Gilad's release had to be, despite the awful implications

Submitted by sara (United States), Oct 18, 2011 at 16:57

I completely agree with the argument that trading Gilad Shalit's life for over a thousand murdererous barbarians is not sound politically, or even ethically. The political folly of giving Hamas and Abbas and the Palestinians victory, and even worse, renewed incentive to kidnap more Israeli soldiers in the future seems utterly inconceivable. The crowds chanted exactly that today in Gaza, We want another Shalit.

In addition, there are numerous occasions of freed murderers murdering still more innocent souls as a result. We are pronouncing death sentences for those who will be victims of those released.

So if we know these things in our heads, and we see the consequences with our eyes, why then is it still the only thing we can do? Because not to do it removes our bond, our humanity. We save a life when we can. We sacrifice for our soldiers how we can, and we cannot measure the cost. It was still the right thing to do, and I say that knowing that the implications are grave.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".