Hamas, Islamic Jihad reject Gaza gov. overhaul for permanent ceasefire, Egyptian sources say (www.reuters.com)

submitted 8 months ago by Fitik@fedia.io to c/world@lemmy.world

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hamas and the allied Islamic Jihad have rejected an Egyptian proposal that they relinquish power in the Gaza Strip in return for a permanent ceasefire, two Egyptian security sources told Reuters on Monday.

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

First off, why anybody is downvoting this link from Reuters is beyond me. Don't shoot the messenger.

Secondly, this is why Palestinians can't have nice things ... like a homeland Israel doesn't control. All because Hamas is acting like a dictatorial asshole. The hell they won't allow elections??? It's because they might not win, so all Palestinians lose instead.

Egypt proposed elections while offering assurances to Hamas that its members would not be chased or prosecuted, but the Islamist group rejected any concessions other than hostage releases, the sources said.

[-] Fitik@fedia.io 2 points 8 months ago

People downvote anything that doesn't fit their narrative sadly, especially on Lemmy where downvotes are anonymous. (Compared to kbin/mbin where they're public)

And yes, there were no elections in Gaza since Hamas takeover of the Gaza strip, Hamas actually pushed out opposition it had in there (ex. FATAH) and either killed them or forced them to leave.

[-] assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world 2 points 8 months ago

I think there may be a lot of people who think Hamas is the Palestinian resistance, and don't realize that they're a third party here. You hear a lot of apologetics along the lines of "what other option do they have" and "it makes sense for someone who grew up around this". I'm not sure how you correct this sort of thing en masse though.

[-] DolphinMath@slrpnk.net 0 points 8 months ago

Sadly support for Hamas has been growing as a resort of this conflict.

They seem pleased with the outcome, so why would they agree to compromise? It’s a horrible situation.

[-] Fitik@fedia.io 6 points 8 months ago

Actually no, according to the poll Hamas support in Gaza slipped(while it grew in PA).

Only 52% of Gazans supported HAMAS a few weeks ago, and it may be even lower right now. https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/poll-shows-palestinians-back-oct-7-attack-israel-support-hamas-rises-2023-12-14/

[-] DolphinMath@slrpnk.net 1 points 8 months ago

i mean, 52% still sounds high, but I don’t know what the number was in September either.

[-] Fitik@fedia.io 1 points 8 months ago

Maybe it does sound high, but it's barely a majority, I think it's even lower now, especially with how violent Hamas against it's own civilians.

[-] avater@lemmy.world 0 points 8 months ago

First off, why anybody is downvoting this link from Reuters is beyond me. Don't shoot the messenger.

there are three downvotes...

this post was submitted on 25 Dec 2023

24 points (87.5% liked)

World News

38529 readers

3803 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.