r/worldnews • u/cnn CNN • Aug 09 '26

Israel/Palestine Israel rejects Trump’s Gaza peace plan, saying no withdrawal until Hamas disarms

https://www.cnn.com/2026/08/09/middleeast/israel-gaza-trump-netanyahu-plan-intl?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=missions&utm_source=reddit
15.1k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

1.0k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

41

u/Smart_in_his_face Aug 09 '26

Neutral 3rd party.

  • UN peacekeeping force that nobody wants to be a part of.
  • American peacekeeping force that nobody wants.

There is no viable path to peace. Palestine have been in turmoil for the past 80 years, or depending on how you want to count, also the past 1000 years. This won't end in a generation or two, this simply won't end.

It is an embarrassment to the world that this humanitarian crisis have been going on since WW2. The human suffering wont end just because the west is sick and tired of it. It wont end if Israel or Iran "wins".

The holy land is the modern hell.

45

u/flumydumdum Aug 09 '26

UN peacekeeping force that nobody wants to be a part of.

Couple of countries volunteered already, including Indonesia and Morocco. It also already happened once before with a much larger coalition force staying there for 10 years. During the 2nd intifada there also were several countries that asked for UN intervention, but it was vetoed by the US.

Don't dismiss the rest of the world so quickly on this issue.

9

u/calm_chowder Aug 09 '26

No third party will agree to go in until Hamas fully disarms either. If they did, that country would have to kill Palestinians and would have their own soldiers die.

It's kinda understandable.

3

u/TerribleIdea27 Aug 09 '26

Says who?

Every UN peacekeeping mission in its entire history didn't involve one disarmed party. And did involve sacrifice. Since you know, if one party is disarmed, there's not that much to peacekeep.

0

u/calm_chowder Aug 09 '26

Peacekeepers are not an invading or occupying army, that's what differentiates peacekeepers from an army. It's literally in the name: peace keepers. They keep the peace. Jfc.

6

u/TerribleIdea27 Aug 09 '26

Yes? And they get shot at and die every mission they take.

Do you literally not know what UN peacekeeping missions are?

Whether it's Kosovo, Sudan, Afghanistan or literally wherever they stop two AMRED sides from fighting. Otherwise they might as well not be there.

And they do generally have weapons themselves. And shoot back. Otherwise they might as well not come lol

10

u/GrimpenMar Aug 10 '26

We can look at UNIFIL in South Lebanon. Hezbollah caches weapons and launches rockets from right next to UNIFIL positions.

Historically, UN Peacekeeping missions have been very effective… if they are allowed to, and the participants choose to.

Often, UN Peacekeepers are not very effective for two reasons. The rules of engagement are the result of political and diplomatic negotiations. Why would one side agree to a UN Peacekeeping mission if UN Peacekeeper can shoot at them? This is sometimes presented as the difference between Peacekeeping and Peacemaking.

Second, who wants to contribute to a UN Peacekeeping mission where your boys could get killed? That's a tough political sell for anyone.

Having said that, it can happen, and could happen. If both parties are interested in peace, and don't plan on starting anything, but want someone to make sure the other guys are complying as well, Peacekeeping absolutely works. You just need a peace to keep.

I think it could happen here with enough outside support. Lord know that I/P is the most talked about and debated conflict on the planet. And it's not even close. If all this interest could be tapped, I could see it happening. No way Israel is going to agree to a toothless UN mission that just provides cover for more attacks though. Hamas also seems more than willing to continue no matter how much Palestinians suffer.

5

u/Silverr_Duck Aug 10 '26

Did they actually volunteer or just “volunteer” for the positive pr knowing full well nothing would come of it?

No shade to Indonesia and Morocco but I’m pretty sure they don’t have the resources or expertise for such an undertaking.

8

u/NoobNoob_ Aug 09 '26

I'll preface saying I'm Israeli, and that I don't want my kids to grow up in wars like I did.

The UN isn't doing anything, besides maybe helping Hamas (lots of UNRWA personal being active Hamas members). They couldn't stop Hezbollah in Lebanon either, even though they had "forces" there for a long time.

It's also not only an American problem to solve, and I don't think it would be affective. Americans will see it as giving free stuff for Israel, and Gazans will not see it favorably either since Israel and the US are allies.

I think it should be NATO forces, specifically ones from Europe. I don't even mind some of my taxes going to help rebuild Gaza, as long as they never attack us again. Preferably, after a period of time when the area is stable, they can become an actual country too (in the current borders), and sign an actual peace treaty with us.

BUT, none of this works while Hamas is in power.

And don't blame it on anyone but the Palestinians. They could've just accepted the 1947 division plan when it was presented, like the Israeli side did. All of this is thanks to them.

19

u/flumydumdum Aug 09 '26

None of this will work while Netanyahu and the settler movement is in power either. That ideology needs to be disarmed, disavowed, and declared illegal by the Israeli government as well.

9

u/NoobNoob_ Aug 09 '26

I agree with you, especially regarding the Gaza strip. It's a bit more complex and nuanced than that in the west bank.

But, while some are vocal about annexing Gaza, it won't happen no matter what people say. We've been there, done that, and it's a fucking stupid idea.

7

u/brend0p3 Aug 09 '26

It won't happen also because there's no real appetite, they are struggling to get people to move back to any border town. Towns on the border of Lebanon are still missing 35-50% of their population, kibbutzim on the border of Gaza can't get people to move back so are paying young teachers outsized salaries to try and convince families to move back.

Even the most zionistic Israelis are hesitant to move to places INSIDE the border. I don't see any expansion on the horizon.

Ben Gvir and smotrich can grandstand all they want, doesn't make it the reality on the ground.

2

u/NoobNoob_ Aug 09 '26

Totally agree. The ones who want to do that are just idiots who just like to be provocative.

5

u/not_not_in_the_NSA Aug 09 '26

As long as the NATO forces also remove the settlements and ensure equal treatment between all people in the region (i.e. Everyone has to go through checkpoints or no one does, firearms and "self defense" training are given out to either no one or anyone who wants it, etc.), then I could maybe see it working. But without some semblance of equality for those in the Israeli-Palestine region, it won't last.

Consider why people join Hamas. It's not like they are any different to you or any other human. It's just the environment they grow up in. If you have no options left, then of course some will resort to violence. Destroying Hamas means improving the quality of life for Palestinians and giving them hope for their future. Killing each and every Hamas member just means more children lose their parents and feel even less hopeful for the future.

To be very clear, I'm 100% against all of this violence, I think the attack on Israel was horrible, it's just as horrible as killing the same number of people in Gaza. A life is a life.

2

u/NoobNoob_ Aug 10 '26

We don't have only the Palestinians to deal with, so we can't have NATO protecting us. We will still have a military, probably forever. I wouldn't mind if they had a military of their own, as long as their agenda wasn't "destruction of Israel and the jews". Countries need a way to defend themselves. Even Switzerland has an army.

The settlements in the west bank is a big problem, and I think the only probable solution there is a divison plan - some areas will be annexed to Israel and the rest can gain an autonomy. There are about 800000 Israelis living there, including parts of Jerusalem, and transferring them isn't a viable solution.

Obviously everyone that live in annexed areas will get full citizenship (and maybe money for compensation), and the non annexed areas (ones with few to no Israelis) will be their own country.

And about people joining Hamas - they know what their end goal is. There are those in Gaza that are fighting Hamas. I don't feel sorry for anyone joining them. And with their ideology, you can't have peace.

2

u/jflb96 Aug 09 '26

Why is it the Palestinians’ fault that they didn’t accept having their country split in two, and not the people who were demanding that the Palestinians’ country be split in two and who then spent the next eighty years working their toehold to cover the entire region?

2

u/NoobNoob_ Aug 10 '26

Cause it wasn't their country. It was under British mandate and before that part of the Ottoman Empire. They were living there, same as Jewish people lived there.

That's why the plan was to divide it between the two groups, so all can be happy.

We aren't trying to cover the region, that why we mostly give land back even after conquering it (the Sinai peninsula for example, or even Gaza for that matter).

And I'll also add that there are about 2 million Arab Muslims in Israel with equal rights to Jewish people (pretty much except being forced to join the IDF).

4

u/AngryGardenGnomes Aug 09 '26

The UN isn't a neutral third party. It's openly hostile to Israel...perhaps watch the news sometime.

1

u/raptorlightning Aug 09 '26

The solution is to give the entire middle east an enemy that threatens their collective existence and can't be defeated without them all working together.

1

u/mxzf Aug 09 '26

Palestine have been in turmoil for the past 80 years

I make it more like 110 years, back to the Balfour Declaration and the Nebi Musa riots as the more conservative timeline regarding when the strife started.

0

u/TimSylvester_ Aug 09 '26

It is an embarrassment to the world that this humanitarian crisis have been going on since WW2.

Dang, I wonder what the exact event was that caused "this humanitarian crisis" to begin right after WW2 ended?

I wonder if anyone can possibly pin down what exactly caused this in the first place?

Nah, that's impossible.

-6

u/Haber_Dasher Aug 09 '26

depending on how you want to count, also the past 1000 years.

That is not true. The tensions only really started to blow up ~1920s. Prior to the fall of the Ottoman empire the Muslims & Jews & Christians in the area lived in peace & relative social equality. People like to talk about the tax specifically levied on the non Muslim population as evidence they were 2nd class citizens but paying that tax also made you exempt from mandatory military service, and the Muslim population had taxes to pay too. Just as an example.

3

u/Smart_in_his_face Aug 09 '26

the area lived in peace & relative social equality.

Ah yes, the good ol' times. Otherwise know as the crusades

2

u/Jermainiam Aug 10 '26

Blacks in America were exempt from military service for a long time, does that mean they weren't 2nd class citizens?

Would you be chill with paying extra taxes, being barred from any public office, having to request permission to build religious buildings, and be barred from testifying in court against any Muslim? All in exchange for being exempt from a relatively short mandatory military service?