Originally Posted by dlish

ive read an article about Shalit, the israeli soldier captured by hamas, and denied any access or rights as a prisoner of war.

while i tend to stay nuetral in the debate about prisoner swaps, i am against many things that is happening here

1) HRW states that his detention may amount to torture. i have no idea if it does, i really dont know that much about his detention,but if its true, and the arabs and muslims dont want their prisoners treated inhumanely, then why do they not practice what they expect of other nations?

2) the typical prison swap usually is skewed towards the palestinians. usually you may get 1 israeli prisoner released (alive or dead) against possibly two dozen, 50, 100? palestinian prisoners. whilst the palestinian families are happy because their sons came home, this cheapens the value of the palestians in my eyes and the eyes of the watching media. That one dead israeli soldier is worth this many living palestianian prisoners

3) the release of prisoners from either side only enhances the objectives of those that are released - namely to fight once more against the enemy with even more resolve. this solves nothing and is nothing more than a band aid solution to a delicate situation and adds more fuel to the fire on both sides.

what do you think about prisoner swaps? do you agree with them?

are they useful? do they achieve the intended purposes (if any)?

is it a window to peace or just an opening to further conflict?