So she seriously thought a sitting Florida Rep was tearfully defending…Hamas?
Nobody likes Hamas. **** Hamas. The ceasefire isn’t for Hamas’ benefit. Just an acknowledgment that this Bến Tre redux of "We had to destroy the village in order to save it” is merely going to ensure the conflict continues far into the future to both Hamas and hawkish Israelites benefit. Neither group being one that should be empowered.
"Nobody likes Hamas" is clearly a false statement unless you've been living in a cave for the last month. When you have thousands upon thousands of people marching across the globe praising the martyrs, the freedom fighters, endorsing resistance by any means necessary, adopting as a symbol the silhouette of paragliders who butchered hundreds of concert goers, naming their protests a "Flood" after Hamas' moniker for their October 7th slaughter, the professors and student groups at universities lining up to justify and contextualize away everything on October 7th, etc. who do you think they're talking about and celebrating?
And on and on. I haven't been posting most of this stuff because it'd essentially spam the forum but maybe I should. That's not to lump everyone who would like to see a ceasefire, or heck, even everyone despises Israel's military and governmental policies in general, together as Hamas supporters. I don't believe that. But the last month has shown a shocking amount of support for Hamas itself and you don't even have to go selectively nutpicking to find it.
As for a ceasefire, there was one in effect on October 6th. Hamas has openly bragged they used the relative quiet of the past years in service of lulling Israel into a false sense of security so they could carry out something on the scale of October 7th. They have openly declared they will do it again. They have openly declared they want to destroy Israel and consider it all occupied territory. These aren't historical statements from a 40 year old charter; their triumphant spokesmen have told this to the press in the last 30 days and you can scroll back in the thread to see it.
Everything I've read by someone who tries to outline a ceasefire ranging from op-eds by British MPs in The Guardian to WaPo pieces boils down to Underpants Gnome logic. 1.) Ceasefire with deceitful, genocidal Hamas 2.) ??? 3.) Middle East Peace. If you have a different take I'd genuinely be interested in reading it. Nothing has changed about Hamas' goals from when they were blowing up pizzerias at the height of the peace process to last month when they were going house to house killing everyone they could find in southern Israel. Israel have laid out their condition for a ceasefire - release the 241 hostages. It's very reasonable, all things considered. Instead Hamas and their allies have floated releasing only dual-citizens to try and pry apart Israel and its allies, a handful of hostages here and there for major concessions and to dictate the pace of the battle, etc. People advocating for a ceasefire not conditioned at a minimum on Hamas releasing the hostages may not be doing so to serve Hamas, but it would serve Hamas' purpose to regroup and rearm while retaining significant leverage over Israel.
There's a reason you see people with as disparate foreign policy views as Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders aligning to say a ceasefire with Hamas is a bad idea, even when in Bernie's case he has denounced Israel's military campaign as too bloody and misguided.