You mean Israel went into negotiations making unreasonable demands? Like almost every other time?
Oh come on. What kind of "return elderly people, pregnant women and other feeble hostages" is unreasonable demand? What would be reasonable demand? Keep them forever. Abuse them?
Why do you think those people would have survived six months of sustained bombing?
If they cared about negotiations, they would have kept them save. Which apparently they don't. Now they don't have any leverage.
Kept them safe how? Do they have force fields?
They kept themselves safe. There are bunch of tunnels or they could say here's a hostage here don't bomb this place.
If Hamas is able to keep themselves save from six months of Israeli bombing, maybe Israel shouldn't have spent six months bombing Gaza and killing over 10,000 children.
So based on your own claims, Israel is far better at killing innocent people than Hamas could even hope to be.
Maybe they shouldn't have kidnapped and killed people in the first place if they didn't want retribution.
They are not getting the retribution based on your own claim.
Unless you think those 13,000+ children are all in Hamas.
Am never going to try to justify civilian deaths, because there's no justification. But the fact is if you kick hornets nest you'll get stung. You can't expect any country on this planet to ignore such an attack because if they do, they risk allowing such attack to repeat.
You say there's no justification and then you justify it in the next sentence by implying that it's Hamas' fault that all of those innocent children died.
Am not justifying am pointing out it's an expected outcome. I never said it was warranted or said it was okay.
Why should over 13,000 dead Palestinian children be the "expected outcome" of far fewer dead Israelis and far, far fewer hostages? Because that still sounds like a justification.
What are the demands of each side? Can we lay them out and compare? Or do we know already that Hamas demands are reasonable? Do we always have to take sides? I personally want what's best for the Palestinian people so I want a ceasefire and return to negotiations. But this partisan flailing isn't helping the cause. Unless of course we're ok sacrificing more Palestinians? I don't get it.
Do sides have to be taken in a negotiation?
I would say yes. That's the whole point of a negotiation.
Should we grant:
A. Both sides be reasonable?
B. Only Israel should be reasonable?
C. Only Hamas should be reasonable?
D. None of the above.
I just don't understand why you're calling out only one party?
Because one party is demanding something the other party says it doesn't have.
Problem I think is why they don't have them now if they had them at some point.
Unless they never had them to begin with; having people and now no longer having them points to killing them which, surprise, hurts negotiation.
Who knows though, Israel might of taken them for innocent Palestinians and did it to themselves :(
Unless it wasn't Hamas who killed them.
The IDF didn't put a magical force field around the hostages as they bombed the shit out of Gaza.
And those were the ones they were caught killing or even were aware themselves that were killed. How many more were killed?
Yeah, I'm not ruling out Israel unknowingly killing their own (or even knowingly I guess) but I think regardless if an explanation (that's true) by either was possible, it'd be better.
THEY SHOULD HAVE, but they said they don't. Some 130 people are still missing. That means they killed hostages. Plain and simple. The request was to return first 40 hostages which should include all the women, elderly and others in a need of care, then fill whatever is left up to 40 with men. Then negotiations can start.
So, there are no hostages anymore. They either raped them to death or tortured them to death. And now Israel's retribution will get even worse.
Or Israel killed them. Why isn't that a possibility? Did a force field go up around them while Israel bombed all the places they claimed were Hamas locations?
That's bullshit excuse. If I hold you in front of oncoming bullets, I killed you, not whoever shot the bullets. If you jump in front of a car you killed yourself. Driver didn't kill you.
Except Hamas didn't hold them in front of bullets, Israel intentionally targeted places they were likely to be held because they were going after Hamas with no regard for casualties.
Let's not forget they shot their own people who had escaped and were waiving a white flag while trying to get back to Israeli forces. Claiming Israel has killed their own people being held hostage isn't bullshit, it's literally a matter of record. And that's not even the only instance you can find being reported, there's a report from March 1st saying another 7 hostages were killed.
If you jump in front of a car you killed yourself. Driver didn't kill you.
What if the driver ran up on the curb to hit the guy next to you? That's absolutely the drivers fault.
Maybe...don't take hostages to begin with???
I got my bingo card. What's the right response?
Israeli occupation ergo hostages are justified.
Casualties of war.
Israel does the same.
I'm not justifying hamas' actions in the slightest. But let's not pretend that Israel isn't at fault for murdering the hostages we know about, or have decades long evidence of lack of care for Palestinian life. Those points alone are enough to destroy any notion that your above assertion is the most likely:
They either raped them to death or tortured them to death. And now Israel's retribution will get even worse.
Funny how zionists only ever talk about the possibility of Hamas intentionally killing the hostages, and never a peep about the hostages that Israel murdered in their negligent attacks on hamas.
That's a Bingo!
Israel does the same
Btw, that quote is not from me. You might have intended to respond to someone else.
We can. Hamas has been very clear. End the blockade. Remove troops from West Bank. Recognize a Palestinian state. Allow Palestinian refugees to return. Release Palestinians being held without charge. (hostages but with a nicer veneer)
Israel wants their people back.
Those are the two positions.
So from the "River to the sea" has been taken out of Hamas charter? What does their charter state as their key objective now?
The 1969 borders. They still vote to resist Israel but they did actually change the charter in 2018.
You mean Israel went into negotiations making unreasonable demands? Like almost every other time?
Oh come on. What kind of "return elderly people, pregnant women and other feeble hostages" is unreasonable demand? What would be reasonable demand? Keep them forever. Abuse them?
Why do you think those people would have survived six months of sustained bombing?
If they cared about negotiations, they would have kept them save. Which apparently they don't. Now they don't have any leverage.
Kept them safe how? Do they have force fields?
They kept themselves safe. There are bunch of tunnels or they could say here's a hostage here don't bomb this place.
If Hamas is able to keep themselves save from six months of Israeli bombing, maybe Israel shouldn't have spent six months bombing Gaza and killing over 10,000 children.
So based on your own claims, Israel is far better at killing innocent people than Hamas could even hope to be.
Maybe they shouldn't have kidnapped and killed people in the first place if they didn't want retribution.
They are not getting the retribution based on your own claim.
Unless you think those 13,000+ children are all in Hamas.
Am never going to try to justify civilian deaths, because there's no justification. But the fact is if you kick hornets nest you'll get stung. You can't expect any country on this planet to ignore such an attack because if they do, they risk allowing such attack to repeat.
You say there's no justification and then you justify it in the next sentence by implying that it's Hamas' fault that all of those innocent children died.
Am not justifying am pointing out it's an expected outcome. I never said it was warranted or said it was okay.
Why should over 13,000 dead Palestinian children be the "expected outcome" of far fewer dead Israelis and far, far fewer hostages? Because that still sounds like a justification.
What are the demands of each side? Can we lay them out and compare? Or do we know already that Hamas demands are reasonable? Do we always have to take sides? I personally want what's best for the Palestinian people so I want a ceasefire and return to negotiations. But this partisan flailing isn't helping the cause. Unless of course we're ok sacrificing more Palestinians? I don't get it.
Do sides have to be taken in a negotiation?
I would say yes. That's the whole point of a negotiation.
Should we grant:
I just don't understand why you're calling out only one party?
Because one party is demanding something the other party says it doesn't have.
Problem I think is why they don't have them now if they had them at some point.
Unless they never had them to begin with; having people and now no longer having them points to killing them which, surprise, hurts negotiation.
Who knows though, Israel might of taken them for innocent Palestinians and did it to themselves :(
Unless it wasn't Hamas who killed them.
The IDF didn't put a magical force field around the hostages as they bombed the shit out of Gaza.
The IDF has already admitted to "mistakenly" killing hostages that had been released- https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/12/16/israeli-hostages-mistakenly-killed-in-gaza-were-had-a-white-flag-official
And those were the ones they were caught killing or even were aware themselves that were killed. How many more were killed?
Yeah, I'm not ruling out Israel unknowingly killing their own (or even knowingly I guess) but I think regardless if an explanation (that's true) by either was possible, it'd be better.
THEY SHOULD HAVE, but they said they don't. Some 130 people are still missing. That means they killed hostages. Plain and simple. The request was to return first 40 hostages which should include all the women, elderly and others in a need of care, then fill whatever is left up to 40 with men. Then negotiations can start.
So, there are no hostages anymore. They either raped them to death or tortured them to death. And now Israel's retribution will get even worse.
Or Israel killed them. Why isn't that a possibility? Did a force field go up around them while Israel bombed all the places they claimed were Hamas locations?
That's bullshit excuse. If I hold you in front of oncoming bullets, I killed you, not whoever shot the bullets. If you jump in front of a car you killed yourself. Driver didn't kill you.
Except Hamas didn't hold them in front of bullets, Israel intentionally targeted places they were likely to be held because they were going after Hamas with no regard for casualties.
Let's not forget they shot their own people who had escaped and were waiving a white flag while trying to get back to Israeli forces. Claiming Israel has killed their own people being held hostage isn't bullshit, it's literally a matter of record. And that's not even the only instance you can find being reported, there's a report from March 1st saying another 7 hostages were killed.
What if the driver ran up on the curb to hit the guy next to you? That's absolutely the drivers fault.
Maybe...don't take hostages to begin with???
I got my bingo card. What's the right response?
I'm not justifying hamas' actions in the slightest. But let's not pretend that Israel isn't at fault for murdering the hostages we know about, or have decades long evidence of lack of care for Palestinian life. Those points alone are enough to destroy any notion that your above assertion is the most likely:
Funny how zionists only ever talk about the possibility of Hamas intentionally killing the hostages, and never a peep about the hostages that Israel murdered in their negligent attacks on hamas.
That's a Bingo!
Btw, that quote is not from me. You might have intended to respond to someone else.
We can. Hamas has been very clear. End the blockade. Remove troops from West Bank. Recognize a Palestinian state. Allow Palestinian refugees to return. Release Palestinians being held without charge. (hostages but with a nicer veneer)
Israel wants their people back.
Those are the two positions.
So from the "River to the sea" has been taken out of Hamas charter? What does their charter state as their key objective now?
The 1969 borders. They still vote to resist Israel but they did actually change the charter in 2018.