threat. I keep hearing that Israel has been slaughtering Palestinians for two years. Are you trying to tell me that it’s Hamas that has actually kept Israel from ethnic cleansing the Gaza strip? Also why do you support Hamas? You see Hamas as a protective force and as the justified resistance of Palestinians. Why have pro palastinian been lying for 2 years about not supporting Hamas and now doing a 180. That now they think Hamas is actually protecting and good for Palestinians, and that Hamas is actually representing Palestinian resistance. So, you agree that you do support Hamas and do not want them to disarm? You want Hamas to stay armed and stay in Gaza? Hamas to you is Palestinian resistance? Hamas is actually a protective force for Palestinians? Because that is what you are implying. So can you be honest and admit you support Hamas and their resistance?
S
So.. why would Israel have agreed to this to begin with in your mind? Why are they waiting 60 days, what’s wrong with today? How are these all signs they suddenly now want to cleanse the whole strip after years of complete military occupation where no more than 1% of the population was taken out? Suddenly now all signs point to 100% coming up, you look at peace plans as a sign of that? Every single turn in this conflict it’s always “all signs point to Israel wanting to ethnically cleanse the region”. They attack, “all signs point to Israel wanting to ethnically cleanse the region”, they broker peace, “all signs point to Israel wanting to ethnically cleanse the region”, they get attacked, “all signs point to Israel wanting to ethnically cleanse the region”. It doesn’t matter, you people will always think this no matter what occurs you will twist your brain into knots to explain why your consistent preconceived narrative is always true no matter what new facts or evidence occurs.
O
> So.. why would Israel have agreed to this to begin with in your mind? To get the media to stop paying attention. And because Trump wanted them to. And because despite what Israel says, the genocide has caused a lot of instability in the country and the population was growing tired of it. There are a lot of reasons. > How are these all signs they suddenly now want to cleanse the whole strip after years of complete military occupation where no more than 1% of the population was taken out? Because absolutely NOTHING indicates Israel is ready to move on and reconstruct Gaza. Your entire post assumes that Israel isn’t currently carrying out its objectives right now. It’s all strategic. They know that they can kill a few dozen people a week and the international community wont really notice. Why aren’t they allowing in sufficient medical supplies for a population that clearly needs it? Why are they still demolishing homes and infrastructure? Like a water treatment plant? Dont give me that “muh Hamas” BS. It’s because they want to make life so unbearable and impossible there so that people die or leave. And take the West Bank. Israel is annexing it. Settler attacks are getting more intense. More Palestinians are getting evicted and homes demolished. They are deliberately making life more terrible there in hopes of getting Palestinians out. It’s obvious to anyone who’s paying attention. Netanyahu is lying about it, but Smotrich and Ben Gvir are being pretty honest about their intentions.
E
What makes you say that? If they disarmed peacefully in order for guaranteed statehood- there’d likely be global peacekeeping forces who’d essentially provide military security in those areas. Unless Israel became enemies of the US, I don’t think there would be any issues. But yes, without statehood, there will always be another group to take Hamas’ place
O
Israel will not allow a peacekeeping force in. And if the US forced it, there’s nothing stopping Israel from killing them. They just have to claim that they were Hamas and they won’t be held to account. They have done it many times with journalists, doctors, and aid workers and suffered no consequences for it. What’s stopping them from doing it again? Can’t you see? Israel has no intention of allowing Gaza to be rebuilt with Palestinians in it. They just want the land, and want the Palestinians out. This is evident from the words and actions of Israeli leaders AND citizens. They aren’t allowing in excavating equipment. They aren’t allowing in the required aid under the ceasefire. They are still destroying buildings and infrastructure. They are still murdering civilians every day. Netanyahu sabotaged so many deals over the past 2 years it’s laughable. Nothing has changed since the “ceasefire” was signed other than the news isn’t reporting on it anymore.
S
Israel is going to kill US troops? What? If this was their goal why agree to let the US troops in to begin with? The mental gymnastics here man. They already had military control of the whole region, for the second time, and have agreed to give it up, again, and yet somehow you are convinced this is actually 4d chess to kill everyone in the region and take it.. for reasons..
E
I doubt that Israel would kill US troops there. I can see where you’re coming from and the concerns may be warranted but I don’t think they’d want a repeat of the USS Liberty incident. If that happened now, they’d lose US support, which they desperately need.
T
Wait, are you telling that Hamas .. won and can make demands from that postition? Or are we talking about an old man smelling like his coffin already? Oudor du Coffin?
E
No one is saying that. Not even sure where you got that from what I said..
M
Seeing how giving back Gaza in 2005 has led to Hamas being elected and decades of tens of thousands of missiles sbeing shot at Israel should have warned Israel of ever allowing Gazans to self-govern. Especially after October 7th Gazans should be happy if they get to be allowed to return to Jordan and Egypt.
E
With the world lens on the conflict- I don’t think it would at all be handled the same way as it has been in the past. With the US having plans to rebuild Gaza/etc, there likely would be many US/UN peacekeeping forces during the transition for stability and safety. Like I said in other comments- the issue won’t go away and without Israel recognizing statehood, there will always be other resistance groups even if Hamas is taken out.
C
what hamas and other terrorists are doing is targeting civilians. this is a crime against humanity not “resistance”.
E
Terrorists typically start as resistance groups which is why I used that wording. If you’re trying to ask me if I think Hamas are terrorists, yes. I denounce any form of extremism. Regardless of the wording, the point is the same. There will be another group to take its place without statehood.
C
they got self governance in Gaza and responded with rocket fire on Israel immediately. you think Israel will allow them statehood now after the oct 7 barbarity? if it is insane enough to do so it will just get attacked with heavier weapons. they openly demand to take over all of israel
E
I think you’re missing my point and ignoring what I said two messages ago. They wouldn’t have any arms- no military. At most a local police force. All arms in the Palestinian areas would be held by US/UN peacekeeping forces.
C
Palestinian leadership is not interested in disarming, or their “police force” will be an army in anything but a name. And Israel is not interested in trusting UN peacekeepers after their utter failures in Lebanon. And US is not interested in putting boots on the ground.
S
Israel would crazy to agree to a 2SS at this point. The security risk would be insane. Hamas has to disarm, and Palestinians have to prove to Israelis that they have truly given up the violence and Israel can trust them not to just arm and attack again from an even stronger position, which is what a Palestinian state would be.
W
Prove to the Israeli’s they can be peaceful, while at the same time Israel does massive violence and annexation in the WB. Huh? One side can be violent, while the other side has to be 100% passive. That makes zero sense. Shouldn’t both sides have to prove it?
O
> Hamas has to disarm, and Palestinians have to prove to Israelis that they have truly given up the violence and Israel can trust them not to just arm and attack again from an even stronger position, which is what a Palestinian state would be. Until and unless Israel grants Palestinians full rights and treats them with dignity, there will be resistance. Israel cannot have it both ways. They do not get to treat them as second class and ethnically cleanse them and just expect them to accept it. As long as this happens, there will be resistance. Remove the need for resistance, and then a peaceful future is truly in reach.
O
Unless Israel rolls over and dies there is no indication whatsoever that there will be peace. This has been the lesson of 100 years. Your empty words won’t change that
E
I don’t think they’d agree without Hamas agreeing to disarm in the first place. Plus, after that, I’m sure there would be tons of peacekeeping troops such as the UN/etc to serve as a buffer. I personally don’t think Israel would do it tbh- but I don’t see any other path to peace. If they get rid of Hamas, another group will just take its place as the methodology has been extremely questionable. Many countries have already recognized Palestine so it’s not like the issue will just disappear
O
Letting the UN in there would be an epically stupid move. The track record for the UN “peacekeeping” especially in the Levant is worse than awful. They do less than good and the opposite of help.
E
Well we’ve never tried with a two state solution on a global lens of this magnitude. Additionally, US troops would also likely be involved as the US is planning to rebuild Gaza in their own view.
C
Palestinians can keep their recognition if it makes them happy. It’s not dangerous by itself. Their right to self determination does not trump Israel’s right to security and territorial integrity. So they pretty much have to prove they do not pose a danger if they want an actual state not just “recognition”. UN peacekeepers? No one in the ME trusts them. They did nothing in Lebanon except hinder IDF.
E
I’d say that comparing to Lebanon isn’t the same as this. Installing US/UN in the Palestinian areas as peacekeeping forces after Hamas would surrender arms post a two state solution would eliminate the danger.
C
“Isn’t the same” how? It is still the same UN with the same anti-zionist slant. And US is not making the classic blunder of getting involved in a land war in Asia.
Additional Sources:
BBC – Iran must abandon enriched uranium and not produce more, Netanyahu says
The New York Times – Opinion | Netanyahu Plays Trump and American Jews for Fools — Again
