WDSmart

The Israeli hostages are being held by the Hamas militants to be used as bargaining chips. The indiscriminate bombing and barbaric invasion of Gaza by the Zionist-led IDF militants is also now a bargaining chip. I have predicted and expect these two chips to be exchanged, with conditions, in a release/return and a ceasefire agreement. I hope all the hostages are released unharmed, and the ceasefire will be permanent and enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force. And, yes, this whole episode is disgusting, but it's what's happening, and I hope it ends, or at least quiets down some, soon.

That's what "hostage" means according to the online Oxford Language Dictionary: A neutral term would be "prisoner."

"Militant" is defined by the online Oxford Language Dictionary as: "favouring confrontational or violent methods in support of a political or social cause" I think that is appropriate to use in this case, and in the case of the IDF. I think the term you'd most object to would be just a neutral one, like "soldier." I did not use that term to describe the armed forces of Hamas.

Israel's claim to the land began when they arrived in Caanan, somewhere before 1000 BCE, 3,000 years ago. When they arrived in a series of bloody wars, they took the land from the native people living there, the Canaanites, who are the forefathers of the current-day Palestinians. The Occupation of Canaan (1250-1050 BCE) (jewishvirtuallibrary.org) So, the "truth of the matter," if you believe the Torah or Old Testament1 is the people who are now called "Palestinians" were natives of that land before the Jews, now called "Israelites," came and took it from them. There have been fighting and wars there ever since. So, Oct 7 is just one (small) chapter in the entire story of this horrific dispute over what each side considers their "god-given" land. So, don't push your biased SJ on me! 1 I don't believe the accounts in the Bible, Torah, Quoran, or any book claimed to be written by or "revealed" by some "diety." But, I cite this above because I know the Jews and the Muslims do believe what is written there.

He's a unilateralist, pure and simple...

You, too, need to amend your phraseology. I'm not an "apologist"; I'm a "bilateralist."

If that could be arranged, I'd be all for it. Of course, that depends on what you mean by "surrender." If by "surrender," you mean a promise to cease all militant activities now and in the future, then yes. If "surrender" means all those who the IDF believes to be Hamas militants are to be arrested and held as prisoners, then no, I wouldn't be for that. And, of course, I'd expect there also would be a condition that negotiations would start on a two-state solution.

Does that mean all the pizzo I've been paying has just been a scam???

I believe Hamas wants a ceasefire, too, but only with a guarantee of a PERMANENT ceasefire. And how would they ever be able to get that if they didn't have hostages to bargain with? I say trade the hostages for a permanent ceasefire, one that is enforced by some neutral peacekeeping force, like the UN. Then, start negotiating a two-state solution, even if those negotiations are led by their allies who want an end to this conflict - if that is at all possible.

Who cares about you? This is not about you or me. I care about me and what I think. I also care about what you and others think and post on this and other Forums. I don't always agree with what you post (and for you, that's almost always), but I do care about it. I learn a lot from these posts. Some posts inform me, and some just disappoint me.

"Israelis overwhelmingly are confident in the justice of the Gaza war..." Well, I'm not; at least, I'm not confident in the justice of how it's being conducted, and that's what's important to me.

Okay, how about this one? There are many online to choose from... Israeli police clash with captives families in anti-Netanyahu protests | Al Mayadeen English

By that, I mean the Israeli people are starting to protest against the Netanyahu government.

I agree with EVERYTHING you've said above, and I would only change one thing. I'd change the "(UK}" in the last line to "(USA)."

With Israel it is work in progress, Hamas will be destroyed. It is also a work in progress within Israel...

Israelis are getting sick of Zionists... Half a million Israelis join latest protest against Netanyahu’s judicial overhaul, organizers say | CNN

If Israel (and Palestine) want to safeguard against any future horrific attacks on their citizens, they should get rid of their extremist leaders (Hamas and Zionists), implement a permanent ceasefire and the return of all hostages (conditional on each other), and start negotiating a two-state solution.

@Wobblybob, and every Palestinian civilian (human shield) that the IDF kills creates 10s or even 100s more Palestinians that now hate Israelis. IDF cannot wipe out Hamas. In trying to do so, they will only create future ones.

I've said time and time again that Hamas are terrorists. I'm sure they think of themselves as "freedom fighters." I think Hamas represents a small percentage of the Palestinian people, just like Zionists represent only a small percentage of Israelis. What I've constantly said is I hope Palestinians and Israelis (not Hamas and Zionists) can eventually come together to reach an agreement that would divide the land up so they both could live in peace. But, as long as they are led by these right-wing, nationalistic, militant factions, that will not happen, or be very, very hard to do.

But you didn't say that. You just deflected the question to a statement implying "He hit me first!" I agree Hamas conducted a horrific terrorist attack on Oct 7. But, what I don't agree with is that it gives Israel the right to also commit horrific, terrorist-like attacks on Gaza in retaliation. That's the main difference we have. I guess you could reduce it down to the old adage, "Two wrongs don't make a right."

What makes you think that?

Sorry, I didn't see that as a question but a statement. I don't believe that statement or the link supporting it.

I asked you, "What would you say about the people who kill human shields?" And your answer was, "It's a war that Palestine so brutally instigated." I don't consider that a direct answer. Your answer IMPLIED that you thought killing civilians used as human shields was okay because "He hit me first!" But, it was not a direct answer.

I "hate" just the extreme factions, not those on either side who also hate those factions. Opinion: Many Palestinians in Gaza hate Hamas. My father certainly did | CNN

It's a war that Palestine so brutally instigated. You never answer a direct question. I always do. You always change the subject. I hope you'll consider changing that approach.