Israel on Saturday described as "propaganda" a claim by Hamas that the militant group had wanted to release two more hostages on humanitarian grounds but that Israel declined to receive them.
B makes A difficult, even if Hamas uses C and D and even E, those hostages are still in danger because of Israeli bombing and constant deaths among people in C and D, as well as the constant bombing in E. Add to that the fact that Israel completely threw them under the bus and refuses to engage with Hamas to get them back is the biggest issue here.
So, here we go:
(1) not really, they cannot do it “directly” nor “easily” and yet they released 4 people already
(2) And two:
Hamas not releasing prisoners, but citing B means that they were lying about A.
How does citing B mean they are lying about A? They could be lying about A anyway, and B could be completely true (and given what is happening today I am starting to think B is true, and not unlike Israel anyway).
Existing in a war zone is dangerous, capturing 200 hostages had danger. Not all of them survived. I think that’s clear.
Releasing hostages also has danger, Israel absolutely could have mitigated that danger by negotiating. And the refusing to do so. That feels completely genuine, but I don’t have evidence either way. They may or may not be lying
Because of point 1. Hamas has the ability to release prisoners, with a degree of danger, without the consent of Israel.
Moving people around in the Gaza strip, is within their capabilities, especially because they don’t have to deliver to the border, they have a variety of UN and Red Cross compounds they could just drop anybody off at. And then make a press release
The issue in point 2 is not that Israel is or isn’t cooperating, it’s that it’s immaterial to hamas’s actions inside the Gaza strip. Israel not cooperating can enhance the danger and that’s a fair thing to talk about. So Hamas could say Israel’s not cooperating, putting hostages in danger, but we’ve released them to the UNRW compound at these coordinates. We did what we could. That at least would be an honest press release
So going back to 1, 2 because Hamas did not release prisoners, but issued a press releasing they couldn’t release prisoners, that contradicts point 1. Of which they have full control over, not danger free, but they have full capabilities to do. This demonstrates they were lying about their intentions. At least at that time, for that reason.
I wanted to read this but I honestly have no idea what those numbers mean /:
what is this numbering supposed to refer to? I used 1 and 2 to respond to you. Is this a continuation of your response?
Anyway about number 8:
So going back to 1, 2 because Hamas did not release prisoners, but issued a press releasing they couldn’t release prisoners, that contradicts point 1.
I mentioned this several times but I feel like it’s being ignored… Hamas did release 4 hostages through the channels you proposed. Do you need me to google this for you and get you the headlines? Because it’s been all over the news for the past 3 days or so.
Yes. But we’re talking about Hamas news release for many days ago.
The fact that they’ve released people through the channels we’ve discussed means they have that capability.
So several days ago when they said they couldn’t release hostages because Israel wouldn’t agree with them, is false on the face of itself. As they’ve demonstrated by releasing hostages through the Red Cross
I understand your position somewhat but I have no trust in Israel. You are saying Hamas is effectively lying but again it could very well be that both sides are lying.
Hamas militants said they will release more when the time allows it. Could also be a lie, but it’s certainly one of the few chances Israel will get to get these hostages back alive and they are blowing it.
But during the time you were discussing this here, 4 hostages were released. I keep getting downvoted for mentioning it in places which makes me think some people are pissed off at this being a fact (not you).
I’m just trying to be logical. There is a statement here which I believe I’ve demonstrated as blatantly false. Calling that as false is a good thing to do, and I believe every critical thinker should acknowledge false statements when they have the evidence.
My point in this thread, is it is immaterial if Israel wanted to help or not, that had no physical impact on hamasa’s releasing of prisoners.
Both belligerence in this conflict have demonstrable lies. There’s no good side here.
Yes in the last several days more prisoners have been released. That’s a good thing. It demonstrates Hamas is trying to negotiate. Or at least start negotiations. Good. Less people need to die. Though I believe the right play for Israeli military was to move in within the first few days, and occupy the city, and put a new leadership in place. The fact that they’ve waited two weeks is removing their global mandate. They’ve waited too long. Indications seem to be that their current strategy is to push the population as far south as possible, prevent them from moving north again. Turn the north part of the Gaza strip into a DMZ, with no Palestinians living there. Basically increase the pressure, I don’t think that’s a long-term viable strategy, but it appears to be what they’re setting up.
But that’s the wider conflict, I will respond to every comment on this thread saying my logic is wrong, I like logic I will defend logic, and I will acknowledge my logic is incorrect when prevented with evidence to the contrary. And the evidence has to be within the self-presented statements of this one Hamas statement. Calling out a lie, for a lie, when all the evidence needed to demonstrate it’s a lie is in its own statement, is something I believe very strongly in. It has nothing to do with the overall political climate.
Okay maybe we should restart. And go through the logic. You can tell me where I’m making my mistake.
Assumptions:
A. Hamas said it wanted to release hostages no quid pro quo
B. Hamas states Israel isn’t cooperating so they can’t release the hostages
C. Inside of the Gaza strip, the Red Cross operates as a somewhat neutral party
D. Inside the Gaza strip The UN RW operates as a somewhat neutral party
E. At the Egyptian Rafah border crossing, Hamas has direct access to the border.
Logic:
If Hamas wants to release prisoners per A they could do it directly through C, D and potentially E.
Hamas not releasing prisoners, but citing B means that they were lying about A.
Where did I mess up?
B makes A difficult, even if Hamas uses C and D and even E, those hostages are still in danger because of Israeli bombing and constant deaths among people in C and D, as well as the constant bombing in E. Add to that the fact that Israel completely threw them under the bus and refuses to engage with Hamas to get them back is the biggest issue here.
So, here we go:
(1) not really, they cannot do it “directly” nor “easily” and yet they released 4 people already
(2) And two:
How does citing B mean they are lying about A? They could be lying about A anyway, and B could be completely true (and given what is happening today I am starting to think B is true, and not unlike Israel anyway).
Existing in a war zone is dangerous, capturing 200 hostages had danger. Not all of them survived. I think that’s clear.
Releasing hostages also has danger, Israel absolutely could have mitigated that danger by negotiating. And the refusing to do so. That feels completely genuine, but I don’t have evidence either way. They may or may not be lying
Because of point 1. Hamas has the ability to release prisoners, with a degree of danger, without the consent of Israel.
Moving people around in the Gaza strip, is within their capabilities, especially because they don’t have to deliver to the border, they have a variety of UN and Red Cross compounds they could just drop anybody off at. And then make a press release
The issue in point 2 is not that Israel is or isn’t cooperating, it’s that it’s immaterial to hamas’s actions inside the Gaza strip. Israel not cooperating can enhance the danger and that’s a fair thing to talk about. So Hamas could say Israel’s not cooperating, putting hostages in danger, but we’ve released them to the UNRW compound at these coordinates. We did what we could. That at least would be an honest press release
So going back to 1, 2 because Hamas did not release prisoners, but issued a press releasing they couldn’t release prisoners, that contradicts point 1. Of which they have full control over, not danger free, but they have full capabilities to do. This demonstrates they were lying about their intentions. At least at that time, for that reason.
I wanted to read this but I honestly have no idea what those numbers mean /: what is this numbering supposed to refer to? I used 1 and 2 to respond to you. Is this a continuation of your response?
Anyway about number 8:
I mentioned this several times but I feel like it’s being ignored… Hamas did release 4 hostages through the channels you proposed. Do you need me to google this for you and get you the headlines? Because it’s been all over the news for the past 3 days or so.
Yes. But we’re talking about Hamas news release for many days ago.
The fact that they’ve released people through the channels we’ve discussed means they have that capability.
So several days ago when they said they couldn’t release hostages because Israel wouldn’t agree with them, is false on the face of itself. As they’ve demonstrated by releasing hostages through the Red Cross
I understand your position somewhat but I have no trust in Israel. You are saying Hamas is effectively lying but again it could very well be that both sides are lying.
Hamas militants said they will release more when the time allows it. Could also be a lie, but it’s certainly one of the few chances Israel will get to get these hostages back alive and they are blowing it.
But during the time you were discussing this here, 4 hostages were released. I keep getting downvoted for mentioning it in places which makes me think some people are pissed off at this being a fact (not you).
I’m just trying to be logical. There is a statement here which I believe I’ve demonstrated as blatantly false. Calling that as false is a good thing to do, and I believe every critical thinker should acknowledge false statements when they have the evidence.
My point in this thread, is it is immaterial if Israel wanted to help or not, that had no physical impact on hamasa’s releasing of prisoners.
Both belligerence in this conflict have demonstrable lies. There’s no good side here.
Yes in the last several days more prisoners have been released. That’s a good thing. It demonstrates Hamas is trying to negotiate. Or at least start negotiations. Good. Less people need to die. Though I believe the right play for Israeli military was to move in within the first few days, and occupy the city, and put a new leadership in place. The fact that they’ve waited two weeks is removing their global mandate. They’ve waited too long. Indications seem to be that their current strategy is to push the population as far south as possible, prevent them from moving north again. Turn the north part of the Gaza strip into a DMZ, with no Palestinians living there. Basically increase the pressure, I don’t think that’s a long-term viable strategy, but it appears to be what they’re setting up.
But that’s the wider conflict, I will respond to every comment on this thread saying my logic is wrong, I like logic I will defend logic, and I will acknowledge my logic is incorrect when prevented with evidence to the contrary. And the evidence has to be within the self-presented statements of this one Hamas statement. Calling out a lie, for a lie, when all the evidence needed to demonstrate it’s a lie is in its own statement, is something I believe very strongly in. It has nothing to do with the overall political climate.
Israel going into Gaza would have meant a much bigger genocide than the one we see today…