Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

IN THE 119th CONGRESS

Senator MUNOZ of Texas, for himself, with thanks to Mr. Heinrich of New Mexico, introduce the following legislation,

A BILL,

To provide for the admission of the State of Puerto Rico into the Union.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

 

SECTION 1. Short title.

This Act may be cited as the “Puerto Rico Statehood Admission Act”.

 

SEC. 2. Findings.

The Congress finds the following:

     (1) The United States national sovereignty in Puerto Rico was established by the Treaty of Paris between the United States and the Kingdom of Spain (30 Stat. 1754), signed on December 10, 1898.

     (2) Puerto Rico is governed by the United States under laws enacted by Congress in the exercise of its power to make rules and regulations governing territory belonging to the United States, pursuant to article IV, section 3, clause 2 of the Constitution.

     (3) For reasons of precedent primarily related to the Philippines also ceded by Spain after the Spanish-American War, substantially the same majority in the United States Supreme Court that established the “separate but equal” doctrine in Plessy v. Ferguson determined in the 1901 Downes v. Bidwell decision that Puerto Rico was an unincorporated territory of the United States, a status of possession that continues today.

     (4) After agreeing to independence for the Philippines, also acquired through the Spanish-American War, on March 2, 1917, Congress granted statutory United States citizenship to the residents of Puerto Rico. Such action has historically led to incorporation and eventual statehood but was denied to Puerto Rico due to anomalies emanating from the 1901 Downes ruling and its progeny, even as fellow Americans in Hawaii and Alaska attained statehood.

     (5) Puerto Rico has a territorial constitution that is republican in form and compatible with the United States Constitution as well as the principles of the Declaration of Independence, and that is equivalent to a State constitution, having been democratically ratified by the United States citizens of the territory on November 4, 1952, and subsequently approved by the Congress of the United States through Public Law 82–447.

     (6) Thirty-two territories previously have petitioned Congress for statehood based on democratically expressed consent of the governed, and each was duly admitted as a State of the Union pursuant to article IV, section 3, clause 1 of the United States Constitution, with equal rights and responsibilities of national and State citizenship under the United States Constitution.

     (7) Puerto Ricans have contributed greatly to the nation and its culture and distinguished themselves in every field of endeavor. However, the denial of equal voting representation and equal treatment by the Federal Government stands in stark contrast to their contributions.

     (8) Since becoming a United States territory, more than 235,000 American citizens of Puerto Rican heritage have served in the United States military.

     (9) Thousands of United States military service members of Puerto Rican heritage have received numerous medals, distinctions, and commendations of every degree, including for valorous military service in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries.

     (10) Nine United States military service members from Puerto Rico have been awarded the Medal of Honor, and many have been awarded the Distinguished Service Cross or the Navy Cross.

     (11) The 65th Infantry Regiment in Puerto Rico (known as the “Borinqueneers”) was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal (Public Law 113–120) for its contributions and sacrifices in the armed conflicts of the United States, including World War I, World War II, and the Korean War.

     (12) To further recognize and pay tribute to the bravery of the Puerto Rican soldiers of the 65th Infantry Regiment, Congress expressed support for the designation of April 13 as National Borinqueneers Day in the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021 (Public Law 116–283).

     (13) Unincorporated territory status means that Federal laws can be applied to Puerto Rico and its American citizens differently, on unequal and, at times inequitable terms, compared not only to the States and their residents, but also unlike territories that are parts of the United States. This has limited the development of Puerto Rico and hindered its economy.

     (14) Unincorporated territory status has resulted in millions of residents leaving Puerto Rico to secure equal rights of citizenship attainable only in a State, and that enable Americans to seek greater opportunities and a better quality of life in the States. Approximately 65 percent of all people of Puerto Rican origin now live in the States, with the increasing rate of population loss in the territory creating a severe strain on the local tax base and workforce participation.

     (15) Other than its unincorporated territory status and its unequal treatment under some Federal laws, Puerto Rico is socially, economically, politically, and legally integrated into the nation. Numerous territories admitted as States did not have as strong a record of self-determination favoring statehood as the majority votes by American citizens in Puerto Rico favoring admission to the Union.

     (16) In November 2012, a majority of voters rejected continuation of the current territory status, and 61.2 percent of those expressing a choice on status alternatives chose statehood.

     (17) In June 2017, a vote was held to confirm the aspirations of the people of Puerto Rico. As advised by the United States Department of Justice, all available status options were included in the ballot. Amid an opposition boycott, statehood received 97 percent of the votes cast, while independence and the current status received less than 3 percent of the vote.

     (18) In November 2020, following Alaska and Hawaii precedent, Puerto Rico voters were presented with the question: “Should Puerto Rico be admitted immediately into the Union as a State? Yes or No”. A clear majority of 52.52 percent voted in the affirmative.

     (19) In December 2020, the Puerto Rico legislature, following the absolute majority victory obtained by statehood in the plebiscite, approved a Joint Resolution petitioning, on behalf of the People of Puerto Rico, that Congress and the President of the United States admit Puerto Rico into the Union as a State and appointed official representatives to manage the transition to statehood.

     (20) No large and populous United States territory inhabited by American citizens that has petitioned for statehood has been denied admission into the Union.

 

SEC. 3. Admission.

Subject to the provisions of this Act, and upon issuance of the proclamation required by section 7(c), the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico is hereby declared to be a State of the United States of America, and as such shall be declared admitted into the Union on an equal footing with the other States in all respects.

 

SEC. 4. Physical territory.

The State of Puerto Rico shall consist of all the islands, together with their appurtenant reefs, seafloor, and territorial waters in the seaward boundary, presently under the jurisdiction of the territory of Puerto Rico.

 

SEC. 5. Constitution.

The constitution of the State of Puerto Rico shall always be republican in form and shall not be repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence. The constitution of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, as approved by Public Law 82–447 and subsequently amended, is hereby found to be republican in form and in conformity with the Constitution of the United States and the principles of the Declaration of Independence, and is hereby accepted, ratified, and confirmed as the constitution of said State.

 

SEC. 6. Certification by President.

Upon enactment of this Act, the President of the United States shall certify such fact to the Governor of Puerto Rico. Thereupon the Governor shall, within 30 days after receipt of the official notification of such approval, issue a proclamation for the election of Senators and Representatives in Congress.

 

SEC. 7. Ratification vote.

(a) Ratification of Proposition.—At an election designated by proclamation of the Governor of Puerto Rico, which may be either the primary or the general election held pursuant to section 8, or a territorial general election, or a special election, there shall be submitted to voters, for adoption or rejection, a ballot with the following ratification question: “Shall Puerto Rico immediately be admitted into the Union as a State, in accordance with terms prescribed in the Act of Congress approved ........... (date of approval of this Act)?: Yes _____ No _____.”.

(b) Certified Results.—If the foregoing proposition is adopted by a majority of the votes cast in the election conducted under subsection (a), the President of the State Elections Commission of Puerto Rico shall certify the results of the election and shall transmit the certified results of the election to the Governor. Not later than 10 days after the date of certification, the Governor shall declare the results of the election and transmit the certified results of the submission to the President of the United States, the President pro tempore of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

(c) Presidential Proclamation.—Upon receipt of the Governor’s declaration pursuant to subsection (b), the President of the United States shall issue a proclamation declaring certified the results of the submission and the date Puerto Rico is admitted as a State of the Union on an equal footing with all other States, which date must follow the certification of results of the general elections required by section 6 of this Act, but not later than 12 months from the date on which the aforementioned submission results were certified in order to facilitate a transition process. Upon issuance of the proclamation by the President, Puerto Rico shall be deemed admitted into the Union as a State.

(d) Termination of Act if Proposition Not Adopted.—If the foregoing proposition is not adopted by a majority votes cast in the election conducted under subsection (a), the provisions of this Act shall cease to be effective.

 

SEC. 8. Election of officers / submission of proposition.

The proclamation by the Governor in section 6 shall designate and announce the dates and other requirements for primary and general elections under applicable Federal and local law for representation in the Senate and the House of Representatives in accordance with the following:

     (1) In the first election of Senators, the two senatorial offices shall be separately identified and designated, and no person may be a candidate for both offices. Nothing in this section shall impair the privilege of the Senate to determine the class and term to which each of the Senators-elect shall be assigned.

     (2) In the first election of Representatives following admission, and subsequent elections until the next Census-based reapportionment cycle, Puerto Rico shall be entitled to the same number of Representatives as the State whose most recent Census population was closest to, but less than, that of Puerto Rico, and such Representatives shall be in addition to the membership of the House of Representatives as now prescribed by law: Provided, that any such increase in the membership shall not operate to either increase or decrease the permanent membership of the House of Representatives as prescribed in the Act of August 8, 1911 (37 Stat. 13), nor shall such temporary increase affect the basis of apportionment established by the Act of November 15, 1941 (55 Stat. 761; 2 U.S.C. 2a), for the Eighty-third Congress and each Congress thereafter, unless Congress acts to increase the total number of members of the House of Representatives. Thereafter, the State of Puerto Rico shall be entitled to such number of Representatives as provided for by applicable law based on the next reapportionment. The apportionment of congressional districts for the first election and subsequent election of Representatives shall be conducted as provided for by the Constitution and laws of Puerto Rico.

     (3) The President of the State Elections Commission of Puerto Rico shall certify the results of such primary and general elections to the Governor. Within 10 days of the date of each certification, the Governor shall declare the results of the primary and general elections, and transmit the results of each election to the President of the United States, the President pro tempore of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

 

SEC. 9. Continuity of laws, government, and obligations.

Upon the admission of the State of Puerto Rico into the Union, the following shall apply:

     (1) CONTINUITY OF LAWS.—All laws of the United States and laws of Puerto Rico not in conflict with this Act shall continue in full force and effect following the date of admission of Puerto Rico as a State of the Union.

     (2) CONTINUITY OF GOVERNMENT.—The individuals holding legislative, executive, and judicial offices of Puerto Rico shall continue to discharge the duties of their respective offices when Puerto Rico becomes a State of the Union.

     (3) CONTINUITY OF OBLIGATIONS.—All contracts, obligations, liabilities, debts, and claims of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and its instrumentalities shall continue in full force and effect as the contracts, obligations, liabilities, debts, and claims of the State of Puerto Rico and its instrumentalities.

     (4) TITLE TO PROPERTY.—The State of Puerto Rico and its political subdivisions, as the case may be, shall have and retain title to all lands and other properties, real and personal, over which the territory and its subdivisions presently hold title. The United States shall retain title to all property, real and personal, to which it presently has title, including public lands.

 

SEC. 10. Repeals.

All Federal and territorial laws, rules, and regulations, or parts of Federal and territorial laws, rules, and regulations, applicable to Puerto Rico that are incompatible with the political and legal status of statehood under the Constitution and the provisions of this Act are repealed and terminated as of the date of statehood admission proclaimed by the President under section 7(c) of this Act. Except for those parts that are not in conflict with this Act and the condition of statehood, the following shall be deemed repealed upon the effective date of the admission of Puerto Rico as a State:

     (1) The Puerto Rican Federal Relations Act of 1950 (Public Law 81–600).

     (2) The Act of July 3, 1950 (48 U.S.C. 731b–731e).

     (3) The Act of March 2, 1917 (Public Law 64–368).

     (4) The Act of April 12, 1900 (Public Law 56–191).

 

SEC. 11. Severability.

If any provision of this Act, or any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or individual word, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court of jurisdiction, the validity of the remainder of the Act and of the application of any such provision, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or individual word to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

 

PES: This bill establishes a process for the admission of Puerto Rico into the union as a state, on an equal footing with all other states, based on a majority vote of the people of Puerto Rico.

Senator Dylan Kennedy

Progressive Senator for Massachusetts

  • Replies 6
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

CS

 

2024 Democratic Nominee for President &

Senator from Hawaii: Hannah Trujillo Kahiona
Bio - Press Office - www.kahiona.senate.gov

I hope that the Bush family finds inner peace and a meditative spirit during this trying time - Mark Tennington

R8: Kasper Braun (R-VT)

R9: Katherine Lawrence (R-ID)(Senate Majority WHIP and Presidential Candidate)

R10: Veronica Kalua (D-HI)

R11: Luke Doolittle (R-AK)- (The great Flip-Flopper of the GOP) Jessica Hunt (R-AK) (RNC Chairwomen and Senate Minority Whip)(Survived as GOP Leadership)

R12: Sarah Warmbier (R-WA-4th) - Administator Scenarios Coordinator

R13: Vice President Sarah Johansen (Martyr to China) - Larry Angelouplos (R-NE) (Lazy Larry) - Mark Tennington (D-OR) (Never Get High on Your own Bowtie)(Senate Majority Whip)

R14: Anney Iyal (D-WA)

R15: Katherine Lawerence (R-ID) 2.0 , Mark Tennington (D-OR) 2.0

,R15-R16: Domestic Scenarios Coordinator,

R-17: Jennifer Stohl (R-MT)

R-18: Anney Iyal (D-WA) (Senate Majority Whip  and President Pro-Tempore) Senate Minority Leader Billy H. Hoover (D-FL)

 

Posted

CS

Rafael Coleman

US Senator from Colorado (2021-)

Senate Minority Leader (2025-) | Chair, New Democratic Coalition (2023-)

R17: Senator Camilo deSonido (I/D-CO) | R18: Vice President Camilo deSonido (D-CA)


  • Latest VGS News

    • Joe Rogan Experience #2488: "Hamas, Gaza, and the Ethics of War"   Guest: Norman Finkelstein [Opening Jingle Plays] Joe Rogan: "What's up, freaks? Welcome to the Joe Rogan Experience. Today’s episode is brought to you by Athletic Greens—get all your greens in one scoop—and by Onnit, keeping your body and mind optimized. Go to Onnit.com/JRE for 10% off everything from kettlebells to brain supplements. Alright, folks, today's gonna be... something. We’ve got a guest who’s not afraid to go where most won’t—Norman Finkelstein. Norman is an author, political scientist, and a guy who has been pissing people off for decades with his takes on Israel, Palestine, and U.S. foreign policy. Some of you will agree with him, some of you will be furious, and that’s the beauty of this show. Let’s dive in. Norman, welcome to the podcast." Norman Finkelstein: "Thank you for having me, Joe. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss such a critical issue." Segment 1: The Gaza Offensive Joe Rogan: "Let’s just jump right into it. Right now, Israel’s about to launch what they’re calling their final offensive in Gaza. They’re saying this is going to ‘end Hamas for good.’ What’s your take?" Norman Finkelstein: "Well, Joe, it’s complicated. Hamas, for all its flaws—and let’s not sugarcoat it, there are many—is both a militant group and, for many Palestinians, a symbol of resistance. Israel’s strategy, on the other hand, is essentially scorched earth. They aim to obliterate Hamas, but the human cost will be catastrophic. The question we have to ask is, does this level of destruction, including the deaths of thousands of civilians, justify the goal?" Joe Rogan: "Yeah, but isn’t that kind of the nature of war? I mean, Israel’s dealing with a group that hides behind civilians, fires rockets, and uses human shields. What are they supposed to do?" Norman Finkelstein: "They have every right to defend themselves. That’s not the issue. The issue is proportionality. International law makes it clear: you can defend yourself, but not at the cost of wholesale slaughter. What’s happening now isn’t just defense; it’s punitive, and the ordinary people of Gaza are paying the price." Segment 2: Ethics of War Joe Rogan: "You mentioned proportionality. I want to ask—where do you draw the line? If you’re Israel and you’re dealing with an enemy that’s literally in the middle of civilians, do you just let them keep attacking you?" Norman Finkelstein: "War is never clean, but the principles of proportionality and distinction exist for a reason. You target combatants, not schools, not hospitals. The argument that Hamas hides among civilians doesn’t absolve Israel of its responsibility to minimize civilian casualties. What we’re seeing isn’t just ‘collateral damage.’ It’s collective punishment." Joe Rogan: "But, Norman, let me push back. You’re sitting here, safe in New York or wherever. If your kids were living under the threat of rockets, wouldn’t you want your government to do whatever it takes?" Norman Finkelstein: "Of course. But if my government was bombing entire neighborhoods, killing thousands of kids to stop those rockets, I’d have to ask, ‘Is this really keeping us safe, or is it sowing the seeds for more violence down the road?’ That’s the moral dilemma Israel refuses to face." Segment 3: Hamas as a Governing Entity Joe Rogan: "Let’s talk about Hamas. They’re not just a terror group; they run Gaza. So how do you deal with an enemy that’s also the government?" Norman Finkelstein: "It’s tricky, no doubt. Hamas has two faces: the militants and the administrators. Their governance is riddled with corruption and authoritarianism, but for many in Gaza, they’re also the only ones standing up to Israel. They’re flawed, but their appeal lies in their resistance to occupation. You can bomb them into the Stone Age, but you can’t bomb the idea of resistance out of the Palestinian people." Joe Rogan: "Yeah, but resistance through violence... doesn’t that just perpetuate the cycle?" Norman Finkelstein: "It does, which is why the international community has to step in. But let’s not forget: Hamas exists in part because the political process was crushed. When you close every door to peaceful solutions, what do you expect people to do? Roll over?" Segment 4: U.S. Involvement and Media Narratives Joe Rogan: "Okay, let’s bring it home. The U.S. backs Israel with billions of dollars. Does that make us complicit in what’s happening?" Norman Finkelstein: "Absolutely. Every bomb dropped on Gaza has ‘Made in the USA’ written on it. We fund this war, we arm it, and we shield Israel diplomatically. The bloodshed isn’t happening in a vacuum; it’s happening with our tacit approval." Joe Rogan: "But, to play devil’s advocate, isn’t that part of our alliance? Israel’s our closest ally in the region, right?" Norman Finkelstein: "An ally doesn’t mean a blank check. The U.S. has leverage, and we could use it to push for peace. Instead, we enable actions that violate basic human rights and destabilize the region further." Segment 5: The Human Cost Joe Rogan: "Let’s talk about the people. Civilians are getting caught in the crossfire—kids, families. How do you even begin to stop that?" Norman Finkelstein: "By demanding accountability. Israel has a responsibility to avoid targeting civilians, and Hamas has a responsibility not to use them as shields. But let’s be clear: Gaza is an open-air prison. People have nowhere to go. When bombs start falling, they’re sitting ducks." Joe Rogan: "Yeah, I can’t even imagine living like that. But doesn’t that mean Hamas is failing its own people too?" Norman Finkelstein: "Undoubtedly. Hamas’s tactics put civilians at risk. But their failures don’t absolve Israel or the U.S. of responsibility. When you have overwhelming power, you bear the greater moral burden." Closing Thoughts Joe Rogan: "Man, this is heavy stuff. Norman, I’ve gotta say, whether people agree with you or not, you’ve given us a lot to think about. What’s the takeaway here?" Norman Finkelstein: "The takeaway is simple: war dehumanizes us all. If we don’t start holding everyone accountable—Hamas, Israel, the U.S., everyone—then this cycle of violence will never end." Joe Rogan: "Alright, Norman Finkelstein, everybody. Thanks for coming on, man. This was intense but important." Norman Finkelstein: "Thank you, Joe. I appreciate the platform."
    • The Rest is History Podcast: "The End of Hamas?" [Intro Music Plays] Host 1 (Tom Holland): Hello and welcome to The Rest is History, where we dig into the past to understand today’s most pressing headlines. I’m Tom Holland. Host 2 (Dominic Sandbrook): And I’m Dominic Sandbrook. Today, we’re turning our attention to the Middle East, where Israel is preparing what it calls its “final offensive” in Gaza. Hamas, the militant group that has controlled Gaza since 2007, is reportedly on the brink of collapse. Tom, this is a moment charged with historical weight, isn’t it? Tom: It absolutely is, Dominic. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is often seen as one of the defining geopolitical struggles of the modern era, with roots that stretch back to biblical times. But today, we’re going to focus on a more contemporary lens—how past military offensives and peace efforts have shaped the current moment, and what history tells us about the likelihood of Israel truly eradicating Hamas. Dominic: We’ve heard this rhetoric before, haven’t we? “The final battle,” “permanent resolution,” these are phrases that have been used countless times. In 2009, during Operation Cast Lead, and again in 2014 with Operation Protective Edge, Israel launched major offensives in Gaza with similar goals—weakening Hamas and restoring security. Yet, here we are again. Segment 1: Historical Context Tom: Let’s start with some context. Hamas emerged in the late 1980s during the First Intifada, or Palestinian uprising. It was initially supported by Israel as a counterweight to the secular Fatah movement. Yes, Dominic, that’s one of history’s little ironies. Dominic (chuckling): Indeed, Tom. It’s a classic case of unintended consequences. Israel thought that by backing an Islamist movement, they could undermine the influence of Yasser Arafat and his Palestinian Liberation Organization. Instead, they helped create a far more radical and uncompromising adversary. Tom: Hamas quickly gained popularity, particularly in Gaza, through a mix of militant resistance to Israel and social services for Palestinians. By the time they won the 2006 elections and took full control of Gaza in 2007, Hamas had become the de facto government in the territory. Dominic: And that’s when the cycle of conflict we know today really began. Israel imposed a blockade on Gaza, and Hamas responded with rocket fire. This led to the kind of asymmetric warfare that has characterized the conflict ever since—Israel with its military might and Hamas using guerilla tactics and human shields. Segment 2: The Military Dimension Dominic: Now, let’s talk about Israel’s strategy. Tom, do you think this “final offensive” can truly end Hamas’s presence in Gaza? Tom: History would suggest otherwise, Dominic. Decapitating a militant group like Hamas—removing its leadership and infrastructure—is one thing. But eradicating its ideology, its support base, is an entirely different challenge. Take the examples of the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka or the IRA in Northern Ireland. Both were eventually defeated militarily, but their causes lived on in various forms. Dominic: It’s also worth noting that Hamas is deeply embedded in Gaza’s society. They’re not just fighters; they run schools, hospitals, and charities. This gives them a level of legitimacy and support that’s hard to dismantle with bombs and bullets. Tom: Exactly. And even if Hamas is militarily defeated, other groups like Palestinian Islamic Jihad could step into the vacuum. Or worse, the power vacuum could lead to total chaos, as we’ve seen in Libya or post-Saddam Iraq. Segment 3: The Humanitarian and International Implications Dominic: Of course, the humanitarian toll of this offensive cannot be ignored. Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas in the world, and every military strike risks civilian casualties. Historically, how has this shaped international opinion? Tom: Well, Dominic, Israel has always walked a tightrope in terms of global perception. On one hand, its right to defend itself against rocket attacks is widely acknowledged. On the other, images of civilian suffering often turn public opinion against it. This has been a recurring theme since at least the 1982 Lebanon War. Dominic: And what about the role of external powers? The U.S. has historically been Israel’s staunchest ally, but in recent years we’ve seen a more complex dynamic. Presidents Biden, Allred, and Van Horn’s administration have generally been supportive but have also emphasized the need for restraint. Tom: Yes, and then there’s the elephant in the room: the Arab world. While many Arab states have normalized relations with Israel in recent years, their populations remain deeply sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. A prolonged or especially bloody offensive could strain these new alliances. Segment 4: What Comes Next? Dominic: So, Tom, what does history tell us about the likely aftermath of this offensive? Tom: If we look at past Israeli operations, we can expect a few things. First, Hamas will likely survive in some form, even if only as a shadow of its former self. Second, there will be calls for reconstruction in Gaza, with international donors stepping in to rebuild what was destroyed. And third, we’re likely to see renewed calls for a two-state solution, even if that seems as elusive as ever. Dominic: And let’s not forget the long-term psychological toll. For every militant killed, there’s the risk of creating new generations of resentment and hostility. As one Israeli general once put it, “You can’t bomb an ideology.” Closing Thoughts Tom: Dominic, it’s clear that while this offensive may mark a turning point, it’s unlikely to be the end of the story. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has defied resolution for decades, and this chapter, like so many before it, will likely leave a legacy of both hope and heartbreak. Dominic: Absolutely, Tom. As historians, we can only hope that future generations will look back on this moment not as another missed opportunity, but as a step toward lasting peace. Tom: And on that cautiously optimistic note, thank you for joining us on The Rest is History. If you enjoyed this episode, don’t forget to subscribe and leave us a review. We’ll see you next time. [Outro Music Plays]
    • IDF Prepares Final Gaza Offensive, Aiming to End Hamas Rule The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) are mobilizing for what Israeli officials are calling a “final offensive” to dismantle Hamas's control of Gaza. Following years of relentless conflict and the devastating toll of Hamas's actions on both Israeli and Palestinian civilians, this operation is being positioned as the decisive effort to ensure long-term peace and security for Israel and its people. A Strategic Operation According to sources close to Israeli Prime Minister Benny Gantz, the offensive will focus on targeting the remaining Hamas strongholds and dismantling the group’s infrastructure. Israeli intelligence estimates that Hamas has approximately 16,000 fighters left in Gaza, with 3,500 classified as “elite” troops. However, recent IDF operations have depleted Hamas’s resources, leaving the group disorganized and leaderless. The death of Mohammed Sinwar, brother of top Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, at the hands of Israeli special forces, has further disrupted Hamas's leadership structure. Israeli officials believe that without organized leadership, Hamas’s forces will be unable to sustain prolonged resistance. “This is not just about defeating a terrorist organization; this is about ensuring that Hamas never again poses a threat to the people of Israel or the broader region,” an Israeli defense official told Fox News on condition of anonymity. Swift and Decisive Action The final assault is expected to unfold rapidly, with military experts predicting that Israel’s overwhelming firepower and precise targeting will bring the operation to a close within days. “The IDF has honed its tactics over years of counterterrorism operations,” said Colonel Avi Rabinovich, a retired Israeli military strategist. “This operation is designed to permanently eliminate Hamas’s ability to wage war.” Israel’s approach is rooted in its determination to protect its citizens from the constant threat of rocket attacks and terror operations orchestrated by Hamas. The group’s indiscriminate attacks have killed and injured countless Israelis, while its mismanagement and corruption have left Gaza’s civilian population in dire conditions. Humanitarian Concerns Despite Israel’s efforts to minimize civilian casualties through targeted strikes and warnings, the humanitarian impact on Gaza remains a significant concern. Hamas’s strategy of embedding its fighters and infrastructure within civilian areas has exacerbated the risk to non-combatants. United States Senator John Carlson (D-MN) wrote on social media: "I support the eradication of Hamas.  But so far, the ordinary people of Gaza have suffered a horrific ordeal from Israel's military actions there.  What is being done to protect children, for example?  How many more will die in this latest offensive?" Israeli officials have reiterated that their fight is with Hamas, not the people of Gaza. “We are doing everything possible to protect innocent lives while achieving our military objectives,” said a spokesperson for the IDF. Global Reactions The international community has been closely monitoring the escalating situation. While the United States and other allies have expressed support for Israel’s right to self-defense, some humanitarian organizations have called for restraint. Israeli Prime Minister Benny Gantz has emphasized that this operation is necessary for lasting peace in the region. “Hamas has brought nothing but destruction to Gaza and terror to Israel. We owe it to our people—and to the future of Gaza—to end this cycle of violence,” Gantz said in a statement. Looking Ahead The anticipated success of this offensive could mark the end of Hamas’s reign in Gaza and open the door to new possibilities for the region. Israeli leaders have signaled a willingness to work with international partners to stabilize Gaza and provide humanitarian aid once the fighting ends. While the path forward remains uncertain, one thing is clear: Israel is determined to ensure that Hamas never again threatens its sovereignty or the safety of its people. As the IDF prepares to take decisive action, the world watches to see whether this operation will bring an end to years of bloodshed and pave the way for a more stable future.   ((Players mentioned: @Indie Voter))
  • Upcoming Events

  • Recent Achievements

    • Indie Voter went up a rank
      Adept
    • DMH went up a rank
      Specialist
    • Brink earned a badge
      Harmonix Winner

×
×
  • Create New...