Forces had no direct confrontation with Hamas terrorists who killed hostages; 'The IDF and security forces are doing everything possible to bring all hostages home as quickly as possible. This news shakes us all,' says army spokesperson Hagari
Forces had no direct confrontation with Hamas terrorists who killed hostages; 'The IDF and security forces are doing everything possible to bring all hostages home as quickly as possible. This news shakes us all,' says army spokesperson Hagari
Israeli forces discovered the bodies of six hostages in a 65-foot-deep tunnel in Rafah, approximately a kilometer from where hostage Farhan Alkadi was recently freed. The IDF had no precise intelligence on the hostages' location in recent months but knew there were captives in the sector, leading to a gradual and cautious operation in Rafah since the ground offensive began.
The hostages seem like the only bargaining chip they have (not that it's much of a bargaining chip), so I'm surprised they're doing it. Maybe they've decided that it isn't worth it.
Thinking on it, it was probably also costing them what are now valuable resources to keep them alive. When it's near impossible to get in and out of Gaza, food, medicine, etc. are worth their weight in gold.
Do you really believe that any member of hamas would be safe just because they let some hostages go? How would that work? Should they surrender themselves to the IDF while delivering the hostages, just notify them of where they are so they won’t be bombed or how would that all work?
How would that work? Should they surrender themselves to the IDF while delivering the hostages, just notify them of where they are so they won’t be bombed or how would that all work?
Israel has tip lines set up for Hamas members and members of the Gazan public to call. You call and say, "me and my boys will have an unspecified number of hostages at x location at y time and are looking to surrender. Then you show up at that time with those resources and surrender.
Are there any examples of it being used successfully and the aftermath of it? This is a genuine question stemming from my own ignorance on the subject. I would really like for that to be a good way of handeling situations where hostages are released, but I could easily understand why a member of Hamas might have reservations if they do not have reason to trust the system.
If there is good reason to trust it I will agree that that would have been a viable and good way out and should have been used.
Unfortunately I am still unable to find any stories that tells what happens to the Hamas members after their surrender.
I’m unsure if they get treated well or are sent to the same facilities in which there are reports of human rights violations amounting to psykological and physical torture.
I did find some examples of successful surenders, but nothing where hostages were explicitly mentioned to have sweetened the deal of surrender.
I do believe you may be right but I have been unable to verify it myself.
Historically you've shipped them to a neutral nation (like Switzerland) who negotiated their return to their home country on the condition that they not be allowed to rejoin the war effort either for the duration of the war or for a specific time.
None of these things are solutions that haven't been seen before.
On 15 December 2023, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) soldiers operating in Shuja'iyya, Gaza as part of the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip killed three Israeli hostages taken during the 2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel. The hostages, who were trying to be rescued, were visibly unarmed and shirtless and waving a makeshift white flag when they were killed.
My friend, you are literally arguing that executing hostages is the same as attempting to release them under extremely risky conditions because it has failed in the past.
If that is truly your opinion, then I honestly have no more to say. I can’t reasonably argue with that type of opinion.
I still wish you a great day though and hope the fighting ends soon.
I put as much faith in this as I do the hospital tunnel story.
Anything the IDF says is to be treated as bunk without at least 2 corroborating sources. The IDF lies like they breathe, so I'm more willing to assume they killed the hostages to make Hamas look bad than anything they actually say.
It's entirely possible this is total nonsense, but I could also see them realizing that keeping them alive was an exercise in futility and, as I suggested in another comment, a waste of precious resources like food.
Oh, don't get me wrong, it could maybe possibly be true. We're just getting it from a serial liar, so the message is untrustworthy on its face.
I'll be extremely saddened if I'm wrong here, because those people didn't deserve this. But given Israel's long history of blatant lies in the name of PR against anything Palestinian, I'm not going to believe it until a credible source backs up their statement.
Israeli history isn't even a necessary consideration. The messaging of any warfighting party should always be taken with appropriate caution.
If someone is willing to wage war to achieve their goals, some propaganda efforts are certainly not out of the question. Factuality cannot really be confirmed until after the war is over, and the area becomes safe for neutral parties to visit. Active warzones are just not fountains of factual and verifiable reporting though.
Depending on how recently they were executed, it makes perfect sense. As the one holding hostages, you want to set the precedent that the only way to get them out alive is via negotiation.
Hamas is trying to keep as many alive as they can.
But (a) 2000 pound bunker busters don't discriminate between Palestinians and Israelis and (b) if the IDF comes too close to the hostages, their guards have to decide whether to let them go alive or to kill them.
In the case of the Druze guy, I can definitely see Hamas choosing not to kill him. But in cases of Israelis who also served in the IDF, the rational choice is to kill them instead of giving the IDF a propaganda win.
And finally, sometimes the IDF probably accidentally kills them and tries to blame Hamas if they can get away with it.
Is Hamas even that disciplined to act as a unified front? Management or soldiers on the site could've decided themselves to take a revenge on hostages. Especially if they knew they are cornered and there were no use of keeping them alive if they are deadmen too.
Ha. If Hamas had IDF weapons and tactics, they would use it to eradicate every Jew in the middle east. They don't have such weapons because they aren't disciplined at all. They are so undisciplined, they can't plan for their own futures unless it involves killing Jews. That's why there is no investment in the future of Gaza or its people except for terror tunnels, rockets, and rocket launchers, oh and mass shootings.
Such discipline from Hamas that Gaza can't be trusted with a runway, let alone aircrafts and parts, or other nice things that normal countries get to have when they don't keep putting terrorists in charge.
Funding is not disclipine. I believe your head is in your ass. I’m willing to help with that, even though I’m against genocide and the more than half century occupation and Israel’s current g̶o̶v̶e̶r̶n̶m̶e̶n̶t̶ terrorist regime.
Sounds like they were retreating from the area, and didn't want to bring the hostages with them. In this case, executing the hostages makes strategic sense, as it reinforces the threat that you are willing to do so.
It would be smarter for them to bring the hostages with them to keep their bargaining chips. You may be right but I'm putting my money on the IDF killing them with bombs and blaming Hamas until another restorer says something. Unfortunately, the IDF keeps killing all the journalists for some reason...