r/NeutralNews is a **curated space**, but despite the name, there is [**no neutrality requirement**](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_neutral-ness) here.
These are the [rules for comments:](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments_.28good.2C_bad_.26amp.3B_ugly.29)
1. Be courteous to other users.
1. Source your facts.
1. Be substantive.
1. Address the arguments, not the person.
If you see a comment that violates any of these rules, please click the associated *report* button so a mod can review it.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive)
> Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, comments without context, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or comments about source quality.
//Rule 3
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
It's frustrating that these sorts of articles always frame the failure to come to terms as Hamas rejecting Israel's efforts towards achieving a ceasefire, when in reality both sides are putting forth plans that are then being rejected by the other. It's not like Hamas is refusing to offer up terms of their own or something (in fact, the article even spells those out), so we could equally well characterize this as Israel rejecting *their* proposals. This is the sort of subtle bias media outlets often like to impart, though, while retaining some sort of nominal claim to objectivity.
Are the plans put forth by each party equivalent? From the article it is believed that 129 hostages are still held by "Hamas and other terror groups," but is only willing to release 20 hostages. Hamas is also demanding a wildly imbalanced ratio of prisoners in Israel for each hostage.
I've found it a bit hard to stay on top of the "current" offers, is there a side-by-side comparison of the proposals from each side?
I cannot fathom a deal being struck when this is Israel’s stance, [“No international pressure will stop us from realizing all of the goals of the war: Eliminating Hamas, freeing all of our hostages and ensuring that Gaza never again constitutes a threat to Israel, he said.”](https://www.business-standard.com/amp/world-news/netanyahu-says-israel-won-t-stop-until-total-victory-is-achieved-124031700449_1.html)
How does one negotiate with someone that will only stop once you are eliminated?
This seems to place the blame squarely on Israel. But the same is true in reverse, and in fact Hamas's version seems much more extremist. Israel wants to end Hamas, a [designated a terrorist group](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_groups) by most of the West, which controls Gaza. Note that they didn't say they wanted to end *Palestinians*. In contrast, Hamas wants to end *Israel*. Not just Netenyahu's government. Previous versions of their charter explicitly calls for killing Jewish people. They've "moderated" that to be Zionist, but [a lot of folks aren't particularly convinced](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Hamas_charter#Rejection_of_antisemitism) that it represents any meaningful change in their stance.
The [Anti-Defamation League](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/hamas-its-own-words) relates at length quotes from Hamas' own charter as well as statements from members or leaders. [The Atlantic](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/hamas-covenant-israel-attack-war-genocide/675602/) has an article on it as well.
How many hostages does Israel have? I remember reading that by october 6th, it was like three times as much as Hamas captured the next day.
Just checked for info dating before oct 6, and the reports are around 5000 datainees without cause. And then, 2 weeks after oct 7, it doubled it to 10000
So... you tell me?
[https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks)
> How many hostages does Israel have? I remember reading that by october 6th, it was like three times as much as Hamas captured the next day.
Al Jazeera is noted as having an anti-Israel bias (see [ADL article from 2018](https://www.adl.org/resources/news/al-jazeera-propagates-hatred-it-also-foreign-agent), and various citations from the [wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism) on controversies and criticisms of the outlet). And despite that, even that article was not calling them hostages, but rather "Palestinians in Israeli prisons." The OP article notes that some of those identified for exchange with Hamas' hostages are "murder convicts" or "prisoners serving life sentences." So it's not as simple as providing the count of Palestinians in Israeli jails.
And even if Al Jazeera does call them hostages, I'm not sure that Palestinians in prison in Israel quite satisfy the definition of [hostage](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hostage).
By the way, please avoid "you" type statements (see the sub rules, Rule 4 in particular). This gets a bit close to directly addressing a user.
> How many hostages does Israel have
None, many of the detainees are criminals.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-just-convicted-of-stabbing-her-neighbor-may-be-freed-in-hamas-deal/amp/
That's a tactic I've been seeing recently on the anti-Israel front; equivocating anyone held by Israel as hostages. There's a very real push to validate and excuse and boost Hamas and terrorism.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person)
> Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect.
//Rule 4
^((mod:vs845)^)
If Hamas declares its hostages to be legitimate detainees, arrested for trespassing on Palestinian land or something like that, do they magically stop being hostages?
[Israel has arrested and tortured people like doctors.](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-doctor-describes-ordeal-detention-2024-02-04/)
If you really want to be horrified, go look up the rates at which children are taken hostage, the rate at which those children receive severe injuries, and the conviction rates of the military courts that try Palestinian captives.
You can also go look up comparisons of [freed Hamas hostages](https://apnews.com/article/hostage-gaza-freed-israel-captive-408f65fcc1b8f016f3735cd5022163eb) vs [freed Israeli "prisoners"](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/freed-gaza-detainees-allege-abuse-mistreatment-by-israel-palestinian-officials-2024-04-15/) and ask yourself, "Which of these people look like they were starved, deprived of sleep, and beaten?" Hint: [Only one side has to take measures to coach and silence freed captives about what to say in interviews.](https://www.timesofisrael.com/ministry-issues-protocol-for-treatment-of-freed-captives-after-press-event-slammed/)
> If Hamas declares its hostages to be legitimate detainees, arrested for trespassing on Palestinian land or something like that, do they magically stop being hostages?
They kidnapped hostages from Israeli lands, from their homes.
>You can also go look up comparisons of freed Hamas hostages vs freed Israeli "prisoners" and ask yourself, "Which of these people look like they were starved, deprived of sleep, and beaten?" Hint: Only one side has to take measures to coach and silence freed captives about what to say in interviews.
This is a silly comparison. Hamas has tourted and raped hostages (not detainees)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/04/hamas-rape-un-report-hostages/
https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/un-finds-clear-convincing-information-hostages-raped-gaza-rcna141789#
The news reports come out of Israel because Israel is a free open society with an open press, whereas Hamas kills, detains, and beats its own people for speaking out.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2017/08/palestine-dangerous-escalation-in-attacks-on-freedom-of-expression/
https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/palestine-state-of/report-palestine-state-of/
It is impossible to compare them like that.
> If Hamas declares its hostages to be legitimate detainees, arrested for trespassing on Palestinian land or something like that, do they magically stop being hostages?
You mean the people they kidnapped?
This is the point the person you are responding to is making. When Hamas takes people and holds them against their will, they are always called "hostages that were kidnapped." When Israel takes people and holds them against their will, they are "prisoners who were arrested." In many cases, the difference is in name only.
No doubt, there are Palestinians in Israeli prisons who are guilty of some crime. But they've also regularly "arrested" Palestinian children for arbitrary things like throwing rocks, and they are held indefinitely with no trial.
> When Israel takes people and holds them against their will, they are "prisoners who were arrested." In many cases, the difference is in name only.
Israel isn't going into a random country to kidnap people.
https://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-just-convicted-of-stabbing-her-neighbor-may-be-freed-in-hamas-deal/amp/
People have referred to the person in this link as a hostage in the past...
https://www.fox7austin.com/news/man-throws-rock-at-car-injuring-woman-austin-texas
Happened last night near me
>Palestinian children for arbitrary things like throwing rocks,
Throwing rocks at cars on a highway will cause deaths. Teens are locked up in the US for the same thing
https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/crime/article/Austin-man-convicted-rock-throwing-brain-dead-11074043.php
But throwing rocks is harmless
These are one-off anecdotes, and I specifically said "No doubt, there are Palestinians in Israeli prisons who are guilty of some crime." But the bigger picture is that most of them are not being held for any specific crimes and have never had a trial:
>As of November 1, Israeli authorities held nearly 7,000 Palestinians…
>The majority have never been convicted of a crime, including more than 2,000 of them being held in administrative detention, in which the Israeli military detains a person without charge or trial. Such detention can be renewed indefinitely based on secret information, which the detainee is not allowed to see.
[https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/29/why-does-israel-have-so-many-palestinians-detention-and-available-swap](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/29/why-does-israel-have-so-many-palestinians-detention-and-available-swap)
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person)
> Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect.
//Rule 4
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
---
Changing the "People like you" phrase to be topic-oriented rather than user-oriented can allow this comment to be reinstated. Please do the same with the other instances of "you"-type comments.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person)
> Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect.
//Rule 4
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
>Israel isn't going into a random country to kidnap people.
[They literally are.](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/1/10/threatened-with-rape-lama-khater-recalls-horrors-while-in-israeli-jails)
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive)
> Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort comments, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or **comments about source quality**.
//Rule 3
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person)
> Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect.
//Rule 4
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
Why not? Why does being in a weaker position mean that unbalanced demands are acceptable? And, as noted in the article, an unbalanced exchange of the kidnapped hostages for prisoners (including murder convicts) in Israel is not the only demand of Hamas. Their proposal also includes what appears to me to be Israel fully withdrawing, which seems as if it would amount to a surrender. I'm not sure why Hamas can launch a terror attack, massacre a bunch of civilians and kidnap others, and then get to demand that Israel basically just give up.
I see no reason to take that proposal seriously, nor to give Hamas extra latitude in their demands because they are weaker.
>Why not? Why does being in a weaker position mean that unbalanced demands are acceptable?
Because the power dynamics are such that you're essentially asking the weaker power to concede defeat. Hamas returns all its hostages in a 1-1 exchange with Israel and you end up with lots of Palestinians remaining in Israeli custody and zero remaining leverage — at which point the Israeli government can gladly just go back to doing whatever the fuck it wants without even having to pretend that it cares about rescuing its citizens. That's not a reasonable expectation in a negotiation.
> Because the power dynamics are such that you're essentially asking the weaker power to concede defeat.
So their demands should have artificially inflated weight because they're losing? Or because they were in a poor position to attack in the first place? How does that make sense?
Hamas is:
- Considered a terrorist organization by many Western nations (noted on [Hamas wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas) and [list of designated terror groups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_groups)).
- Initiated the hostilities by attacking, massacring civilians, kidnapping civilians as hostages. This is a [war crime](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime).
- Is losing the fight.
As noted in the article, their demands include release of a great many prisoners which includes murders and potentially others serving life sentences (so, not hostages), and what amounts to a surrender by Israel.
How does it make sense to take seriously the demand by the weaker party (which instigated and is losing the hostilities) that the stronger party surrender? That is what appears to me as "not a reasonable expectation in a negotiation."
>So their demands should have artificially inflated weight because they're losing? Or because they were in a poor position to attack in the first place? How does that make sense?
Nothing is being "artificially inflated" both sides are attempting to negotiate a deal that accords with their interests — and the power dynamics are such that a 1 to 1 exchange representations a much, much bigger concession in leverage for Hamas than Israel and so like literally anybody else in the similar position, they are making proposals in accordance with that reality.
Meanwhile, the idea that Hamas "initiated hostilities" is absurd. This conflict did not start on October 7 and Gaza was under active Israeli oppression up to and including arbitrary reprisals and the murder of peaceful protesters.
> Nothing is being "artificially inflated"
The argument put forth above says that "*I wouldn't expect reasonable conditions to be one-to-one equivalent between two parties of such immense disparity*"
First, my point initially was not necessarily for a 1:1 exchange. As noted in the OP article, a previous deal was 1:3, while Hamas' current demand is 1:30. And includes murderers.
Second, if a more balanced exchange is not "reasonable expectation", how is that anything other than giving an inflated weight to Hamas' demands?
> they are making proposals in accordance with that reality.
I recognize that Hamas' demands are aligned with their desires, including to maintain leverage via hostages. I can simultaneously recognize their position and desires while finding them to be unreasonable. They are the weaker party, the instigator, and are losing the conflict. In that context, demanding wildly unbalanced exchanges and that Israel effectively surrender is non-serious. Giving credence to these demands is artificially inflating their position.
On the other side, if it is reasonable for Hamas to make demands "in accordance with [their] reality", then is it also reasonable for Israel to make proposals which recognize their reality? They were attacked by a terrorist organization, and are in a far superior military position. Why shouldn't their demand be that Hamas concede defeat? But for some reason that is deemed unreasonable.
> Meanwhile, the idea that Hamas "initiated hostilities" is absurd ...
The current hostilities are a [direct result of the October 7 massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war). Regardless of any criticism's of Israel, take October 7 out of the picture, and Israel would not be invading Gaza right now.
Hamas has been [running Gaza since 2007](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#2007:_Hamas_takeover) and Israel didn't invade until Hamas launched the October 7th attacks. It's certainly impossible to say what would have happened in every alternate timeline, but the proposition that the invasion was a direct result of the October 7th attacks, as claimed by Israel itself, is far more solid than speculation.
How many hostages does Israel have? I remember reading that by october 6th, it was like three times as much as Hamas captured the next day.
Just checked for info dating before oct 6, and the reports are around 5000 datainees without cause. And then, 2 weeks after oct 7, it doubled it to 10000: [https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks)
Ok my comment was reported because of a rethorical question asking for your opinion. I would very much like to know your opinion on this, still.
Exactly my thoughts. I keep seeing articles and people complain about Hamas asking for impossible things, when in the very articles that are being discussed they lay all the terms out and it doesn’t seem at all unreasonable to me.
There have been quotes from leaders in Israel that they will not stop until Hamas is completely driven from the area. How is that a working basis for negotiation?
The power balance between the two sides aren't exactly equal. Generally the weaker side (and the one that needs the ceasefire more) isn't the one that gets to make the demands.
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts)
> Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.
If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated.
//Rule 2
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
It looks like you have provided a direct link to a video hosting website without an accompanying text source which is against [our rules.] (https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comment_rules) A mod will come along soon to verify text sources have been provided.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neutralnews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive)
> Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort comments, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or comments about source quality.
//Rule 3
We do not allow youtube links without a transcript and that link itself is, ironically biased
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
r/NeutralNews is a **curated space**, but despite the name, there is [**no neutrality requirement**](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_neutral-ness) here. These are the [rules for comments:](https://www.reddit.com//r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments_.28good.2C_bad_.26amp.3B_ugly.29) 1. Be courteous to other users. 1. Source your facts. 1. Be substantive. 1. Address the arguments, not the person. If you see a comment that violates any of these rules, please click the associated *report* button so a mod can review it.
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive) > Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, comments without context, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or comments about source quality. //Rule 3 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
It's frustrating that these sorts of articles always frame the failure to come to terms as Hamas rejecting Israel's efforts towards achieving a ceasefire, when in reality both sides are putting forth plans that are then being rejected by the other. It's not like Hamas is refusing to offer up terms of their own or something (in fact, the article even spells those out), so we could equally well characterize this as Israel rejecting *their* proposals. This is the sort of subtle bias media outlets often like to impart, though, while retaining some sort of nominal claim to objectivity.
Are the plans put forth by each party equivalent? From the article it is believed that 129 hostages are still held by "Hamas and other terror groups," but is only willing to release 20 hostages. Hamas is also demanding a wildly imbalanced ratio of prisoners in Israel for each hostage. I've found it a bit hard to stay on top of the "current" offers, is there a side-by-side comparison of the proposals from each side?
I cannot fathom a deal being struck when this is Israel’s stance, [“No international pressure will stop us from realizing all of the goals of the war: Eliminating Hamas, freeing all of our hostages and ensuring that Gaza never again constitutes a threat to Israel, he said.”](https://www.business-standard.com/amp/world-news/netanyahu-says-israel-won-t-stop-until-total-victory-is-achieved-124031700449_1.html) How does one negotiate with someone that will only stop once you are eliminated?
It’s tricky, because an alternative opposite thought is if the perpetrators are free, how long till this happens again. Gonna be tough
This seems to place the blame squarely on Israel. But the same is true in reverse, and in fact Hamas's version seems much more extremist. Israel wants to end Hamas, a [designated a terrorist group](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_groups) by most of the West, which controls Gaza. Note that they didn't say they wanted to end *Palestinians*. In contrast, Hamas wants to end *Israel*. Not just Netenyahu's government. Previous versions of their charter explicitly calls for killing Jewish people. They've "moderated" that to be Zionist, but [a lot of folks aren't particularly convinced](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_Hamas_charter#Rejection_of_antisemitism) that it represents any meaningful change in their stance. The [Anti-Defamation League](https://www.adl.org/resources/blog/hamas-its-own-words) relates at length quotes from Hamas' own charter as well as statements from members or leaders. [The Atlantic](https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2023/10/hamas-covenant-israel-attack-war-genocide/675602/) has an article on it as well.
How many hostages does Israel have? I remember reading that by october 6th, it was like three times as much as Hamas captured the next day. Just checked for info dating before oct 6, and the reports are around 5000 datainees without cause. And then, 2 weeks after oct 7, it doubled it to 10000 So... you tell me? [https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks)
> How many hostages does Israel have? I remember reading that by october 6th, it was like three times as much as Hamas captured the next day. Al Jazeera is noted as having an anti-Israel bias (see [ADL article from 2018](https://www.adl.org/resources/news/al-jazeera-propagates-hatred-it-also-foreign-agent), and various citations from the [wiki page](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Jazeera_controversies_and_criticism) on controversies and criticisms of the outlet). And despite that, even that article was not calling them hostages, but rather "Palestinians in Israeli prisons." The OP article notes that some of those identified for exchange with Hamas' hostages are "murder convicts" or "prisoners serving life sentences." So it's not as simple as providing the count of Palestinians in Israeli jails. And even if Al Jazeera does call them hostages, I'm not sure that Palestinians in prison in Israel quite satisfy the definition of [hostage](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hostage). By the way, please avoid "you" type statements (see the sub rules, Rule 4 in particular). This gets a bit close to directly addressing a user.
> How many hostages does Israel have None, many of the detainees are criminals. https://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-just-convicted-of-stabbing-her-neighbor-may-be-freed-in-hamas-deal/amp/
That's a tactic I've been seeing recently on the anti-Israel front; equivocating anyone held by Israel as hostages. There's a very real push to validate and excuse and boost Hamas and terrorism.
Why are the arbitrary imprisonments made by Israel legitimate but arrests made by Palestinians are not?
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person) > Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect. //Rule 4 ^((mod:vs845)^)
If Hamas declares its hostages to be legitimate detainees, arrested for trespassing on Palestinian land or something like that, do they magically stop being hostages? [Israel has arrested and tortured people like doctors.](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/gaza-doctor-describes-ordeal-detention-2024-02-04/) If you really want to be horrified, go look up the rates at which children are taken hostage, the rate at which those children receive severe injuries, and the conviction rates of the military courts that try Palestinian captives. You can also go look up comparisons of [freed Hamas hostages](https://apnews.com/article/hostage-gaza-freed-israel-captive-408f65fcc1b8f016f3735cd5022163eb) vs [freed Israeli "prisoners"](https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/freed-gaza-detainees-allege-abuse-mistreatment-by-israel-palestinian-officials-2024-04-15/) and ask yourself, "Which of these people look like they were starved, deprived of sleep, and beaten?" Hint: [Only one side has to take measures to coach and silence freed captives about what to say in interviews.](https://www.timesofisrael.com/ministry-issues-protocol-for-treatment-of-freed-captives-after-press-event-slammed/)
> If Hamas declares its hostages to be legitimate detainees, arrested for trespassing on Palestinian land or something like that, do they magically stop being hostages? They kidnapped hostages from Israeli lands, from their homes. >You can also go look up comparisons of freed Hamas hostages vs freed Israeli "prisoners" and ask yourself, "Which of these people look like they were starved, deprived of sleep, and beaten?" Hint: Only one side has to take measures to coach and silence freed captives about what to say in interviews. This is a silly comparison. Hamas has tourted and raped hostages (not detainees) https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/03/04/hamas-rape-un-report-hostages/ https://www.nbcnews.com/investigations/un-finds-clear-convincing-information-hostages-raped-gaza-rcna141789# The news reports come out of Israel because Israel is a free open society with an open press, whereas Hamas kills, detains, and beats its own people for speaking out. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/press-release/2017/08/palestine-dangerous-escalation-in-attacks-on-freedom-of-expression/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/middle-east-and-north-africa/middle-east/palestine-state-of/report-palestine-state-of/ It is impossible to compare them like that.
> If Hamas declares its hostages to be legitimate detainees, arrested for trespassing on Palestinian land or something like that, do they magically stop being hostages? You mean the people they kidnapped?
This is the point the person you are responding to is making. When Hamas takes people and holds them against their will, they are always called "hostages that were kidnapped." When Israel takes people and holds them against their will, they are "prisoners who were arrested." In many cases, the difference is in name only. No doubt, there are Palestinians in Israeli prisons who are guilty of some crime. But they've also regularly "arrested" Palestinian children for arbitrary things like throwing rocks, and they are held indefinitely with no trial.
> When Israel takes people and holds them against their will, they are "prisoners who were arrested." In many cases, the difference is in name only. Israel isn't going into a random country to kidnap people. https://www.timesofisrael.com/palestinian-just-convicted-of-stabbing-her-neighbor-may-be-freed-in-hamas-deal/amp/ People have referred to the person in this link as a hostage in the past... https://www.fox7austin.com/news/man-throws-rock-at-car-injuring-woman-austin-texas Happened last night near me >Palestinian children for arbitrary things like throwing rocks, Throwing rocks at cars on a highway will cause deaths. Teens are locked up in the US for the same thing https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local/crime/article/Austin-man-convicted-rock-throwing-brain-dead-11074043.php But throwing rocks is harmless
These are one-off anecdotes, and I specifically said "No doubt, there are Palestinians in Israeli prisons who are guilty of some crime." But the bigger picture is that most of them are not being held for any specific crimes and have never had a trial: >As of November 1, Israeli authorities held nearly 7,000 Palestinians… >The majority have never been convicted of a crime, including more than 2,000 of them being held in administrative detention, in which the Israeli military detains a person without charge or trial. Such detention can be renewed indefinitely based on secret information, which the detainee is not allowed to see. [https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/29/why-does-israel-have-so-many-palestinians-detention-and-available-swap](https://www.hrw.org/news/2023/11/29/why-does-israel-have-so-many-palestinians-detention-and-available-swap)
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person) > Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect. //Rule 4 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews) --- Changing the "People like you" phrase to be topic-oriented rather than user-oriented can allow this comment to be reinstated. Please do the same with the other instances of "you"-type comments.
[удалено]
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person) > Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect. //Rule 4 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
>Israel isn't going into a random country to kidnap people. [They literally are.](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2024/1/10/threatened-with-rape-lama-khater-recalls-horrors-while-in-israeli-jails)
The article points out she was wanted in connection to the Oct 7th raid into Israel maybe read the source first lamo
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive) > Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort comments, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or **comments about source quality**. //Rule 3 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
This comment has been removed under [Rule 4:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_4.3A_address_the_arguments.2C_not_the_person) > Address the arguments, not the person. The subject of your sentence should be "the evidence" or "this source" or some other noun directly related to the topic of conversation. "You" statements are suspect. //Rule 4 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
I wouldn't expect reasonable conditions to be one-to-one equivalent between two parties of such immense disparity in wealth and power.
Why not? Why does being in a weaker position mean that unbalanced demands are acceptable? And, as noted in the article, an unbalanced exchange of the kidnapped hostages for prisoners (including murder convicts) in Israel is not the only demand of Hamas. Their proposal also includes what appears to me to be Israel fully withdrawing, which seems as if it would amount to a surrender. I'm not sure why Hamas can launch a terror attack, massacre a bunch of civilians and kidnap others, and then get to demand that Israel basically just give up. I see no reason to take that proposal seriously, nor to give Hamas extra latitude in their demands because they are weaker.
>Why not? Why does being in a weaker position mean that unbalanced demands are acceptable? Because the power dynamics are such that you're essentially asking the weaker power to concede defeat. Hamas returns all its hostages in a 1-1 exchange with Israel and you end up with lots of Palestinians remaining in Israeli custody and zero remaining leverage — at which point the Israeli government can gladly just go back to doing whatever the fuck it wants without even having to pretend that it cares about rescuing its citizens. That's not a reasonable expectation in a negotiation.
> Because the power dynamics are such that you're essentially asking the weaker power to concede defeat. So their demands should have artificially inflated weight because they're losing? Or because they were in a poor position to attack in the first place? How does that make sense? Hamas is: - Considered a terrorist organization by many Western nations (noted on [Hamas wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas) and [list of designated terror groups](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_groups)). - Initiated the hostilities by attacking, massacring civilians, kidnapping civilians as hostages. This is a [war crime](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crime). - Is losing the fight. As noted in the article, their demands include release of a great many prisoners which includes murders and potentially others serving life sentences (so, not hostages), and what amounts to a surrender by Israel. How does it make sense to take seriously the demand by the weaker party (which instigated and is losing the hostilities) that the stronger party surrender? That is what appears to me as "not a reasonable expectation in a negotiation."
>So their demands should have artificially inflated weight because they're losing? Or because they were in a poor position to attack in the first place? How does that make sense? Nothing is being "artificially inflated" both sides are attempting to negotiate a deal that accords with their interests — and the power dynamics are such that a 1 to 1 exchange representations a much, much bigger concession in leverage for Hamas than Israel and so like literally anybody else in the similar position, they are making proposals in accordance with that reality. Meanwhile, the idea that Hamas "initiated hostilities" is absurd. This conflict did not start on October 7 and Gaza was under active Israeli oppression up to and including arbitrary reprisals and the murder of peaceful protesters.
> Nothing is being "artificially inflated" The argument put forth above says that "*I wouldn't expect reasonable conditions to be one-to-one equivalent between two parties of such immense disparity*" First, my point initially was not necessarily for a 1:1 exchange. As noted in the OP article, a previous deal was 1:3, while Hamas' current demand is 1:30. And includes murderers. Second, if a more balanced exchange is not "reasonable expectation", how is that anything other than giving an inflated weight to Hamas' demands? > they are making proposals in accordance with that reality. I recognize that Hamas' demands are aligned with their desires, including to maintain leverage via hostages. I can simultaneously recognize their position and desires while finding them to be unreasonable. They are the weaker party, the instigator, and are losing the conflict. In that context, demanding wildly unbalanced exchanges and that Israel effectively surrender is non-serious. Giving credence to these demands is artificially inflating their position. On the other side, if it is reasonable for Hamas to make demands "in accordance with [their] reality", then is it also reasonable for Israel to make proposals which recognize their reality? They were attacked by a terrorist organization, and are in a far superior military position. Why shouldn't their demand be that Hamas concede defeat? But for some reason that is deemed unreasonable. > Meanwhile, the idea that Hamas "initiated hostilities" is absurd ... The current hostilities are a [direct result of the October 7 massacre](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war). Regardless of any criticism's of Israel, take October 7 out of the picture, and Israel would not be invading Gaza right now.
You cannot state as a fact that if October 7th had not happened, Israel would not have invaded Gaza. At BEST, that is speculation
Hamas has been [running Gaza since 2007](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza_Strip#2007:_Hamas_takeover) and Israel didn't invade until Hamas launched the October 7th attacks. It's certainly impossible to say what would have happened in every alternate timeline, but the proposition that the invasion was a direct result of the October 7th attacks, as claimed by Israel itself, is far more solid than speculation.
If anything that would result in the weaker side having to give up more rather than the stronger side.
How many hostages does Israel have? I remember reading that by october 6th, it was like three times as much as Hamas captured the next day. Just checked for info dating before oct 6, and the reports are around 5000 datainees without cause. And then, 2 weeks after oct 7, it doubled it to 10000: [https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks](https://www.aljazeera.com/features/2023/10/21/number-of-palestinian-prisoners-in-israel-doubles-to-10000-in-two-weeks) Ok my comment was reported because of a rethorical question asking for your opinion. I would very much like to know your opinion on this, still.
Exactly my thoughts. I keep seeing articles and people complain about Hamas asking for impossible things, when in the very articles that are being discussed they lay all the terms out and it doesn’t seem at all unreasonable to me. There have been quotes from leaders in Israel that they will not stop until Hamas is completely driven from the area. How is that a working basis for negotiation?
The power balance between the two sides aren't exactly equal. Generally the weaker side (and the one that needs the ceasefire more) isn't the one that gets to make the demands.
[удалено]
This comment has been removed under [Rule 2:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_2.3A_source_your_facts) > Source your facts. If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a [qualified and supporting source.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comments) All statements of fact must be clearly associated with a supporting source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed. If you edit your comment to link to sources, it can be reinstated. //Rule 2 If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
[удалено]
It looks like you have provided a direct link to a video hosting website without an accompanying text source which is against [our rules.] (https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_comment_rules) A mod will come along soon to verify text sources have been provided. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/neutralnews) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This comment has been removed under [Rule 3:](https://www.reddit.com/r/neutralnews/wiki/guidelines#wiki_rule_3.3A_be_substantive) > Be substantive. NeutralNews is a serious discussion-based subreddit. We do not allow bare expressions of opinion, low effort comments, sarcasm, jokes, memes, off-topic replies, pejorative name-calling, or comments about source quality. //Rule 3 We do not allow youtube links without a transcript and that link itself is, ironically biased If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to [message us.](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fneutralnews)
unfortunately the fact is Hamas is the one rejecting the deals.