Is 1 Israeli worth 1,000 Palestinians?
FOX NEWS- Here is a short video from David Siegl, Israeli Consul General L.A., discussing the release of of an Israeli soldier who was released from 5 years of imprisonment under Palestinian occupation. His release was a prisoner trade for 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Do you think that the release is worth it? Do you think America would do the same for one of its soldiers? Should we consider the possibilities of such acts?
FOX NEWS- Here is a short video from David Siegl, Israeli Consul General L.A., discussing the release of of an Israeli soldier who was released from 5 years of imprisonment under Palestinian occupation. His release was a prisoner trade for 1,000 Palestinian prisoners. Do you think that the release is worth it? Do you think America would do the same for one of its soldiers? Should we consider the possibilities of such acts?
Denny I <3 u. luv Denny
ReplyDeleteThis is Ryan Peterson. I think the idea of the release to show that the Israeli Government will protect the mandatory drafted soldiers even if it means giving up hundreds of killers is a nice notion, but in reality it is a foolish decision. It is not worth releasing 1027 prisoners many of whom are cold blooded killers for the return of one Israeli soldier. This price you are paying by releasing all those killers is not worth the reward of one soldier and the ability to say you did everything you could to bring him back. The Israeli government fought so hard to imprison all those evil men and now they are being released which is frankly silly. I’m not saying he shouldn’t have been returned, I’m saying they could have found a monetary price, or a trade of goods instead of the release of murderers. I do not think America would do the same for its soldiers, if America was to even begin the hostage negotiations which it is hard to believe they would, they would not even think of trading prisoners for prisoners. Instead, they would trade goods, pay a price, or try to fight to gain back the hostage. Also, they would argue that in contrast to the mandatory draft in Israel, these American soldiers knew what they were getting into when they signed up and enlisted. Finally, I do not think we should consider the possibility of such acts as releasing prisoners. If we were to negotiate to return our soldiers, which I think we should, I think we should find a price or a good or service instead of releasing prisoners. That is the last possible option, because it poses a great threat and if that country captures one of your soldiers again, they could pull the same stunt on you.
ReplyDeleteI was quite shocked when I read this article. I couldn't believe that the government would do such a thing for one soldier. After I settled down a bit and really thought about it, I understood where they were coming from. I agree with Roy Joy (Ryan) about what he previously said regarding how the idea was good but in reality it is a bad decision. I applaud them for sticking by their words and doing whatever it takes to get them back but in the overall picture, it was just a foolish decision. How can one man be worth one thousand enemies who have killed, stole, and fight against you? The greatest benefit I can see happening from this is that more people in Israel will join the military and support it because now they truly believe that the government will follow through with their agreements. I also believe Israel knew exactly what they were doing when they accepted this deal. David Siegal reports, "Israel will have to deal with whatever consequences there may be as they come up." I feel Israel knows the consequences that are to come. Lastly, I agree with Denny, I too luv Denny.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the release of the Israeli soldier is obviously a good thing, the ends do not justify the means in this case. The attitude of the government to protect the country's soldiers is noble, and I support the idea, though I do not believe this was the right move to make. The Israeli man's life was spared, but by releasing over 1,000 Palestinian prisoners, including murderers, the Israeli government is giving these killers an opportunity to commit even more crimes. I agree with Ryan, that the United States should not consider doing anything like this. We should do everything possible to protect the lives of our soldiers, but putting other lives in jeopardy in doing so is not necessarily the right answer. -Saralyn
ReplyDeleteLike Brandon, I was also shocked by this article. I couldn't even believe what I was reading and watching. I don't think it is worth at all.But, on the other hand, I understand why Palestine accepted and why Israel made the offer. While Israel lives in the XXI century, Palestine is still really backward. The war has been killing thousands of Palestinians, who have to defend with rocks from a big amount of the last technology in the army.
ReplyDeleteI think that, either America or any other country in Israel's situation would try to do whatever they can to save one of their citizens (or at least that's what I want to think about this). But the decision was only possible because Israel is the rich country in that case and Palestine is the poor one. In this situation I think it's normal (for a government and not for some ethic values)this kind of exchange. It wouldn't happen in the opposite way.
By myself, I wouldn't consider such a... strange (I don't know any other word that isn't offensive) exchange. But if I was Palestine, that's what I would do, I wouldn't even think about it twice. On the other hand, I don't like what Israel has done here and I don't like either what they've been doing since some years ago.
According to this article, the Israeli government released 1,027 Palestinian prisoners for the return of ONE israeli soldier, who had been held captive for five years. Like everyone else responding to this story, my response is similar in the sense it is one of negativity and confusion. I couldn't agree more with Ryan, when he stated that "giving up hundreds of killers is a nice notion, but in reality it is a foolish decision." This truly sums about my thoughts about the matter as well. Of course the family of the Israeli solider would do absolutely anything to have him back home, but in reality there trade is simply not close to being equal. In the article, "[Daniel] Siegal says that because Israel has a mandatory draft, the country owes it to everyone who serves the country, as well as their families, to do everything within its power to get them back." The mandatory draft does entitle the people of Israel and their families to do everything in their power to return them safely home, but being drafted leads to the horrific repercussions of war, which will lead to Galid's situation of being held hostage. I believe that Israel is require to make the effort to bring their hostage soldiers home, but not at the expense of others. I believe that this move made by the Israeli government will lead to the Palestinian government capturing more and more Israeli soldiers, knowing that they are willing to trade thousands upon thousands of their soldiers in return. This is not even close to being the first altercation between the two countries, regarding prisoners of war, and sadly it will not be last the, in my opinion, with this recent trade.
ReplyDeleteWhen reading this article i could immidatly see both sides of the argument. On one hand it was a very nice solution for the family and for the prisoner, but on the other hand it was a giant loss to the Isreal army. I agree with Ryan in that the cons of this decision outweigh the pros. As nice as it was to bring him home it was a stupid decision, with possibly major consequinces of releasing cold blooded killers. In the interview he states that "It is our duity to bring our souldiers home safe". I agree with this quote but i believe that there are better manners of doing this. The United States would never have even considered this trade. They would still put the same amount of effort to bring the soldier home, but they would work out a different deal that did not involve trading prisoners.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching the video and reading each of the posts above I feel well informed by both the facts and diverse opinions being shared. My viewpoint follows the trend of everyone else.
ReplyDeleteI too believe the swap of 1027 prisoners for a one Israeli soldier is not worth it. David Siegl describes the country of Israel as, "... a very small country, everyone knows everyone. It's a very intimate society." Well I have been taught the ethical systems and am a firm believer in utilitarianism; which is the idea that you weigh the pros and cons of a situation and make your decision based upon what solution seems most beneficial. The pros to making this prisoner swap include the benefit of returner a prisoner of war to his home country, the benefit of strengthening and gaining more trust of the Israeli people who may not have previously believed the country to care for its citizens right down to the last soldier, as well as the strict word of the government showing they will not leave any man behind. Yes, I understand these pros to be important, but in my opinion the Israeli's are showing a lack of understanding. The big picture, which seems to have been overlooked, is that Israel released 1027 prisoners who consist of murderers, terrorists, and other horrible people for just one soldier. This decision simply isn't logical. Based on utilitarianism, the advantages to sacrificing one soldier in order to keep 1027 Palestine prisoners behind bars are so much greater than rescuing one soldier at the cost of 1027 prisoners. How can Israel expect to win a war by showing sincerity to their military personnel? Ryan explained it well by saying, "This price you are paying by releasing all those killers is not worth the reward of one soldier and the ability to say you did everything you could to bring him back." I cannot fathom the reasoning behind Israel wanting to be seen as the country who leaves no man behind at the cost of probable extreme military efforts and incredibly hard work. Not to mention the capture of these 1027 prisoners probably cost Israeli casualties! The intentions behind this swap are in good faith, but in a globally interconnected and forever competitive world, Israel can't afford to put themselves at a large disadvantage for the savior of one soldier only to set them back in their efforts of quieting Palestine.
Yours truly,
- Connor "The supreme opinion" Cinque
“We’re a very small Country everyone knows everyone it’s a very intimate society so when we say that Gilad was everyone’s son we really mean it.” David Siegl says this on Fox news about Gilad Shalit the Israeli soldier being traded for 1,000 Palestinian soldiers. In Siegl’s opinion, Shalit is extremely valuable to his country because they are close and without him there it is as if everyone in the country is loosing a family member.
ReplyDeleteDo I feel as if this release is worth it? Absolutely not! I personally don’t care if your country is close or not, there is no way you can justify sending home one soldier is exchange for a thousand prisoners. This poses the question: is one life more valuable than another? How is this related? Well, if these thousand prisoners are released, some imprisoned for heinous crimes such as murder, who’s to say they’re not going to commit these crimes once again and harm more people? Because Israel claims to be an “intimate country” they are choosing to value one of their soldier’s lives over the countless lives of others. This soldier entered the army knowing that he could potentially have something like this happen or could even be killed.
I agree with Ryan when he calls this a “foolish decision.” I also strongly agree with Lenny (Brandon Len) when he makes a point about how this could benefit Israel’s army by encouraging more soldiers to join because they know their country will support them. Although this is foolish and I do not agree with it, it does make me humanize the soldier when I imagine it being one of our own Americans or someone I knew personally. Though I would feel differently about this particular situation if the soldier was someone I knew, I still do not think it is right to trade 1,000 prisoners for just one person. No, I do not think that America should begin doing things like this because it begins to set a bad precedence and it blurs the line of right and wrong.
-Sydney Fisher
Like Connor "The supreme opinion" and everyone else said I don't believe the release of 1,027 Palestine prisoners is worth the release of one Israeli. I know its hard to except and not really an easy idea to grasp.For me the pros don't really out way the cons. Although you are returning a citizen back to your country your releasing 1027 murderous criminals to another. Can you really be that naive to not see the negative outcomes and consequences of your decisions? To me not only is it a bad idea but it sets a president that you would do it again. You can't return every prisoner you ever capture at the first sign to save another. There's a reason why The United State's foreign policy just doesn't allow negotiations like these to even happen. Now I'm not saying that every country should base their decision off the US but its hard to fathom what Israeli was thinking. Unfortunately if you were not to take this route and make the swap than this Israeli man would have to stay in prison. All though it may seem cold if you sign up to defend your country than that's a risk you need to be willing to take. The amount of potential harm this decision could cause not just to Israeli but the world is just appalling. For me it just seems ignorant for the Israeli government not to realize what they have done. That's why I believe this prisoner swap was a wrong idea.
ReplyDelete-Jake Kittredge
It is difficult to compare the ethics of what the Israeli government has done with the policy we have in the United States, mainly due to the substantial differences between our countries. The most significant distinction between America and Israel is that America is a much larger and much more powerful country. Our army consists of volunteers, who have chosen to serve their country, while Israel, being such a small and “intimate society,” does not have the option of simply asking for volunteers. Because of Israel’s mandatory draft, their government has more of an obligation to protect its soldiers. As David Siegel aptly stated, “…..when we say that Gilad was everyone’s son, we really mean it.” Israel’s government must prove that it is able to protect its soldiers, so that Israeli citizens don’t lose faith and reject the draft.
ReplyDeleteHere in America, we have a strict non-negotiation policy when it comes to dealing with terrorists. We put our best efforts into stopping them, but we never give into their demands. This may seem cruel, but it is actually the best chance that we have to stop terrorism altogether. Giving into terrorist threats solves a temporary problem, but it makes the overall issue even worse. If they know that we’ll give into their demands, then we’re condoning terrorism as an acceptable method for them to get what they want. If we ignore their requests, although we may lose out temporarily, overall, we’re working towards a permanent end to terrorism. If we refuse to be a part of their system, they’ll have to eventually come up with a new system.
Israel doesn’t have as many options as America when it comes to dealing with terrorism; their situation is much less flexible. They could have come up with a less outrageous trade, however; the ratio of 1:1000 is simply ridiculous. I completely agree with Saralyn when she says, “the ends do not justify the means in this case.” I completely understand the Israeli government’s need to keep Israeli citizens faithful to their government and confident that their soldiers are protected, but allowing 1,027 prisoners to be released seems entirely contradictory to their intended purpose of keeping their country safe. I believe that the Israeli government needs to refine their technique of dealing with terrorism and find a more viable and permanent solution to end their terrorist problem.
~Mary
The release of 1000 prisoners is far to drastic for the return of one soldier. I do understand that the Isreal had a mandatory draft and he didnt have a say on weather or not he wanted to go to war. It is a valid point that because of the draft, the goverment should attempt to get him back but not at the cost of 1000 prisoners. It could be quite the crowd comming out of jail and could create kaos and devistation due to their release. I do not think that it is a justifiable argument to do anything that dramtic.
ReplyDeleteAlex H
Thomas Rives- It is hard to make a decision of where I stand on this topic. I do feel the release of the Israeli prisoner is a good thing that will bring much peace to the boy's family especially considering the soldier comes from a society where everyone is expected to carry out military action. However, I must also add that it is extremely unreasonable to exchange 1027 prisoners for this one person. As mentioned by David Siegl a vast majority of these prisoners are killers therefore the aftermath of this decision must be brought into consideration. Sure they saved the life of that one Israeli but how many Israelis will die now on account of the fact that there are now even more hundreds of killers back into circulation. With this being said, my standpoint on the topic is no, 1 Iraeli is NOT worth 1027 Palestinians.
ReplyDeleteSean Mitchell-After watching the Fox News interview with David Siegel about the 1027 prisoners being traded for one Israeli soldier, I thought the trade should have been thought through more carefully. I understand that Israel agreed to the trade because Israel has a mandatory draft and the government promises the families to bring the soldiers home safely. However, some promises just can’t be kept when the trade-off of one person equals a thousand prisoners. The prisoners are cold blooded killers and terrorists. Palestine is celebrating the release of these prisoners and making the release day a national holiday, while Israel is celebrating in a somber way. These released prisoners could do the same things they did that got them into jail in the first place. Does Israel really understand the consequences of releasing these prisoners? I agree with Josh that ”this move made by the Israeli government will lead to the Palestinian government capturing more and more Israeli soldiers, knowing that they are willing to trade thousands upon thousands of their soldiers in return.” By keeping their promise to do anything in their power to bring the soldiers back to their families safely, Israel is just putting their citizens into more harm’s way.
ReplyDeleteI think it isn’t a good thing to release 1027 prisoners for one Palestine because those prisoners are in jail for a reason. It wouldn’t be a safe thing to do to let prisoners on the streets especially if they still are going to continue what they did in the past to get in prison. In a way I do think America would release so many prisoners for one solider but at the same time be thinking about the dangers it could lead to. Personally, I don’t think we should try something like this because if we knew that putting someone in a dangerous situation could lead them up in jail, why would we go in harm’s way? We just need to stay out of dangerous territories and leave some countries alone so we wouldn’t have this situation. Like some people have said like Jake Kittredge, “Although you are returning a citizen back to your country your releasing 1027 murderous criminals to another,” and that is exactly what I think. I understand that you would want someone back especially if your related to them but you’re putting yourself and others into a dangerous situation with murders being on the loose.
ReplyDelete-Vivian Kattell
I believe that trading one man for a thousand murders and people who in general are not good is ridiculous. No one person's life is worth letting that many dangerous people free. Has this man saved people? Is he in some way a hero? What makes him worth a thousand people? I could understand if he was a very important person trading him for a few hundred people but he really isn't that important, there are many other soldiers, and if I were in his position if any of those thousand prisoners freed killed anyone I would think of it as my fault and that my life isn't more important than the ones that died because I was released from jail. I do not think that America or very many other countries would do the same as Israel did. Its not right putting more peoples' lives in danger for one man. Other countries don't think of their soldiers as family as was said in the interview. Although respecting and caring for their soldiers is good, if they did treat them like family, then they wouldn't send them into war to fight where there is a good chance of them dying. When you send someone off to war there is that chance that they could be killed or captured. The country needs to accept that and not rush to save them when something that is expected to happen in war happens. I do not think that other countries should follow their actions. If they did then no one would win wars because they would all want their people to be safe and that's just not how wars work. The ends do not justify the means in this case.
ReplyDelete-Kira Zotcavage
Ben Polio- After watching this interview and reading through many of the comments left by my classmates, I am siding with the majority on this topic. As many have said, this trade of 1,027 Palestinian prisoners for just one Israeli prisoner is just not worth it. I believe this mostly because the cons simply outweigh the pros in this situation. This is a dangerous and high risk decision to make when dealing with a thousand Palestinian prisoners, especially when some were even convicted for murder. I completely agree with Ryan Peterson when he said, "giving up hundreds of killers is a nice notion, but in reality it is a foolish decision." I believe he is right and that Israel does not understand how huge of a risk they are taking by trading this one, single man for a thousand foreign prisoners. But I am not saying they should not have taken the trade if the number of Palestinian prisoners being released was a more reasonable number, such as 200-500 prisoners instead of 1000. Would the US make the same trade for one of our soldiers? Personally, I think we would, although I would not agree with it. The reason why is because we are so obsessed with making sure every single US soldier is safe. I am not saying this is a bad thing, but it's just the way we operate as a country to keep as many soldiers as possible. So overall, I think the decision that was made to trade one Israeli prisoner for 1027 Palestinian prisoners was a very bad decision and will hurt Israel in the future.
ReplyDeleteI am very surprised anyone in their right mind would ever make this kind of trade! I agree with Ryan in saying “it is a foolish decision”, it isn’t hard for me to say this because I don’t even know the Israeli prisoner. However, 1,000 prisoners for just 1 man?
ReplyDeleteUtilitarianism would be all over this because if you look at the facts from both sides, it still doesn’t seem fair! Not to mention that probably most of these Palestinians were convicted of murder. In my opinion this is way too much harm than good. This is because it’s a terrible trade to begin with and then to “deal with whatever consequences there may be” is another side of the story.
This one Israeli can turn into a hundred, not right away of course, but maybe over the course of the next ten years or so. All they’re doing is making the world that more dangerous releasing these prisoners. America wouldn’t even consider this a possible idea for any of its soldiers, because most countries look at the statistics. If it could back fire and make an even worse scenario for the country then it’s just more to not risking it. When I was reading the short article I thought there had to be a reason for this kind of serious trade, but all I could see were 1,000 dangerous enemies of Israel being traded for one simple Israeli soldier. Again, I know that I don’t know the one prisoner in person like the Israelis’ do; however, I do know that conflict can be hell, and that people can suffer.
The only reason why I feel that this could be good thing is if Israel has a plan, for example, giving them those 1,000 prisoners to help Palestine destroy themselves “inside out”, so Israel doesn’t have too. Maybe the prisoners were turned in favor for Israel to help their cause or to just spy for them. These are the only explanations I can think of to reason with Israel. If not, then Israel is only encouraging Palestine to take more of them prisoner, only to have another trade like this ending up with Palestine getting some more 1,000’s of men back and Israel with only a few.
I was extremely surprised that Israel would do such a thing. Trading 1,027 Palestinian prisoners just for 1 Israeli soldier is not smart. Now, I can see the viewpoint of the family where they are filled with pain and want the soldier back or as David Siegal said "because Israel has a mandatory draft, the country owes it to everyone who serves the country" and I can understand, but in reality, do the people want 1,027 potential cold-blooded murders that could facilitate the fall of Israel, to be given away for trade, or do they want to have their house safe and not be targeted? I would say that it was completely not worth it. I think that America would not do that for one its own soldiers just because America does not do deals with opposing force who is trying to bargain for the soldier’s life. My reasoning for this is since the Bush Administration that is the policy that we have followed where America doesn't deal with the opposing force/terrorist/enemy. I honestly think that America should not consider these acts because it shows weakness. What I mean by weakness is that it encourages the enemy to capture as many prisoners as possible and try to get a deal with America. Another reason America should not consider these acts is because it is wasting the hard work and the money to just give away prisoners. After trading the people away, we would have to go back and try to capture the prisoner again. This would lead to a vicious cycle where America would not be able to get out of and could lead to America not being able to grow as a country.
ReplyDeleteDo the ends justify the means?
ReplyDelete1,027 prisoners were released for one singular person to be returned to his family. 1,027 people, who did something so bad that they were sent to prison to wade out their lives, are out in the world again. The ‘get out of jail free’ card doesn’t exist in real life, why start now? Those people who were released could be dangerous. Yes, the family must be happier than ever, but is the fact that there are 1,000 roaming prisoners on their conscience? Conor M is completely right, this cannot be the last time this happens. Now that one family got their husband/father back, other families are going to want theirs back too. Now are there going to be 2,058 prisoners set free? This shouldn’t have happened, how could anyone think this is rational? In my opinion, the ends do not justify the means.
Before watching the short video I was unsure of my reaction but, after listening I came to my final understandings and realized that the release of 1,027 Palestine prisoners is not worth the release of one Israeli. I think that it is crazy that you can return a citizen to your country but yet,think its okay to release 1,027 criminals into a population. In the long run, the one individual will have their way but, now free prisoners are rewarded for committed crimes. I do agree with Addy and Connor M that this cannot be the last time this happens, and other families are going to want their family member back as well. It will never be fair to the innocent family members but, its okay if we can help one citizen because all we have to do is release 1,027 prisoners? This idea is definitely not right, and I can't believe that people let this happen. Hopefully all citizens can find a way to stay together with their family but, if someone decides to do wrong then their punishment has to stay in action, and not put other people in danger.-Rachelle
ReplyDelete