The New York Declaration.
- Thread starter petros
- Start date
Yup. Hamas can change their name to the Pop Tarts and live their lives in the Nation of Palestine they fought for and won.
Israel can't rebrand as a new entity and the pipe dream of Judea/Samaria/Euphrates to the Nile is never going to happen.
Going forward, after the most recent shenanigans, yesterday/today, depending on your time zone….
(YouTube & Israel resumes ceasefire after Gaza strikes)
Wow. Ok, even with apparently three different attacks on IDF forces in the last day, Israeli fought back, & still resumes the cease-fire. That’s apparently what I’m reading in the various new sources today.
You might read the same news sources and interpreted it completely differently.
Here’s something we can finally agree on today. This is never going to happen. Good to find some common ground. Other than a fringe of far-right religious extremists, this concept is not only irrelevant, it’s got to be absolutely laughable to the overwhelming majority of Israelis in its absurdity, to only be acknowledged with a group rolling of their eyes.
They whom? Israel or Hamas? I’m going to assume that the answer is yes.
DOHA, Oct 17 (Reuters) - Hamas intends to maintain security control in Gaza during an interim period, a senior Hamas official told Reuters, adding he could not commit to the group disarming - positions that reflect the difficulties facing U.S. plans to secure an end to the war.
Hamas politburo member Mohammed Nazzal also said the group was ready for a ceasefire of up to five years to rebuild devastated Gaza, with guarantees for what happens afterwards depending on Palestinians being given "horizons and hope" for statehood.
Not much. What were the conditions for a cease-fire? What were the conditions for this peace agreement?
Speaking to Reuters in an interview from Doha, where Hamas politicians have long resided, Nazzal defended the group's crackdown in Gaza, where it carried out public executions on Monday. There were always "exceptional measures" during war and those executed were criminals guilty of killing, he said. You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs…
While Hamas has broadly expressed these views before, the timing of Nazzal's comments demonstrates the major obstacles obstructing efforts to cement a full end to the war in Gaza, days after the first phase of the ceasefire was agreed. Oh well.
Trump's September 29 plan called for Hamas to immediately return all hostages before committing to disarmament and ceding governance of Gaza to a technocratic committee overseen by an international transitional body.
Asked if Hamas would give up its arms, Nazzal, speaking on Wednesday, said: "I can't answer with a yes or no. Frankly, it depends on the nature of the project. The disarmament project you're talking about, what does it mean? To whom will the weapons be handed over?"
He added that issues to be discussed in the next phase of negotiations, including weapons, concerned not only Hamas but other armed Palestinian groups, and would require Palestinians more broadly to reach a position.
Asked for its response to Nazzal's remarks, the White House directed Reuters to comments by Trump on Thursday.
"We have a commitment from them and I assume they're going to honour their commitment," Trump said, noting that Hamas had returned more bodies but without elaborating on the issue of it disarming or its interim presence on the ground…but that’s so three days ago now.
(Reaching an agreement on the first phase of the plan depended on US pressure on Israel but also Qatar and Turkey leaning heavily on Hamas)
The spiraling violence comes just two weeks into a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas that sparked hope among both Palestinians and Israelis that the brutal, two-year war was finally at an end. President Trump, who proposed the 20-point plan that was meant to end the war…
…characterized the agreement as an opportunity for peace in the Middle East.
Israel Hits Dozens of Targets in Gaza After Saying Hamas Killed Troops in Attack — The Wall Street Journal
Israel accuses militant group of violating truce; Hamas’s armed wing denies mounting any attack on Israeli troops
Yeah that’s brutal. Not unexpected by anyone on Oct 7th, 2023 & to those that planned this prior to that date, but brutal nonetheless.
Who the fuck do you think?They whom? Israel or Hamas? I’m going to assume that the answer is yes.
DOHA, Oct 17 (Reuters) - Hamas intends to maintain security control in Gaza during an interim period, a senior Hamas official told Reuters, adding he could not commit to the group disarming - positions that reflect the difficulties facing U.S. plans to secure an end to the war.
Hamas politburo member Mohammed Nazzal also said the group was ready for a ceasefire of up to five years to rebuild devastated Gaza, with guarantees for what happens afterwards depending on Palestinians being given "horizons and hope" for statehood.
Not much. What were the conditions for a cease-fire? What were the conditions for this peace agreement?
Speaking to Reuters in an interview from Doha, where Hamas politicians have long resided, Nazzal defended the group's crackdown in Gaza, where it carried out public executions on Monday. There were always "exceptional measures" during war and those executed were criminals guilty of killing, he said. You can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs…
While Hamas has broadly expressed these views before, the timing of Nazzal's comments demonstrates the major obstacles obstructing efforts to cement a full end to the war in Gaza, days after the first phase of the ceasefire was agreed. Oh well.
Trump's September 29 plan called for Hamas to immediately return all hostages before committing to disarmament and ceding governance of Gaza to a technocratic committee overseen by an international transitional body.
Asked if Hamas would give up its arms, Nazzal, speaking on Wednesday, said: "I can't answer with a yes or no. Frankly, it depends on the nature of the project. The disarmament project you're talking about, what does it mean? To whom will the weapons be handed over?"
He added that issues to be discussed in the next phase of negotiations, including weapons, concerned not only Hamas but other armed Palestinian groups, and would require Palestinians more broadly to reach a position.
Asked for its response to Nazzal's remarks, the White House directed Reuters to comments by Trump on Thursday.
"We have a commitment from them and I assume they're going to honour their commitment," Trump said, noting that Hamas had returned more bodies but without elaborating on the issue of it disarming or its interim presence on the ground…but that’s so three days ago now.
(Reaching an agreement on the first phase of the plan depended on US pressure on Israel but also Qatar and Turkey leaning heavily on Hamas)
The spiraling violence comes just two weeks into a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas that sparked hope among both Palestinians and Israelis that the brutal, two-year war was finally at an end. President Trump, who proposed the 20-point plan that was meant to end the war…
View attachment 31674
…characterized the agreement as an opportunity for peace in the Middle East.
Flare-ups of fighting between the two sides have occurred several times since the cease-fire came into effect, but this is the first time that Israel has responded with widespread strikes across Gaza. It is also the first time Hamas successfully killed troops since the halt to fighting.
Israel Hits Dozens of Targets in Gaza After Saying Hamas Killed Troops in Attack — The Wall Street Journal
Israel accuses militant group of violating truce; Hamas’s armed wing denies mounting any attack on Israeli troopsapple.news
Yeah that’s brutal. Not unexpected by anyone on Oct 7th, 2023 & to those that planned this prior to that date, but brutal nonetheless.
View attachment 31673
What peace agreement? Did Israel agree to a peace agreement or are they being forced to stop fighting by the UN and 149 nations?
Israel agreed to a U.S.-brokered ceasefire deal with Hamas in early October 2025, marking the first stage of an agreement aimed at ending the two-year Gaza war, securing a hostage release, and facilitating humanitarian aid. This deal, proposed by U.S. President Donald Trump, was approved by Israel's cabinet on October 8, 2025, and welcomed by UN Secretary-General António Guterres as a positive step based on prior U.S. proposals. It was not a direct "peace agreement" in the sense of a comprehensive long-term treaty but rather a phased ceasefire with provisions for hostage exchanges and potential escalation to broader talks.
The notion of Israel being "forced to stop fighting by the UN and 149 nations" appears to stem from a June 2025 UN General Assembly (UNGA) resolution demanding an immediate, unconditional, and permanent ceasefire in Gaza, which passed with 149 votes in favor, 12 against (including Israel and the U.S.), and 19 abstentions.
Last edited:
Comes from here above.
Agreement involves at least two parties, which in this case were…?
If you don’t want to call it a “peace” agreement designed to end the war, you can call it whatever kind of agreement you wish “designed to end the war.” Here’s some alternative terms if it’ll made you feel better:
Gaza peace plan - Wikipedia
Its a ceasefire not a peace plan. Look that up whilst at it.Comes from here above.
Agreement involves at least two parties, which in this case were…?
View attachment 31675
If you don’t want to call it a “peace” agreement designed to end the war, you can call it whatever kind of agreement you wish “designed to end the war.” Here’s some alternative terms if it’ll made you feel better:
View attachment 31676
View attachment 31677
Gaza peace plan - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
The real shit has yet to hit the fan. Clearing 700,000 illegal aliens from West Bank is going to be dirty.
A rose, etc…if it makes you feel better.
Seeing as it’s disputed territory, I concur with your assessment of the situation in that, without mutually agreed upon land swaps, and agreement of mutual borders, it will be a shit show.
Prior to 1967, control of the Palestinian territories was split between Egypt and Jordan, which “administered” (in the case of what Jordan renamed as the West Bank, it annexed it) the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, respectively.
The lands under PA control on the West Bank are disputed territories. When the partition plan was set up in 1948, that territory was marked as being another Arab state, could have been called Palestine or something else.
The neighbouring Arab nations rejected the plan because they did not want a Jewish state, Israel to exist. They told the local people to leave and return when they destroyed the new nation of Israel and sent any remaining population out of the area.
The Arab nations lost, but Jordan did conquer the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem. They basically ignored these lands even though they illegally annexed it. They could have set up a state, but didn’t and the local population of Arabs apparently didn’t care.
Jordanian annexation of the West Bank - Wikipedia
Six-Day War - Wikipedia
Seemed like a good deal, but the Arabs said no to all. So possibly these territories can be considered disputed. Jordan still did not initiate a new state. Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty and at some point later Jordan gave up what it considered its claim to the West Bank and easter Jerusalem.
The International Court of Justice (ICJ), the UN General Assembly, and the UN Security Council all regard Israel as the occupying power for the territories. In 2024, the ICJ ruled in an advisory opinion that Israel's occupation was illegal and called for Israel to end its "unlawful presence ... as rapidly as possible" and to make reparations to the people of the occupied territories.
UN special rapporteur Richard Falk called Israel's occupation "an affront to international law". The Supreme Court of Israel has ruled that Israel is holding the West Bank under "belligerent occupation".
However, successive Israeli governmentshave preferred the term "disputed territories" in the case of the West Bank, and Israel likewise maintains that the West Bank is disputed territory. Israel has cited several reasons for retaining the West Bank within its ambit: historic rights stemming from the Balfour Declaration; security grounds, both internal and external; and the area's symbolic value for Jews.
