2nd Israel - Hamas Hostage Deal Jan 2025

[Shmueli]

I think it's fair to debate the ceasefire aspect of this.

It is hard for me to even have an opinion on the number of prisoners vs number of hostages being released...
It is a question way out of anyone's league and is best left to daas torah (not saying that that is what is happening, but that would be the best answer).

Picture being the mother of one of the hostages and try to see if the argument against the trade resonates as well.
Picture being the mother of one of the terror victims (who's perpetrator is being released) and try to see if the argument for the trade resonates as well.

There isn't even a fair debate to be had. How?

[Yehuda57]

I think it's fair to debate the ceasefire aspect of this.

It is hard for me to even have an opinion on the number of prisoners vs number of hostages being released...
It is a question way out of anyone's league and is best left to daas torah (not saying that that is what is happening, but that would be the best answer).

Picture being the mother of one of the hostages and try to see if the argument against the trade resonates as well.
Picture being the mother of one of the terror victims (who's perpetrator is being released) and try to see if the argument for the trade resonates as well.

There isn't even a fair debate to be had. How?

Why is the ceasefire aspect any different in terms of telling the mothers? If one is if the opinion that the deal is wrong, for any reason, that doesn't help with the emotional part of the equation.

You've introduced a new part of the trolley problem whereby whatever choice you make, you have to tell the mothers of the people first. If that changes the calculus of the decision then the decision is an emotional one, not rational - which isn't necessarily wrong.

[TzviR]

Picture being the mother of one of the hostages and try to see if the argument against the trade resonates as well.
Picture being the mother of one of the terror victims (who's perpetrator is being released) and try to see if the argument for the trade resonates as well.

The only reason why I am able to see it the way I do is because I am not in the situation. If it would be a family member of mine chas vshalom I'm sure I would feel very differently, but I would be wrong! Many times in life we cant see the right thing because we're blinded by emotion or something else.

My heart breaks for anyone who has a family member hostage. It is unfathomable and none of us should ever have to know from such things. That being said I dont believe that the current deal is the right thing to do

(It is easy to be a backseat driver and I know nothing about warfare, hostages or any of these situations so my opinion is all just emotional as well I guess)

[Shmueli]

Why is the ceasefire aspect any different in terms of telling the mothers? If one is if the opinion that the deal is wrong, for any reason, that doesn't help with the emotional part of the equation.

You've introduced a new part of the trolley problem whereby whatever choice you make, you have to tell the mothers of the people first. If that changes the calculus of the decision then the decision is an emotional one, not rational - which isn't necessarily wrong.

Meaning the pros and cons of a simple ceasefire in exchange for hostages (without also releasing Palestinian terrorists) are not nearly as contradictory to one another as hostages vs terrorists.
As far as the ceasefire itself goes, there are many other factors and arguments at play, and one can argue that it is an overall good decision (not only because of the hostages). For e.g. to get on Trumps good side, or to bring the soldiers home, maintain world support for Israel, economic reasons, etc. etc...

The issue with the release of hostages vs terrorists with blood on their hands are basically 2 of the exact same things, directly opposing one another.
THE ARGUMENT TO YES MAKE THE TRADE: Value of live vs Value of life
THE ARGUMENT TO NOT MAKE THE TRADE: Also Value of life vs Value of life.

It is literally the exact same thing just from two different angles.
That's why I use the example of imagining being the mother on either side/ angle.

It is an impossible dilemma, and I struggle to understand how almost everyone I speak to has such a strong opinion is for one side or another (and can't even understand the other side).

** I was saying imagine you are the mother. Not imagine telling the mother...**

[Yehuda57]

** I was saying imagine you are the mother. Not imagine telling the mother...**

Sorry for misreading. If I was a mother there is no way I could view this with the kind of detachment required for honest discussion (no matter which side you take)

I have zero argument with any hostage family member, no matter what side they're on, but the government cannot take that into consideration.

Meaning the pros and cons of a simple ceasefire in exchange for hostages (without also releasing Palestinian terrorists) are not nearly as contradictory to one another as hostages vs terrorists.
As far as the ceasefire itself goes, there are many other factors and arguments at play, and one can argue that it is an overall good decision (not only because of the hostages). For e.g. to get on Trumps good side, or to bring the soldiers home, maintain world support for Israel, economic reasons, etc. etc...

The issue with the release of hostages vs terrorists with blood on their hands are basically 2 of the exact same things, directly opposing one another.
THE ARGUMENT TO YES MAKE THE TRADE: Value of live vs Value of life
THE ARGUMENT TO NOT MAKE THE TRADE: Also Value of life vs Value of life.

It is literally the exact same thing just from two different angles.
That's why I use the example of imagining being the mother on either side/ angle.

It is an impossible dilemma, and I struggle to understand how almost everyone I speak to has such a strong opinion is for one side or another (and can't even understand the other side).

I don't understand your post. The issue with releasing murderers is not that they have killed and need to be punished, but that past performance is indicative of future results, and these terrorists who have already killed will kill more and more. Sinwar's MO was to take hostages precisely because he knew it would lead to this. By caving, you essentially ensure the cycle continues.

[Chester7]

+100 which turns into why is the blood of the hostage more red than that of R"L future victims.

[yfr bachur]

There's no good answer.
Just B"H that I dont have to be the one making these decisions.

[AsherO]

Was the only reason it was much worse, was because of the ratio?

The ratio (could've been other majoor concessions) is a symptom, what was worse was that it incentivized taking hostages, as materialized on Oct 7th.

[AsherO]

Why is it hypocrisy to minimize the chilul Shabbos, when doing so did not change anything regarding the pikuach nefesh? Would their staying and being mechalel Shabbos have changed anything? Unless you are saying that they should have stayed because of "מצוה בגדול."

You're obligated to be mechalel shabbos for safek pikuach nefesh too. Hard to say there was none of that here.

[Shmueli]

I don't understand your post. The issue with releasing murderers is not that they have killed and need to be punished, but that past performance is indicative of future results, and these terrorists who have already killed will kill more and more.

That's not what I said. Of course you don't want them freed. You don't want them to commit more terror. 1000%.
That's an argument of protecting life.

Similarly, freeing hostages is a practically parallel argument - an argument of protecting life.

The issue is that since these 2 things contradict each other entirely, I don't know how someone can defend one side or the other so strongly (which is all I've seen the past few days).

I think I'm over complicating this... Simply put, I feel it's silly for me to throw my opinion around about such an impossible dilemma, as if I'm debating who will win the super bowl. That's all

[yfr bachur]

You're obligated to be mechalel shabbos for safek pikuach nefesh too. Hard to say there was none of that here.

Its also likely that they knew that their votes would not make a difference anyway.
The votes were likely whipped ahead of time... Everyone knew more or less who wasn't going to vote for it.

[gozalim]

Its also likely that they knew that their votes would not make a difference anyway.
The votes were likely whipped ahead of time... Everyone knew more or less who wasn't going to vote for it.

allowing your vote to be whipped on a topic of pikuach nefesh is exactly the problem we're talking about

[efflpetzel]

There's no good answer.
Just B"H that I dont have to be the one making these decisions.

there's a simple solution that would have prevented this whole situation from happening.

Execute terrorists.

[Chester7]

The ratio (could've been other majoor concessions) is a symptom, what was worse was that it incentivized taking hostages, as materialized on Oct 7th.

And this perpetuates that. Not something I'd call much worse.

[AsherO]

Its also likely that they knew that their votes would not make a difference anyway.
The votes were likely whipped ahead of time... Everyone knew more or less who wasn't going to vote for it.

Which part of their staying would be chillul shabbos anyway? Is it possible they could stay in a way where they wouldn't be oiver any d'oraisa?

[yfr bachur]

allowing your vote to be whipped on a topic of pikuach nefesh is exactly the problem we're talking about

You misunderstand.
The vote was 24-8.
The surprise was maybe two votes against.
Maybe they knew that their votes wouldnt make a difference, either way.
Therefore - It aint "pikuach nefesh"

[yfr bachur]

allowing your vote to be whipped on a topic of pikuach nefesh is exactly the problem we're talking about

and there aint no way the chareidi votes were whipped on this one.
They did exactly what the gedolim told them to do.

[Chuchum Ainer]

and there aint no way the chareidi votes were whipped on this one.
They did exactly what the gedolim told them to do.

Explain what whipped means, and why that's contradictory to "doing exactly what the gedolim told them to do"

[Chuchum Ainer]

Its also likely that they knew that their votes would not make a difference anyway.
The votes were likely whipped ahead of time... Everyone knew more or less who wasn't going to vote for it.

If the votes were 100% known ahead of time, then the government meeting for 7 hours was a farce. And they decided their votes without going through the full discussion.

For example, a lot is being reported about Ronen Bar and Barnea's briefings. You don't think you should be present for that? Get the whole picture? Even if you go in planning on voting for it.

Leaving aside the fact that I think this is a bad matzav, culminating in a bad deal (though I don't know that a better one could be reached), the charedim's shouted justification that it's pikuach nefesh rings hollow when they don't treat it as such.

To reiterate:
Yes, the diyun and briefings about a ceasefire and hostage deal, with the potential to save or condemn thousands of lives r"l is most definitely docheh Shabbos.

[frenchfries]

+100 which turns into why is the blood of the hostage more red than that of R"L future victims.

This 100%. R"L.