• TrippyFocus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wtf is the point of passing this bs watered down version? It’s basically a strongly worded letter if it’s not demanding an immediate ceasefire. It also has more bs like Israeli prisoners going free but no mention of any palestinians going free? It’s completely one sided.

    • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      17
      ·
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It calls for a ceasefire if Israeli hostages are released and for immediate aid to the people of Gaza. If the US starts off at A, support Israel unconditionally, and you start of at B, ceasefire now, and the US gets slowly pressured your way until ultimately, the US enters a resolution that is much closer to B than to A, you don’t stomp your foot and say ‘that’s not B!’ and reject it, if you really care about civilians in Gaza, who are starving right now, only in the hopes that in a few months time, the US might’ve fully moved over to B. When Israel has already invaded Rafah and many Gazans have starved.

      • NovaPrime@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        How about Israel release the entire area of Gaza as a hostage first?

        • Quacksalber@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          3 months ago

          Why don’t you wish for unicorns while you’re at it? That’s about as likely to happen as Israel, after all this time, suddenly deciding to pull back from Gaza.