• Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    6 months ago

    Hamas just hasn’t been taking civilian noncombatants as hostages like Israel has been doing.

    Totally untrue

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      6 months ago

      Where are Hamas getting them?

      Like, do you think this is an actual war where both sides attack each other’s territories?

      Seriously, at what point in the last six months would Hamas have captured non combatants?

      • Stovetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        I am not here to give Israel a W, but Hamas still has a number of civilian captives from the original October 7 attack. Just not as many surviving as was assumed.

        According to Israel’s own figures, there are 90 or so living hostages and 30 or so bodies still held by Hamas IIRC. Apparently most of the 90 survivors are non-civilians, based on what Hamas is saying, but some of them still are.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          According to Israel’s own figures,

          But not according to anyone else’s…

          Israel has been flattening the entire area, they can’t keep track of how many they kill, regardless of what country they’re from.

          But the article OP linked even says there aren’t 40 noncombatants left…

          CNN’s record of the conditions of the hostages also suggests there are fewer than 40 living hostages who meet the proposed criteria.

          I’m not sure what you’re not understanding about this.

          Or why you’re listening to Israel still

          • Stovetop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            6 months ago

            But the article OP linked even says there aren’t 40 noncombatants left…

            Right, I acknowledged that. It’s just that no one knows who specifically is counted in the alive vs dead hostage statistics. It wouldn’t surprise me if Israel purposefully set a number of civilians that they knew had likely already died, knowing that Hamas would not be able to comply with the request, to justify continuing the conflict.

          • Stovetop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            I would say take it with a grain of salt, but there’s enough international scrutiny that I would say the list of missing is probably reliable enough. People in Israel are still protesting the Israeli government about that very frequently. Not everyone missing from October 7th has been returned, alive or dead. Many probably buried beneath rubble from IDF attacks, to be honest, since several were already confirmed killed by “friendly” fire.

            Edit: to add, it is worth noting that Hamas is not the only group that participated in Oct 7 and took hostages. There are likely other hostages that they cannot account for because they were taken by other groups.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          6 months ago

          Try to keepup.

          I have…

          https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Israeli–Palestinian_prisoner_exchange

          Again, your own article says CNN knows there aren’t 40 hostages left that aren’t noncombatants.

          Israel keeps taking civilians hostage, so they have enough.

          Since 10/7 the only Israelis Hamas interacts with are combatants. They literally don’t have enough hostages left for this deal, which is likely how the deal arrived at that number.

          It’s something that literally is impossible to comply with, and Israel gets to blame Hamas.

          This ain’t complicated bub. Your own source agrees with me.

          You should read it