Ceasefire In The Israel-Hamas War?

Bogan

Sounds like "I can shoot your women and children but you must not retaliate."

MayCaesar

Game theory is a mathematical theory studying behavior of actors based on their expectations of behavior of other actors. Trust plays an interesting role in that theory: in the absence of trust every actor is forced to choose the course of action that has the best expectation across all possible sets of behaviors of others, including very negative behaviors - while in the presence of trust actors can cooperate and assure a better outcome for everyone. However, as long as even a small minority of actors are unwilling to trust others or, in turn, cannot be trusted by others, the former behavior ensues.

Suppose parties A and B are at war and agree on a ceasefire. If A and B both could trust each other with respecting the agreement, then they could move on and stop worrying about reignition of the conflict. However, even if B completely trusts A to respect the agreement, but A does not trust B, then A will be encouraged to act in a way that impairs B's ability to reignite the conflict, and B will have to react to that... And as such the agreement becomes virtually useless as both parties are preparing for war.

The US and Canada do not have to be ready for a potential war with each other: the US government understands that the Canadian government has no reason to initiate hostilities, and the Canadian government understands the same about the US government. As such, they can cooperate and build something together, without fearing being backstabbed. The peace here is real and lasting, and the possibility of war does not have to be considered by the actors when choosing how to act.

Not the case with Israel and Palestine. Ceasefire or not, both actors have to behave as if the war could break out any moment. Cooperation, peace, et cetera here is only possible if one of the sides assures complete dominance and beats the other side into submission. But that would also lead to a bit of a contradiction, for cooperation at a gunpoint might as well be enslavement.

The reality is, if A has a hostile intent towards B, there might not be a scenario in which both A and B get what they want. Cooperation is only possible when A and B find a common ground and shared goals and focus on achieving them, setting aside their disagreements. But when the disagreements are the essence of their interaction, cooperation is unfeasible.

It is like an argument between a husband and a wife. If both the husband and the wife are willing to work together towards a resolution, then the resolution can be found, a compromise that works for both parties. However, if the husband (or the wife) is set on "winning" the argument and does not want to seek the common ground until the partner concedes theirs, then there is no good outcome to this situation - and even if the husband (or the wife) does "win" the argument and beats the partner into submission, the resentment will hold, and the consequences of this argument remaining unresolved will snowball into a catastrophe and a breakup.

Dee

                     Our government in Republic of Ireland proposed the the solution in 1960 but will they listen.

                             Situation in Gaza and Israel - What is Ireland’s position?

Ireland wants to see a permanent and sustainable ceasefire, the lifting of the blockade on Gaza which is at the root cause of this devastating conflict and ultimately the establishment of a two-state solution which is based on the borders of 1967.

We will continue to address the crisis and humanitarian situation with which we are now confronted in Gaza. This includes addressing the underlying causes of the violence.

Ireland fully accepts that the Government of Israel has the right to defend its people, but this right does not negate the rights of others. Any use of military force in self defence must be in accordance with international humanitarian law, and in particular must be both discriminate and proportionate.

Equally, we condemn the firing of missiles from Gaza into Israel by Hamas and other militant groups.

Ireland has repeatedly underlined that no ceasefire will last without a serious political effort to address the causes of the disastrous situation in Gaza.

It is imperative to bring about an end of the restrictions imposed on the people by the continuing Israeli blockade and the general closing off of Gaza. The continued absence for people in Gaza of any political or economic perspective for the future is a breeding ground for extremist action.

Did you know that Ireland was the first EU member state to declare that a solution to the conflict in the Middle East had to be based on a fully sovereign State of Palestine, independent of and co-existing with Israel?

That was in 1980, in a joint declaration by the Foreign Ministers of Ireland and Bahrain.

Since then, every Irish Government has given a high priority to the achievement of a “two state solution”, which is now the accepted goal of all international efforts. The Middle East Peace Process remains a key foreign policy priority for the Government. Along with our EU partners, Ireland supports all efforts to restart comprehensive negotiations for an overall peace agreement.

Our support to the Palestinian People

Ireland has therefore for many years focused in particular on the injustices and infringements of human rights suffered by Palestinians in their homeland. These include the seizure of land for Israeli settlements, evictions of families, destruction of homes and farm buildings, of wells and water tanks, and of trees and crops, as well as movement restrictions and unequal treatment.

We believe that these critical issues cannot wait for an overall peace agreement, and action must be taken to ensure that the viability of a two-state solution is maintained.

Barnardot

@JulesKorngold ;There already was a ceasefire.  Hamas broke it on October 7.

And Israel broke it before that and Hamas broke it before that then Israel broke it before that then Hamas broke it before that then.......

How far do you want to go back just to find out who started it. They have both hated each others guts with such vehemence from the day dot. They are both to bleme for having such bitter hatred against each other.

ZeusAres42

@Dee

You support the IRA right? 

Dee

@ZeusAres42

Correct

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: Just Some IRA Terror Attacks

• 1970 Belfast bombings (11 killed, 157 wounded)
• Claudy bombing (1972) (9 killed, 30 wounded)
• Bloody Sunday (1972) (14 killed, 14 wounded)
• Guildford bombing (1974) (5 killed, 65 wounded)
• Birmingham pub bombings (1974) (21 killed, 182 wounded)
• M62 coach bombing (1974) (12 killed, 38 wounded)
• Warrenpoint bombing (1979) (18 killed, 63 wounded)
• Droppin' Well bombing (1982) (11 killed, 63 wounded)
• Harrods bombing (1983) (6 killed, 93 wounded)
• Brighton Hotel bombing (1984) (5 killed, 34 injured)
• Enniskillen bombing (1987) (11 killed, 63 wounded)
• Manchester bombing (1992) (2 killed, 54 wounded)
• Omagh bombing (1998) (29 killed, 220 wounded)
• Westminster Bridge attack (2017) (5 killed, 40 injured)

Dee

@JulesKorngold

ARGUMENT TOPIC : JUST A DROP IN THE OCEAN OF BRITISH TERROR ATTACKS AGAINST THE IRISH 

I CAN GIVE THE COMPLETE LIST FOR IRELAND ALONE,AND WE CAN THEN INTRODUCE THE  LENGHTY LIST FOR  OTHERS COUNTRIES WHO HAVE SUFFERED FROM BRITISH STATE TERRORISM

1972, 9 July	Springhill massacre	Springhill estate West Belfast, Northrern Ireland	5	2	The British Army shot seven unarmed Catholics near a timber yard in Belfast, five of whom died, including a Catholic priest and a 13-year-old girl
1972, 21 July	Bloody Friday	Belfast	9, including two British soldiers	130	Within the space of 75 minutes, the Provisional IRA detonated 22 bombs in Belfast. Nine people were killed (including two British soldiers and one Ulster Defence Association member) while 130 were injured
1972, 31 July	Claudy bombing	Claudy	9	30	Three car bombs were detonated in the early morning on Main Street, Claudy, killing 9 civilians, including three children. The Provisional IRA are believed to be responsible for what became known as "Bloody Monday". Part of "the Troubles".
1972, 20 December	Top of the Hill bar shooting	Derry	5	4	At 10:30 p.m., two Ulster Defence Association gunmen entered the Top of the Hill bar in Derry and opened fire, killing five patrons and injuring several others. The shooting is believed to be revenge for the IRA's killing of George Hamilton earlier that day.[15]
1974, 17 May	Dublin and Monaghan bombings	Dublin and Monaghan	34	300	Three bombs exploded in Dublin and a fourth exploded in Monaghan, carried out by the Glenanne gang; included British soldiers from the Ulster Defence Regiment (UDR), police officers from the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), and members of the Mid-Ulster Brigade of the Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF)
1975, 31 July	Miami Showband killings	Buskhill, County Down, Northern Ireland	5	2	A botched attack by the UVF. Part of "the Troubles".
1975, 13 August	Bayardo Bar attack	Belfast, Northern Ireland	5

6, 4 January	Reavey and O'Dowd killings	Whitecross, County Armagh	6	1	A massacre of two families by the Ulster Volunteer Force.
1976, 5 January	Kingsmill massacre	Kingsmill, County Armagh, Northern Ireland	10	1	A sectarian massacre of Protestant workers. A report by the Historical Inquiries Team found that Provisional IRA members were responsible. Part of "the Troubles".
1978, 17 February	La Mon restaurant bombing	Gransha, County Down, Northern Ireland	12	30	Massacre conducted by the IRA. A large incendiary bomb, containing a napalm-like substance, was detonated outside one of the restaurant windows. Part of "the Troubles".
1979, 27 August	Warrenpoint ambush	Narrow Water Castle, County Down	19	6	Double bombing against British soldiers by the IRA.
1987, 8 May	Loughgall Ambush	Loughgall, County Armagh	9, 8 IRA Volunteers & 1 civilian	1	British Army SAS ambush killed eight experienced IRA volunteers, making it the IRA's biggest loss of life from one incident since the 1920s, two Protestant civilians were also shot by the SAS in the ambush, one of whom died from his injuries, referred to by Irish republicans as massacre as a number of the IRA men shot dead were unarmed while trying to surrender.
1987, 8 November	Remembrance Day bombing	Enniskillen, Northern Ireland	12	63	A mass civilian bombing by the IRA. Part of "the Troubles".
1988, 16 March	Milltown Cemetery attack	Belfast, Northern Ireland	3	60+	A gun and grenade attack by UDA member Michael Stone. Part of "the Troubles".
1992, 17 January	Teebane bombing	County Tyrone Northern Ireland	8	6	A roadside bomb destroying a van by the PIRA.
1992, 5 February	Sean Graham bookmakers' shooting	Belfast Northern Ireland	5	9	A mass shooting by the UDA.
1993, 25 March	Castlerock killings	Castlerock, Northern Ireland	4	1	A mass shooting by the UDA
1993, 23 October	Shankill Road bombing	Belfast, Northern Ireland	10	57	A mass civilian bombing by the IRA. Part of "the Troubles".
1993, 30 October	Greysteel massacre	Greysteel, Northern Ireland	8	13	A shooting by the UDA. Part of "the Troubles".
1994, 18 June	Loughinisland massacre	Loughinisland, Northern Ireland	6	5	A shooting by the UVF. Part of "the Troubles".
1998, 15 August	Omagh bombing	Omagh, Northern Ireland	29

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: "What About England?"

@Dee
Stop the WhatAboutism.  The IRA is a terrorist organization.

Dee

@JulesKorngold

What do you mean what about England?

THE IRA ARE THE IRISH REPUBLICAN ARMY ...THEY ARE FREEDOM FIGHTERS

***Stop the WhatAboutism.  The IRA is a terrorist organization.***


Stop the WhatAboutism.  The British government engages in state terrorism.

Bogan

Dee is a troll, Jules.   Just ignore him.     Just in case you haven't figured it out, all he is doing is amusing himself by winding you up.   

Dee

@Bogan

Says Bogan the bigot and racist LOL 

Everyone you disagree with you deem a troll because you cannot debate 

ZeusAres42

Dee said:

@ZeusAres42

Correct

@Dee ofc, kinda figures. However that being said idk with you. Several months or a about a year or so ago you were accusing @anarchist100 on here for being anti-Jewish. Before that you were having a dig at @CYDharter for being racist against blacks. You also thought conspiracy theories against 9/11 were ludicrous. You undderstood that climate change is a real thing. And much more. 

Then Nom comes along and all of a sudden you are for all of this. Bruh, you really need to make your mind up.  

rather amusing how you called me a raging hyporcrite a month or so ago. You can almost taste the irony. 

Can you really blame someone thinking "radicolization?"  Maybe you are just trolling but I hope it's not the latter as that means there might actually be some help for you. Perhaps you do have a moral compass, have a Consciounce. 

Dee

@ZeusAres42

ARGUMENT TOPIC: Z BOUGHT HIMSELF A JUMBO BOOK OF FALLACIES TYPICALLY  USED BY PEOPLE LIKE HIMSELF ( DREADFUL DEBATERS).Z HAS BEEN GUILTY OF RESORTING TO USING EVERY FALKACY IN HIS HEFTY TOME.....

HIS LATEST ONE BEING ......

ARGUMENTUM AD BACULUM : If you don't join our demonstration against the expansion of the park, we will evict you from your apartment; So, you should join our demonstration against the expansion of the park.


*** ofc, kinda figures. However that being said idk with you. Several months or a about a year or so ago you were accusing @anarchist100 on here for being anti-Jewish.***

It's no surprise you're a fan of fellow Jew and Irish hater A who 2 months ago poured out his vile opinion of the Irish , you no doubt find his views admirable.

The guy openly stated several times that the Holocaust never happened, I made an educated guess that this probably meant he was most likely anti Jewish.

***Before that you were having a dig at @CYDharter for being racist against blacks.***

Yes yet again he sort of gave the game away with his vile bigoted rants.



*** You also thought conspiracy theories against 9/11 were ludicrous. You undderstood that climate change is a real thing. And much more. ***

And?

**Then Nom comes along and all of a sudden you are for all of this. Bruh, you really need to make your mind up.  ***

All for what exactly?

I still believe the Holocaust actually happened , I still belive that blacks are in ever way entitled to be treated exactly the way every other citizen is.

So what's your actual.point?

***rather amusing how you called me a raging hyporcrite a month or so ago. You can almost taste the irony. ***

I called you what you are and I told you why as usual your response was to laugh into personal attacks like above that you cannot back up.

***Can you really blame someone thinking "radicolization?"***

The only thing I can blame " someone" for is a total inability to comprehend what an opponent actually says so as to push  their own  attempt at character assassination.

***  Maybe you are just trolling but I hope it's not the latter as that means there might actually be some help for you***

The only one trolling is you as every point you make is easily countered and your favoured respone is your usual smear campaigns, do you ever actually debate?

***. Perhaps you do have a moral compass,***

You can almost taste the irony this is hilarious Z talks about  a " moral compass," yet he praised the FDA for being a model of honesty, integrity and for following best practice , this being the same totally corrupt organisation that allowed and escalated the opioid crisis in the USA.

What a raging hypocrite you are, watch now as Z foes his usual and remains mute.on this



*** have a Consciounce. ***

Says a guy who refused to condemn the FDA and also asks others to have a conscience while he refuses to condemn the British goverment for their savagery in Nothern Ireland ...."have a conscience " indeed

Dreamer

Argument Topic: Interesting I didn't know Dee ever believed in climate change.

@ZeusAres42

There's an interesting yahoo article on Democratic Rep. Tlaib's take on the situation. I disagree, with Tlaib, but I feel as a liberal I have to at least hear her as a woman of color's point of view.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/democratic-rep-tlaib-accuses-biden-024529584.html

Bogan

@Dee ;    Everyone you disagree with you deem a troll because you cannot debate 

Endlessly submitting sneery one liners is heckling, not debating.       Try and grow a brain.    

MineSubCraftStarved

@JulesKorngold
Did people call for a ceasefire after 9/11?
No.
So why are people calling for a ceasefire now?

It's a general rule to "not negotiate with terrorists." Hamas is a terrorist organization, Israel shouldn't and will never negotiate with them. That only validates them as a legitimate political entity.
I never saw people talking about US negotiations with al-Qaeda after 9/11. But when it comes to Israel, everyone starts screaming about "proportional response," "humanitarian pause," or military ceasefire.
I think its time people grew up and began to accept responsibilities for their actions.

Dee

@Dreamer

Argument Topic: Interesting I didn't know Dee ever believed in climate change.

@ZeusAres42

Really?  You knew perfectly well, l I spent several frustrating posts debating with you on the issue and you assume because I asked you several questions regarding cycle lanes and the cost to the puplic and how utterly ridiculous and ineffective thay  are ( mostly) as  a solution to the crisis.

You instantly deem anyone who disgrees with with your copy and pasted links of being a climate change denier.

It's remarkable also you pretend you didn't actually suggest that working class families who couldn't afford electric cars should walk or cycle to work as it would be good for their health

Dee

@Bogan

Endlessly submitting sneery one liners is heckling, not debating. Try and grow a brain.    


You don't debate you rant. Also I never engage with you as you've the intellectual level of a sea sponge 


Try and grow a brain.    

If I succeed in growing one I will send on to you as you're badly in need.

MichaelElpers

@Dreamer

"I disagree, with Tlaib, but I feel as a liberal I have to at least hear her as a woman of color's point of view."

This is racist/sexist thinking.  You should be able to hear/listen to anyone, and their color/sex should have no impact on why your listening to them or the value of their input.

Replace with white man and liberals would be outraged.

MayCaesar

Dreamer said:

@ZeusAres42

There's an interesting yahoo article on Democratic Rep. Tlaib's take on the situation. I disagree, with Tlaib, but I feel as a liberal I have to at least hear her as a woman of color's point of view.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/democratic-rep-tlaib-accuses-biden-024529584.html

Wow... I just had the best weekend of my life - but I just had to read something by the end of Sunday that would spoil it. This is one of the most disgusting things I have read in a while... Well achieved.

As a "liberal", you have to hear out every "woman of color" on this issue? What about men of non-color (or whatever the opposite of "of color" here is)? Their opinion is inherently less interesting?

Bogan

@Dee ;     quote     I spent several frustrating posts debating with you on the issue 

Since when is tossing sneery one liners "debating?"   

Bogan

@Dreamer

Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib  quote   “I grieve the Palestinian and Israeli lives lost yesterday, today, and every day. I am determined as ever to fight for a just future where everyone can live in peace, without fear and with true freedom, equal rights, and human dignity,” she said in part, adding, “The path to that future must include lifting the blockade, ending the occupation, and dismantling the apartheid system that creates the suffocating, dehumanizing conditions that can lead to resistance. The failure to recognize the violent reality of living under siege, occupation, and apartheid makes no one safer.”

 

So, what is Rashid Tlaib’s solution, Dreamer?     Does she want Israel/Palestine separated into Jewish and Muslim areas?     No.    What she wants is what every “good” Muslim wants, and that is the total extermination of Israel.   “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!”, they shout.

 I find it incredible that a well meaning person such as yourself can ignore the fact that the Muslim opposition to Israel is entirely religious.    You are advocating for religious extremism.     The whole problem could be solved if the surrounding Arab nations would accept all Palestinians as their own citizens.     But they won’t do that for many reasons.    The primary one is because they want this endless confrontation with Israel to continue.

 There are three reasons for that primary reason.    The first is, that the evil Mullahs and Imams will never accept that the Jews will return to a land conquered by Islam and replace Islam as the defining culture.   The second is, that Israel is an unwelcome example of what the entire Arab world could be if their people were as smart as the Jews.    The third is, that just as in Orwell’s book “1984”, Arab despots need somebody for their people to hate in order to make them ignore the widespread corruption and incompetency of their despotic administrations.   And you support this insanity?    Ama-a-a-a-zing. 

 Arab nations will not accept their Palestinian “brothers” because too many of them are brainwashed fundamentalists who have caused serious trouble in every Arab nation that gave them succor.    Just as they are causing trouble in every western nation that was stu-pid enough to allow them to enter as “refugees.”     If Gaza is such a bad place, why is it that Australia now has the problem of repatriating 39 “Australian” Palestinians who left peaceful Australia to go back and live in Gaza?    Denmark noted that most of the “Palestinian” refugees granted asylum in Denmark “celebrated” by immediately returning to Gaza to see their families. 

 I think that your opposition to Israel is simply you trying to display your class affiliations.    The social progressive (actually, “regressive”) left has declared that opposition to Israel is another defining characteristic of the social progressive brahmin caste, a class you aspire to be considered a part of.        And you have a compulsive psychological need to conform to your chosen class’s expectations.    Your advocacy for “Palestinians” is just a fashion statement.

Dee

@Bogan



***Since when is tossing sneery one liners "debating?" ***

It's not, so can you stop doing it?

Barnardot

@Dee @Bogan It's not, so can you stop doing it?

So says the master of sicko personal insult one liners. Ive never seen so many one liners that could easily fit in to a book bigger than war and piece.

Bogan

HAMAS wants a ceasefire because they know that the IDF has got them trapped and is slowly wiping the cowardly bastards tunnel by tunnel.     .    Far from being Muslim heroes, they are now sheeting blue bricks because now they are fighting real men instead of women and children.    And those real men are smart, brave, and they know what they are doing.    Democracy strikes back.

Dee

@Bogan


And those real men are smart, brave, and they know what they are doing. Democracy strikes back.



Sure thing buddy your definition of "real men" seems to mean scum bags who beat up women and children .... thankfully my country like many more holds weekly support rallies for the the brave citizens of Palestine 

Bogan

Try writing an entire 350 word article starting with a clearly stated premise that you are prepared to defend with a reasoned argument.     Writing curt replies dealing entirely in implications is hardly going to impress anybody into thinking you have an opinion worth reading.    Neither is, just continually asking loaded Dorothy Dixer questions.     You may think that it makes you look authoritative, but it just makes you look like an ignorant person winging it to vainly defend a position he passionately holds, but has little knowledge of.

 

Dee

@Bogan


Try writing an entire 350 word article starting with a clearly stated premise that you are prepared to defend with a reasoned argument.     Writing curt replies dealing entirely in implications is hardly going to impress anybody into thinking you have an opinion worth reading.    Neither is, just continually asking loaded Dorothy Dixer questions.     You may think that it makes you look authoritative, but it just makes you look like an ignorant person winging it to vainly defend a position he passionately holds, but has little knowledge of.


Try writing an entire 350 word article starting with a clearly stated premise that you are prepared to defend with a reasoned argument.     Writing curt replies dealing entirely in implications is hardly going to impress anybody into thinking you have an opinion worth reading.    Neither is, just continually asking loaded Dorothy Dixer questions.     You may think that it makes you look authoritative, but it just makes you look like an ignorant person winging it to vainly defend a position he passionately holds, but has little knowledge of.