Israeli PM said to have turned down proposal in early talks and continues to take tough line

  • mwguy
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    The hostages are a group that’s assumed to be complete. That’s like if someone stole your tires off your car and offered to give “your tires” back to you but only 2 of the 4. People assume they offered all the tires if the headline doesn’t say otherwise.

    If you include the partial hostage release, it essentially robs the story as it’s clear why you wouldn’t do a deal for some of the hostages. Making any deal for some of the hostages is stupid.

    • المنطقة عكف عفريت@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      I think this is dumb. The title didn’t say all hostages. The article didn’t say all hostages. You invented this in your own head then decided to build an argument around it.

      • mwguy
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        I mean future articles covering it have said things like “Ceasefire for $x hostages rejected” for exactly this reason.

          • mwguy
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            “Ceasefire-for-hostages”

            Would you assume that they’re asking for a ceasefire in a percentage of the territory or the full territory?

              • mwguy
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                That’s not the truth. When you hear the title: “Netanyahu rejected ceasefire-for-hostages deal in Gaza, sources say”

                Do you assume that it’s 40% of the hostages for a ceasefire im 40% of the territory?

                  • mwguy
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    I did. That’s why I pointed out the misleading headline as a comment. Had I not read the article I would have assumed that it was a ceasefire in 100% of the territory for 100% of the Hostages that Israel turned down.

                    Just like you would have.