WDSmart

Same-same...

These "terrorists" did not hold Israeli hostages in the hospital, at least from the last report I heard. And, were these "terrorists" hiding behind innocent civilians, or were they patients at the hospital, perhaps because they had been injured by the bombings or wounded?

Here is my main source of the interpretation of the rules that I previously posted. The protection of hospitals during armed conflicts: What the law says | ICRC

"Well they've already caught some terrorists in there..." The last I heard on CNN (in the last hour), IDF is reported to have said it has "detained" three people, but there is no declaration that they are terrorists. I assume they are suspected of that, but that has not been confirmed yet. CNN did say that IDF says it found no hostages, alive or dead, but that they are still conducting their searches.

I don't know for sure that any Hamas fighters are hiding in hospitals, but I wouldn't say there are none. But, no, IMO, Hamas fighters who might be hiding in hospitals are not committing war crimes unless they are guarding hostages or using the hospital as a base for their military operations. The IDF is committing a war crime when it attacks a hospital unless the hospital is being used as a base for its adversary or to rescue hostages. They would have to know that there are hostages there first, not just go in searching for them. These are my interpretations of international law I looked up in various places online.

Inside the Gaza's Nasser Hospital, surrounded by Israeli troops (nbcnews.com)

International opposition to Israel's military plans in Rafah is growing. February 13, 2024 Israel-Hamas war (cnn.com) It's working... What I have come to believe to be the primary objective of Hamas' horrible Oct 7 terrorist attack on Israel was to provoke Israel into a revenge counterattack on Gaza. I believe Hamas was counting on Israel to be so savage in this attack that they would start losing the support of the UN, the USA, and the Western world in general. This is definitely what is now happening. Their secondary objective was to capture hostages that they could use in what they hoped would be the forced negotiations with Israel. A lot will depend on just how Israel carries out their declared ground invasion of Rafah. I do expect the IDF to reveal what they want to be the ways the over 1 million Palestinian civilians, who are now holed up in Rafah, can evacuate north, where most of them have fled from. They can't go south since I don't think Egypt would allow that. BUT, I think Hamas may even try to STOP any evacuation to delay and perhaps even cancel the ground invasion. Or if that doesn't work, make the destruction and loss of life of the ground invasion as devastating as possible. This would further weaken the bonds between Israel and its Western allies even more. What I believe Hamas wants is a forced negotiation in which a permanent ceasefire in return for the hostages is agreed to. This would, IMO, also require an on-site UN peacekeeping force and continuing forced negotiations on how to split up this land into a two-state solution.

I consider 1,200 people a lot, but not when compared with 9 million. That is why I don't consider the Hamas terrorist attack on 7 Oct "genocide." I do consider "Jews" (those who practice the religion of Judaism) as people. I also consider "Israelis" (citizens and nationals of the State of Israel. Israelis - Wikipedia) as people. I prefer "Israelis" to "Jews" when talking about these people.

No. See my explanation in my post above...

Since you just won't let this drop, I'll answer your question. No, that is not "true," or at least is not my interpretation of that definition as it applies to Hamas and Oct 7. On Oct 7, Hamas killed something less than 1,500 people. Israel revises Oct. 7 death toll down to 1,200 as long process of identifying victims nears close - Jewish Telegraphic Agency (jta.org). That, IMO, is, when compared to the total population of Israel, over 9 million, not a large enough number to be considered a genocide. Israel Population (2024) - Worldometer (worldometers.info)

Okay, I'll agree with you that this is just a matter of semantics. I see the "act of genocide" implies you are actually doing it, not just intending or wishing you could. It's the same as the "act of killing or murder." That means you've killed someone, not just that is your intent or wishing you could. But, I will accept your use of the word when you apply that to Hamas. I agree they would very much like to do that.

Oct 7th was not what I would call "genocide." It could be seen, I agree, as a prelude to an attempt at genocide. But, as I've said in my previous post, Hamas does not have the military power to kill or drive out all (or a majority) of the Israelis from what they consider to be their land. Israel, however, does. That's why I call the IDF's indiscriminate bombings and large-scale killings and wounding in Gaza "genocide."

I agree with half of what you say above. Hamas are terrorists. They do not distinguish between civilians and military forces. In fact, they seem to prefer to attack civilians since, of course, they are the softer target. The iDF, however, with their indiscriminate bombings in Gaza, has also shown they do not distinguish, or at least don't care about any distinction, between civilians and militants. They will kill 100 civilians to kill one terrorist and feel justified in doing that. This is why I do not support either Hamas or the extreme right-wing factions in Israel (I call these "Zionists"). They are both determined to continue killing to drive towards their efforts to secure all of this land in a one-state solution.

No, I never agreed that Hamas is committing genocide. They don't have the military ability to do that. I will agree they would like to if they could, but they can't without the military force to do so.

I agree that the end goal of Hamas, the reclamation of all their land from the Israelis (one-state solution), includes a potential tactic of genocide. But, I also believe the end goal of the Zionists is the acquisition and control of all that land (one-state solution) includes current tactics of genocide. That is evident from their actions in Gaza. I do abhor the treatment of the hostages you described above, but I also abhor the indiscriminate bombing of civilians, which has resulted in almost 30,000 deaths and almost 70,000 injured. Gaza death toll climbs 28,064 Palestinians killed, 67,611 injured since Oct. 7, health ministry says | Reuters Yes, I do see hostages as bargaining chips, just as I see military might and the continuation of these attacks on Gaza as the same. Both of these will be very important and will be used in any negotiations. I wish all this were fiction. It's not. It's real, and it's certainly one of the most horrendous non-fiction stories I have ever read about.

I understand that the hostages are the only bargaining chips that Hamas has. Israel has military power as their most potent bargaining chip. So yes, I would like Hamas to release the hostages, but I would also like Israel to cease their attacks on Gaza - a permanent ceasefire. Unfortunately, neither side will do either of these unconditionally. So, what I have been recommending is an agreement that includes BOTH the release of the hostages and a permanent ceasefire. And I think a UN peacekeeping force would need to be implemented to ensure both sides live up to this agreement. I also think the agreement should also include commitments to talks about how to divvy up the land in question to reach a two-state solution. I've previously given my recommendations on that.

I am totally lot for words when reading your hate posts. "Hamas should never agree to the return of the hostages" and that is why the Palestian terrorists must be eliminated. You forgot the antecedent conditional phrase, "Without an actual peacekeeping force..."

My opinions are not warped, biased, or anti-Semitic. My opinions are well-thought-out, unbiased, and neither anti-Hebrew(Jew) nor anti-Arab(Muslim). That's the basis of your problem with them. They are not pro-Israeli, so you judge them to be biased because of YOUR extreme, biased, anti-Semitic perspective. I have a BA with an English Major, have authored nine published books, and have edited and helped publish over 200 other books (in English), so, I think my use of the English language should be good enough for posting in this Forum and Topic. My post above, to which you are referring, merely pointed out that your objection to the use of the word "genocide" was not warranted and did so by using the very method you suggested - looking it up online. I could also add that the pending charges against Israel that are being considered by the UN's International Court of Justice (ICJ) include the very charge of "genocide." And my insult at the end of my post was done only to mirror your insult. Your posts usually contain some sort of insult. Mine, with the exception of this last one, usually don't.

Here is the result of my Bing search for "genocide" and the definition provided by the online Oxford Language Dictionary: "the deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group" genocide definition - Search (bing.com) If you think that's not a 100% accurate description of what Israel is doing in Gaza, you're just refusing to accept the facts like an arrogant, know-it-all, wanna-be professor.

Okay, so that was a typo. I've said over and over again there were 134. If you want to engage with me, why don't you engage with me over some important points? And, in the end, it really doesn't matter if there are 134, 101, 34, or just 1 hostage. It still presents the same problem in this scenario. Hamas is holding them and Israel wants them back.

It tells you in your own link. 101 alive and the bodies of 29 that are dead!! Those dead have been dead for a long time, they are still keeping the bodies and will not return them. @Bkk Brian: Why are you going on and on about this? If you only want to say there are 101 LIVE hostages (plus 4 others), and not count the bodies of the dead hostages, just say so. That's all I asked. I say there are 134, just as Hagari said above.

Here is what I read and my source, dated today, which I posted a link to above, giving the 34 remaining hostages. "After Monday’s rescue, the total number of hostages left in Gaza is 134, Hagari said. Of that number, 130 hostages are from the October 7 attack – with 29 dead and 101 believed to be alive. The other four had been held in Gaza prior to the attack." Israeli forces rescue 2 hostages as airstrikes kill around 100 Palestinians in Rafah (msn.com) How many do you think is left? And what is your source? I have no doubt there could be differences. I doubt if even Hamas knows how many they and their local allies have. And the Israelis might think some of those missing have been taken as hostages, but they were not.

I don't understand what your objection is. I said I "thought" (last read) that there were 34 remaining hostages and 67 dead during this recent hostage recovery. Do you have a source that has different figures than this?

This upcoming IDF attack on Rafah just may be the last step of the culmination the goals of BOTH Hamas and Israel. Here is how that might be the case… Israel may have aided/allowed the Oct 7 terrorist attack to have a reason to invade and Gaza. - There have been reports that Israel may have known about the funding of this attack and allowed them to continue. I don’t necessarily believe these. I don’t think Israel, even the most militant Zionists, would have gone that far, but some do. How Israel Secretly Propped Up Hamas - The New York Times (nytimes.com) - There have also been reports that Israel knew about the preparation for this attack, and did nothing to prevent it. I believe these allegations. Israeli intelligence leak details extent of warnings over Hamas attack | Israel | The Guardian But I believe they did not realize Hamas’ attack would be as widespread and as devastating as it was. I believe if either or both of these are true, Israel may have done this to give them the justification for launching a full-scale bombing and destruction of Gaza, with the end goal of either killing or driving all Palestinians out, or at least gaining complete control of Gaza and forcing a one-state solution. Hamas may have launched their Oct 7 terrorist attack to provoke the Israelis into attacking Gaza. - They also took around 200 hostages. Hamas Took More Than 200 Hostages From Israel. Here’s What We Know. - WSJ All but 34? of those have been recovered at this time. Israeli forces rescue 2 hostages as airstrikes kill around 100 Palestinians in Rafah (msn.com) I believe Hamas did this believing these hostages would be important bargaining chips (or so they thought) in what they hoped would be their negotiations with Israel. - Also, they did this knowing Israel with the IDF would go overboard in their attacks on Gaza, and this would eventually weaken the support they had, up to now, been given by the UN and important allies, like the USA, forcing Israel to negotiate a two-state solution. If I am correct in my assumptions above, both sides have accomplished the first parts of their plan, and it could very likely be the upcoming IDF attack on Rafah that will decide whose plan will succeed in the end.

That's an EXCELLENT question and goes to the heart of this matter. I think NO LIVES LOST on either side would be the only ACCEPTABLE figure to retrieve not only these two hostages but the other 34 also. I think that could be done with an agreement that includes Hamas returning the hostages unharmed for a permanent ceasefire and other agreements on both sides. I've posted my suggested outline for such an agreement before, and it was deleted, so I won't post it again. But I'll say any agreement has to include not only a hostage return and a ceasefire but also a UN peacekeeping force and an eventual two-state solution. And, no more lives lost on either side.