Israeli parents will never sleep safe in their beds unless the Israeli government shows its commitment to keeping our children safe. And that means bringing them home safe, whatever the cost. Gilad's life is worth any sacrifice. We will not use our children as human shields.

Remember Golda Meir "Peace will come to the Middle East when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us."

Let's show just how much we love our children.

A life can never be worth any cost to a state. Gilad is just one citizen among millions and while the Israeli Army is known for getting its soldiers home whether they are dead or alive there has to be a point at which it is no longer sensible to pay the price.

If the prisioners who are to be released in exchange are likely to go on and kill more Israeli's whether soldiers or civilians then the exchange becomes much less worthwhile. Is the life of one soldier worth a busload of children? The problem is that the cost of releasing people is in the future and is unknown. It may be nothing, it may be massive and there is no way to measure it. However because of this the exchange has to be strictly limited to those who are not in for violent crimes, perhaps those who support Hamas etc rather than the militants themselves.

The capture of Filad Shalit has already lead to a conflict with Hamas in Gaza so has already caused too much bloodshead. The possibility of releasing Gilad by peacefull means through a prisoner exchange has to explored and acted upon. The Israelis' cant just keep believing that they will be able to get him back for nothing, that price is going to have to be something that hamas wants, and it wants the release of prisioners. The alternative price is more Israeli blood through another conflict, this makes the first option preferable even if the exchange does seem to be a steep price.

Hamas will not stop its attacks on Israel if Israel agrees to its demands. Gilad's return home will not end the conflict, there will be bloodshed whether or not there is a prisoner exchange. Before Hamas kidnapped Shalit, Israel was still enemies with Hamas, and so the point that you are trying to make is irrelevant.

Italians pay for the release of their journalists. French pay for the release of their people. Everyone else pays pirates for the release of their sailors. The idea that hostage taking isn’t fruitful has long gone.

So why bother pretending we shouldn’t release Gilad Shalit to the bosom of his family on the basis it will encourage others to do the same. That kind of thinking is absurd, old fashioned and has no benefit whatsoever.

The French and Italian PAY to get their people back, but in Israel's case we are talking about terrorists who will most likely return to terror, meaning Israel is "paying" in the lives of its citizens. This is not quite the same, and the question still stands.

The consequences of force are likely to be far greater than a prisioner release of almost any size. If you use military force as a way of setting Gilad back then you add to the downwards spiral that leads to more terrorists being created.

Essentially Hamas would be bound to react in some way, opinion on the Arab street would demand it. So this would mean more rockets launched into Israeli homes and settlements. In turn this is likely to mean an escalation by the IDF, who of course would win any engagement but israel's name is blackened internationally and with an American president who seems to be less inclined to support Israel no matter what she does this would be unwise.

Israel has incomparable military intelligence tactics, stealth, and military strength. Why do we need to free murderers and terrorists to get Gilad back? Is it really possible we cannot find where he is?

How can setting terrorists free really bring Gilad home? We should give Hamas an ultimatum before we go in and take him back by force, whatever the consequences. Then we can send our sons and daughters into the IDF, safe in the knowledge that the state will not abandon them.

It must depend partially on what the prisioners are held for and how likely releasing them is to make things worse. If many are released then it can be portrayed as a step towards reconcilliation as well as getting Gilad back home. This then shows that Israel is willing to take steps to make peace so helping force the palestians to make the next step, or at least diverting pressure away from settlement activity.

If the prisioners who are released are not likely to contribute to terror against Israelis then releasing them in exchange for Gilad is good for both sides rather than a one way deal where the palesitiians gain far more, not everything can be measured by numbers.

How many prisoners legitimately held are to be set free for the sake of one man? What next? Do the British now start to put pressure on the US to empty Guantanamo Bay for the sake of a few sailors?

The idea that negotiating with terrorists should never be an option is silly. It has to be possible sometimes, not everything can be solved by waiting or by military action. Both have their own consequences as well. Leaders have to accept that when dealing with terrorists there are no good options so all should be left open. If waiting has failed, as in this case, if military action has failed, in this case it has, then what is left - negotiation.

Negotiating with terrorists should never be an option. The sight of Shalit walking free will be viewed as a very strong bargaining chip on legs. The thirst for more will be irresistable.