Freed Israeli hostages erupted in anger during a tense meeting on Tuesday with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying that they were terrified they would be killed by Israeli airstrikes on Gaza instead of their Hamas captors.
“We were in tunnels, terrified that it would not be Hamas, but Israel, that would kill us, and then they would say Hamas killed you,” the woman from the southern Israeli village of Nir Oz near the Gaza border said
But, based on your own justification, that would be fine, wouldn’t it? At least they’d have the hostages back alive, right? That’s justified because you get the people back alive, right?
Or can you only justify killing with the return of hostages?
My justification of what? The airstrikes? I’m not justifying them by by connecting them to the release of the hostages - I think they’re justified as part of the war that’s going on and their effect on hostage negotiations is secondary.
The best strategy for winning the war is not the same as the best strategy for getting the hostages back. Netanyahu appears to be prioritizing winning the war and for that he’s getting a lot of criticism from people who would prioritize getting the hostages back. I’m just saying that this particular criticism, which focuses on the counterfactual scenario in which the hostages that have been released were killed by airstrikes instead, is not reasonable. After all, they weren’t killed and they’re free now; in their case, Israeli policy has been successful.