Discussion about this post

User's avatar
EKB's avatar
Jan 1Edited

While there are of course hundreds who care about the hostages in these rallies, they are also being used by those with more machiavellian desires. And that is to oust Bibi. T

The question I have asked from the beginning is why they chose the saying "Bring them home" instead of "let them go." What they chose means its all up to israel to effect a hostage deal rather than putting the blame where it belongs, on Hamas, Iran and Qatar.

It is a terrible choice and yet it is not. You do not sacrifice 10 million people for 100. And if we are being true it would be sacrificing 14 million people, because the lives of the Jews of the world are at stake as we have seen as well. And no I do not have a child as a hostage and my heart goes out to them, but what kind of deal would be made? Sinwar was released in the Shalit deal. We saved him, and how many then died? (And no Shalit should never live with guilt. It's just an observation of what happened and why would Israel do that to herself again?)

Expand full comment
April's avatar

Excellent post. The problem with negotiating with terrorists is that you’re negotiating with terrorists. I cried about the hostages every night for months and I still pray for them. But Israel has to win the war and put a stop to infinite terrorism. And yes the target should be the UN. I hope a Trump presidency will improve this situation.

Expand full comment
38 more comments...

No posts