+972 Magazine's Stories of the Week

Directly In Your Inbox

Analysis News
Visit our Hebrew site, "Local Call" , in partnership with Just Vision.

Blaming Palestinians for their own deaths

‘All the targets hit by the IDF in Gaza were attacked morally; those killed are responsible for their own deaths. And Netanyahu – he just wants the Gazans to be safe.’

By Hagai El-Ad (translated by Keren Rubinstein)

It is moral because we told them to leave, and those who stayed did so at their own peril. It’s moral because Hamas encouraged them to stay, that’s why this is a self-inflicted genocide carried out by Hamas. The Palestinians who died in Shejaiya, in Khan Younis, actually everywhere and always, are to blame for their own deaths. Maybe it’s only the children who aren’t guilty of their own deaths – maybe it’s the parents who are to blame. As for the elderly people who died, that’s definitely Hamas’ fault. Whichever way you twist it, that blood was not spilled by our hands.

How deeply can you suppress the denial by Israelis? How can the prime minister – the prime minister of the army whose air force killed four nameless children on the beach in Gaza for the world’s cameras to see – look straight into the camera and tell the Palestinians of Gaza, “We want you to be safe”?

Paramedics and people run at the scene where four Palestinian children were killed by Israeli military shelling on the harbor and nearby beach of Gaza city, July 16, 2014. Four children; Ahed Bakr, 10, Zakaria Bakr, 10, Mohd Bakr, 11, and Ismail Bakr, 9.; were killed during the attack.  As of 16 July 2014, more than 200 Palestinians have been killed since the start of the 2014 Israeli assault against the Gaza Strip, and more than 1,400 have been injured. (Anne Paq/Activestills.org)

Paramedics and people run at the scene where four Palestinian children were killed by Israeli military shelling at the harbor and nearby beach of Gaza City, July 16, 2014. Four children; Ahed Bakr, 10, Zakaria Bakr, 10, Mohd Bakr, 11, and Ismail Bakr, 9.; were killed during the attack. (Anne Paq/Activestills.org)

Anyone who has been listening to Palestinian voices in Gaza in recent weeks has heard one message repeated over and over through the thunder of Israeli bombardment: No place is safe in Gaza, a bomb can fall anywhere, anytime, on anyone. And there’s nowhere to run, because you can’t leave Gaza; while in it – inside this narrow, impoverished and overpopulated strip of land – nowhere is safe.

They were named Zakariya Ahed Subahi Bakir, age 10; Ahed Atef Ahed Bakir, age 9; Ismail Muhammad Subahi Bakir, age 9; and Mohammad Ramiz Izat Bakir, age 11.

Out of the thousands of targets “attacked” morally, none of these “surgical” bombardments featured in the IDF spokesperson’s clips or the few bombardments cancelled at the last minute, nor did any of the prime minister’s pleas manage to convince Gazans that Israel wishes for their safety. Perhaps they were actually convinced by the overflowing morgues, or maybe they were thinking of the more than 177 dead children. Maybe they were thinking about the Al Batsh family and its 17 dead, or maybe about the Al Haj family and its eight dead.

After the “surgical” phase they moved onto the heavier instruments. The moral side called on the residents to leave and the immoral side told them to stay. Many chose to stay: Some presumed that it was safer at home; others were afraid to leave, perhaps caring for an elderly mother, a relative in a wheelchair or small children. Maybe they stayed because Gaza is closed from all directions – where could they run for safety?

Maybe they stayed because they heard that UNRWA’s schools were already overflowing with incoming refugees, and in any case those schools are also being shelled. Maybe they stayed because they were afraid that if they left, the democratic side’s graces would guarantee that they would have nowhere to return to. Maybe they were afraid of Hamas, maybe of the IDF. Either way, maybe they thought of the morgues. Maybe they were afraid. Of course they were. Frightened Arabs dying by the dozens don’t make for telegenic photos. The kids on the beach weren’t captured telegenically either. Morally, but not telegenically.

A relative cries over the body of one of the children killed earlier by an Israeli attack in a playground in al-Shati refugee camp, Gaza city, July 28, 2014. Reports indicate that 10 people, mostly children, were killed and 40 injured during the attack which took place on the first day Eid. Israeli attacks have killed more than 1,000 Palestinians and injured more than 6,200 in the current offensive, most of them civilians (photo: Activestills)

A relative cries over the body of one of the children killed earlier by an Israeli attack in a playground in al-Shati refugee camp, Gaza City, July 28, 2014. Reports indicate that 10 people, mostly children, were killed and 40 injured during the attack, which took place on the first day Eid. (photo: Activestills)

Hamas most certainly intended for all this to happen; we, most certainly, did not intend for any of it. But if intent is the outcome expected of a reasonable person, then what was the intent of the person who dropped bomb after bomb on one house and then another, and buried entire families? Those families apparently weren’t persuaded to flee for their lives after the bombarding army’s courteous announcement.

Israel and Hamas both know – it is impossible not to know – that the inevitable result of the war in Gaza is devastating civilian losses there. The bloody experiences already accumulated are sufficiently horrifying to establish with confidence that this is the inevitable outcome, that any claim about the absence of intent is simply detached from reality and renders the word “intent” totally devoid of meaning.

But the main point is that it is moral, and we can move onto the next house, the next family, the next neighborhood. In Beit Hanoun, in Beit Lahia, in Jabaliya, there are another few dozen, hundred, thousand cowardly Palestinians, afraid of the democratic army for no reason at all, and who have every reason to fear the terrorists, whose morality lacks values and is undemocratic. Arabs are cowards; they shake with fear. It will of course be done morally and, in any case, whatever happens Hamas is to blame. Always. What the IDF does is moral. Always. And legal too. The main thing, once again, is that the blood that we spilled was not spilled by our hands.

Hagai El-ad is the CEO of B’Tselem.

Read this post in Hebrew on Local Call

Related:
What Israel’s ‘precision bombing’ of Gaza looks like
Catch-22: When a humanitarian ceasefire becomes a death trap
WATCH: Whole Gaza neighborhood destroyed in an hour

Newsletter banner 5 - 540

Before you go...

A lot of work goes into creating articles like the one you just read. And while we don’t do this for the money, even our model of non-profit, independent journalism has bills to pay.

+972 Magazine is owned by our bloggers and journalists, who are driven by passion and dedication to the causes we cover. But we still need to pay for editing, photography, translation, web design and servers, legal services, and more.

As an independent journalism outlet we aren’t beholden to any outside interests. In order to safeguard that independence voice, we are proud to count you, our readers, as our most important supporters. If each of our readers becomes a supporter of our work, +972 Magazine will remain a strong, independent, and sustainable force helping drive the discourse on Israel/Palestine in the right direction.

Support independent journalism in Israel/Palestine Donate to +972 Magazine today
View article: AAA
Share article
Print article
  • LEAVE A COMMENT

    * Required

    COMMENTS

    1. Goldmarx

      You haven’t heard? Hamas shot down the Malaysian airliner in the Ukraine! Why? Because it thought Jews were aboard and its charter says to kill Jews wherever!!!

      Reply to Comment
    2. Richard

      Isn’t isn’t merely the expected outcome of a reasonable person, its a desire for that outcome. The author’s morally equivalency argument falls apart right there. Its too bad that the CEO of B’Tselem is diving headfirst into the morally incorrect side of the debate of this war. Documenting the petty abuses of occupation and showing the Israeli and world public that power corrupts soldiers on an individual level is noble work. This piece discredits B’Tselem with a bad argument.

      Reply to Comment
    3. Richard

      *Intent isn’t merely

      Reply to Comment
    4. Whiplash

      Here are some facts for Hagai. Hamas with the knowledge of Gazan society and UNWRA, and the money of Qatar, did build, burrow and weave a vast military complex into the urban landscape of Gaza for the express purpose of waging war and terror attacks on Israel. Hamas has burrowed dozens of attack tunnels from the heart of civilian areas in Gaza into Israel for the purpose of attacks against Israel. Hamas has spent hundreds of millions of dollars on building, electrifying and hooking them up to sensors and computer stations connecting to command centers in and outside the Gaza strip. Hamas has rockets launchers on trucks and built into the ground. The tunnels allow them to fight a guerrilla war in the midst of their citizens. Their fighters pop out of tunnels with weapons such as mortars, anti-tank and other lethal arms. They fire rockets into Israel by remote control. Their fighters do not wear uniforms and mingle with and blend into the local population. They commandeer peoples’ homes, mosques and public buildings to fire weapons at Israeli soldiers searching for the source of missiles being fired and for enemy fighters.

      Hamas prosecutes the war in such a fashion amongst its civilians that guarantees significant collateral damage to its civilian population. It wants dead children on the TV news while hiding their own fighters’ deaths from reporters.

      War is messy and chaotic at the best of times. This war is not like the war the English and French fought on the Plains of Abraham. It is an asymmetrical war where one side, Hamas, ignores all laws of war while calling upon the other side to not exercise its legal rights to fight the war among the civilian terrain which Hamas has chosen for its war against Israel.

      This war is fought in real time with real consequences. Decisions of defense are made in split seconds which sometimes have unintended, though inevitable, consequences in the battle of the war. Hamas rockets Israel and the rocket falls on children in Gaza playing. Israel fires at Hamas fighters and the tank shell misses the targets and skips and hits a civilian target by accident.

      Israel also will bomb targets of military significance which will cause many civilian deaths. This is inevitable and part of the war for which Hamas prepared itself but not its citizens.

      Gazans elected Hamas whose program was clear, resistance until the Jews were defeated and cleansed from the River to the Sea. Gazans still support Hamas and Islamic Jihad in the war and are not holding anti-war rallies or peace marches. Gazans send their children to Hamas schools and military camps producing Hamas with a never ending supply of martyrs for the cause.

      Israel is not to blame for the decisions Gazans and Hamas made. When Israel withdrew from Gaza 9 years ago, Hamas and Gazans could have built a just and prosperous society but instead invested the majority of their resources time and time again to wage war against Israel and its citizens.

      Israel has a duty to protect its people and to wage war on its enemies who attack them. Hamas should be protecting their people by surrendering their weapons and asking for an unconditional truce.

      Hamas had many chances to end the war, even before it became a war. Israel did not force Hamas to go to war or to refuse to stand down. Gazans and their leaders need to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions.

      Reply to Comment
      • JohnW

        Where Gilad Shalit’s father is wrong is that Hamas is not just fighting for a Palestinian state which would live in peace side by side with Israel. Hamas is fighting for a Palestinian state which would replace Israel. And Hamas wants that state to be an Arab Muslim state instead of a Jewish state.

        Reply to Comment
        • Goldmarx

          No, he’s right and you’re wrong. He is far more familiar with Hamas than you are, due to what his son went through.

          Reply to Comment
    5. Nick Olson

      Advanced warning to leave house and go to UN facilities where they are bombed anyway?

      Reply to Comment
    6. David

      This debate would have been hilarious hadn’t it been so tragic.
      People are arguing as if the whole concept of a war between political entities is an unprecedented situation.

      Notwithstanding the grief that every conscientious person should feel over the death of innocent people, an honest debate must remain in context. The context is that rockets are fired from the territory of one political entity toward the cities of another. And there has never been a case where a capable state didn’t strike back, as forcefully as it could, at the launch sites, munition repositories and any other target marginally related to the aggressor.
      You may question the wisdom of such a reaction, but in order to decently claim that there is an alternative, at least one relevant example should be given. We’re not talking about a scientific open question. We’re not brainstorming to figure out what to do in case of an alien invasion. This is a classic situation that has happened thousands of time and we already know what humans do in it. Always. Unquestionably. Unequivocally.

      This weakly argued essay attempts to start the story in the middle and rips it out of its historical and military context. To top this up, it treats terms introduced *by the Israeli army*, from “surgical attacks” to “civilian warnings”, as if they were universal rights and household battlefield terms that are shockingly violated by this army (again, the very army that has introduced them to the military jargon). Again, the absurdity and hypocrisy of the situation could be very entertaining, if not for its tragic impact on the situation. Make no mistake: neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis will benefit from such murky, biased and poorly argued discourse. It may be considered by some as legitimate pressure on Israel, but it only leads to frustrated belligerence on the Israeli side and to obtuse rejection of reality on the Palestinian side.

      Reply to Comment
    7. JohnW

      No he is wrong and I am right. Here read what Hamas itself says about what they want to do to Israel:

      http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamas_Covenant

      “The charter states that “our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious” and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine”

      Do you want to argue with Hamas itself? Do you know their aims better than they know their own aims?

      Reply to Comment
      • Goldmarx

        Israel’s Likud government is quite familiar with Hamas’ aims, since a prior Likud government help spawn it and financed it back in the 1980s.

        Does the Hamas charter mention eliminating Egypt? Well, Hamas launched rockets from Gaza last week, killing 4 Egyptian children in the Sinai. Doing things not in their charter is not surprising, since it sees its Charter as flexible. That’s not good news for you, since as a neo-Nazi, you want Hamas to fulfill those goals, instead of ignoring them like politicians.

        Reply to Comment
        • JohnW

          Right, I think I understand your curious logic, Goldo:

          Hamas clearly say in their charter that they want to destroy and replace the Jewish state by an Arab Islamic state.

          Hamas did not just launch thousands of rockets on Southern Israeli civilians for the last 15 years but recently (you allege) they also launched a few rockets on Egypt.

          Hamas does not want to destroy Egypt, everybody knows that, even I know it.

          So, according to you Goldo, because Hamas launched rockets on both Israel and Egypt (a few allegedly), and because Hamas clearly doesn’t aim to destroy Egypt, it follows that Hamas does not plan to destroy Israel either. Even though they themselves say that they DO want to destroy Israel.

          Hey Goldo, here read this link and learn about syllogistic errors:

          http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/_/dict.aspx?rd=1&word=Errors+in+syllogisms

          It goes something like this –

          1. Dogs have four legs.

          2. Cats have four legs.

          3. Therefore, cats are dogs.

          The last time Jews ignored the plans of a homocidal maniac who wrote Mein Kampf, we paid dearly for ignoring his solemn claims that he DOES want to destroy us.

          Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            Hitler did not offer the Jews a ten year truce, because he took his own writings seriously.

            Hamas frequently makes deals (prisoner-swapping) with Israel’ Hamas, most importantly, was created by Israel, according to Avner Cohen. Was the Nazi Party created by Jews? Was Germany being occupied, externally or internally, by a hostile Jewish body?

            Those differences explain (in addition to the attack on Egypt) why Hamas charter should not be held up to the same level of credibility has Mein Kampf. Same with the PLO charter.

            Reply to Comment
          • Avdim

            I also don’t understand why the charter is brought out all the time, their actions speak well for themselves. Some are just too blind or naive to see.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Hitler did not offer the Jews a ten year truce, because he took his own writings seriously”

            Now you are really grasping at straws.

            Hitler did not need to offer the Jews a truce. He was strong enough to murder us almost as soon as he gained power.

            “Hamas frequently makes deals (prisoner-swapping) with Israel’”

            Yea. When the deal is the release of 1000 Arab prisoners for one Israeli.

            “Hamas, most importantly, was created by Israel, according to Avner Cohen.”

            Hamas waa not created by Israel. Read what I told you previously.

            “Was the Nazi Party created by Jews?

            No it wasn’t. So?

            “Was Germany being occupied, externally or internally, by a hostile Jewish body?”

            No it wasn’t. So?

            “Those differences explain (in addition to the attack on Egypt) why Hamas charter should not be held up to the same level of credibility has Mein Kampf.”

            No they don’t. Read what I told you above about syllogistic errors.

            “Same with the PLO charter.”

            We are talking about Hamas. But any charter which talks about their intent to destroy us cannot be ignored. We need to drag it out into the open and make them renounce it if they want anything from us.

            Why? Because after we give up strategic assets (lands) what would stop them from pursuing their stated goals from a position of greater strength?

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            “Hitler did not need to offer the Jews a truce. He was strong enough to murder us almost as soon as he gained power.”

            Nope. The first mass murders of Jews happened during Kristallnacht, more than five years after he became Chancellor. Before then, the Bundestag passed laws against Jews, but there were no killings. Hitler even allowed his own Jewish doctor to emigrate.

            Therefore, he had plenty of time to offer a truce if he were so inclined.

            G: “Hamas frequently makes deals (prisoner-swapping) with Israel’”

            J: Yea. When the deal is the release of 1000 Arab prisoners for one Israeli.

            –> So? A deal’s a deal. That you don’t like the deal does not argue against its existence.

            “Hamas was not created by Israel. Read what I told you previously.”

            I read what you wrote, and all you offered was a variation of your usual “I-know-better-than-Avner-Cohen-even-though-he-was-there-and-I-was-not” bullshit.

            “Because after we give up strategic assets (lands) what would stop them from pursuing their stated goals from a position of greater strength?”

            Israel gave up strategic assets to both Egypt and Jordan; yet they have not attacked Israel.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            “Nope. The first mass murders of Jews happened during Kristallnacht, more than five years after he became Chancellor. Before then, the Bundestag passed laws against Jews, but there were no killings. Hitler even allowed his own Jewish doctor to emigrate.”

            I repeat. Hitler did not need to offer a truce to the Jews because he was strong enough to commence what he wanted to do.

            Hamas is not strong enough to destroy Israel today. It simply hasn’t got the weapons to do it with. To get those weapons, it needs Israel to lift the blockade. Hence their idea of a truce.

            “So? A deal’s a deal. That you don’t like the deal does not argue against its existence.”

            I do argue against deals that I don’t like. I would not make them in the first place. That is precisely what we are discussing here.

            “I read what you wrote, and all you offered was a variation of your usual “I-know-better-than-Avner-Cohen-even-though-he-was-there-and-I-was-not” bullshit.”

            The only BS that is coming out is from you. Here, read this Wall Street Journal article:

            http://m.asia.wsj.com/articles/SB123275572295011847?mobile=y

            “Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah.”

            Does it sound to you like the Islamists (Hamas) did not exist before Israel made the mistake of propping them up for a while?

            “Israel gave up strategic assets to both Egypt and Jordan; yet they have not attacked Israel.”

            But not before Egypt and Jordan acknowledged the need for coexistence with Israel. Show me where Hamas displays a need to coexist with Israel in the long term.

            Reply to Comment
          • Goldmarx

            1) Your link starts off with the following sentences, undermining your case:

            “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” says Mr. Cohen, a Tunisian-born Jew who worked in Gaza for more than two decades. Responsible for religious affairs in the region until 1994, Mr. Cohen watched the Islamist movement take shape, muscle aside secular Palestinian rivals and then morph into what is today Hamas, a militant group that is sworn to Israel’s destruction.”

            The ‘Islamist movement’ was not always Hamas. You erroneously and intentionally conflate the two. Big surprise.

            2) It’s funny the way you try to cover your ass whenever I expose your errors. First you said about Hitler: “He was strong enough to murder us almost as soon as he gained power.” Then, after I showed that that was not true, you said “I repeat. Hitler did not need to offer a truce to the Jews because he was strong enough to commence what he wanted to do.”

            That’s a repetition? Really? You changed ‘murder us’ to ‘commence what he wanted to do’.

            No perception of internal weakness is forcing Hamas to offer a ten year truce. That is something that it has chosen to do.

            3) “I do argue against deals that I don’t like.”

            –> You are deflecting from the point being raised. The fact that Hamas is making such deals, and proposing such truces, in the first place means it does not treat its own charter as sacrosanct.

            4) “But not before Egypt and Jordan acknowledged the need for coexistence with Israel. Show me where Hamas displays a need to coexist with Israel in the long term.”

            –> Egypt and Jordan were not asked to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, but both Hamas and Abbas are being asked to jump through this extra hoop. It is encumbent on Israel to remove that hoop.

            More importantly, since when do victims of bullies recognize the bully’s right to exist while the bullying is ongoing? Hamas’ offer of a truce is generous – I’m not sure I would be so forgiving if I were being held in a chokehold for years on end.

            Reply to Comment
          • JohnW

            G:”1) Your link starts off with the following sentences, undermining your case:

            “Hamas, to my great regret, is Israel’s creation,” says Mr. Cohen,”

            J:Yes, and it goes on to say:

            “Instead of trying to curb Gaza’s Islamists from the outset, says Mr. Cohen, Israel for years tolerated and, in some cases, encouraged them as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the Palestine Liberation Organization and its dominant faction, Yasser Arafat’s Fatah.”

            Which means that the Islamist movement already existed. And if it did, then it was not Israel’s creation.

            The ‘Islamist movement’ was not always Hamas. You erroneously and intentionally conflate the two. Big surprise.”

            Is that so? I conflate the Islamist movement with Hamas? Now, tell me how Hamas is not the Islamist movement which Cohen was talking about? The context in which he talks about the Islamist movement is the same context in which he talks about Hamas. Or are you trying to say that Israel created two movements, Hamas and some other Islamist movement? You really are grasping at straws Goldie. Can’t you just admit you are wrong? Of course you can’t. That would be honest.

            “2) It’s funny the way you try to cover your ass whenever I expose your errors. First you said about Hitler: “He was strong enough to murder us almost as soon as he gained power.”

            Are you saying Hitler was not strong enough to murder Jews as soon as he took power? Are you saying he didn’t start his murder campaign of Jews and others as soon as he came to power?

            “Then, after I showed that that was not true, you said “I repeat. Hitler did not need to offer a truce to the Jews because he was strong enough to commence what he wanted to do. That’s a repetition? Really? You changed ‘murder us’ to ‘commence what he wanted to do’.

            You showed nothing. And what did Hitler want to do to Jews again, Goldie?

            In any case what has the fact that Hitler did not offer a truce to the Jews, got to do with Hamas offering a truce? Enlighten me o’ oracle of all wisdom?

            “No perception of internal weakness is forcing Hamas to offer a ten year truce. That is something that it has chosen to do.”

            Ah OK, so you are saying that Hamas has all the tools at it’s disposal today to destroy Israel but it does not want to destroy Israel? Instead, it is offering a magnanimous gesture for Israel to survive.

            Yet it does not want to change it’s charter which says that it wants to destroy Israel and it keeps on shooting rockets at Israel instead of dropping that item from it’s charter so they could negotiate a peace deal. Why a truce? Why not a peace deal?

            Are you listening to your own gobbletygook, Goldie?

            “You are deflecting from the point being raised. The fact that Hamas is making such deals, and proposing such truces, in the first place means it does not treat its own charter as sacrosanct.”

            If it’s charter is not sacrosanct, then why not delete the bits which talk about Iarael’s destruction? And as I said, why only a truce? Why not negotiate a peace deal?

            “Egypt and Jordan were not asked to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, but both Hamas and Abbas are being asked to jump through this extra hoop. It is encumbent on Israel to remove that hoop.”

            Oh how sad and inhumane. What a hoop to jump through. Not only that, but it is discriminatory. Why should the poor Palestinians be expected to recognize the Jewish state when Egypt and Jordan were not asked to do the same thing?

            Sigh …

            Because the whole war between Jews and Arabs was triggered by Palestinian Arab intransigence on this matter. So it is now incumbent on them to reverse their previous rejection of the Jewish state abd thereby signal to other Arabs that the war has ended.

            “More importantly, since when do victims of bullies recognize the bully’s right to exist while the bullying is ongoing?”

            The only bullies are the Arabs and people like you who expect Israel to accept Arab and Hamas dictates, under threats of violence and actual violence, to relinquish strategic assets (lands) without even offering anything tangible in return.

            “Hamas’ offer of a truce is generous”

            Yea, let’s kiss Hamas’s feet for being generous to us.

            “I’m not sure I would be so forgiving if I were being held in a chokehold for years on end.”

            You are just a petty fool Goldie. Nobody cares how you feel.

            Reply to Comment
    8. Rachamim Dwek

      The Bak’r deaths on the beach resulted from an airstrike against a HAMAS coastal defence battery sitting upon the retaining wall opposite al De’ira Hotel on al Rashid Street. The battery was headquarted in a steel shipping container. According to the family members of the Bak’rs they had repeatedly been warned not to go outside under any circumstances. Not only did they disregard their own family’s warnings, but chose to hang out on the retaining wall. Talk about terrible choices.

      The author feels that even if Gazans willingly place themselves in peril by agreeing to act as Human Shields, it is Israel’s fault if they die. Unless one is arguing that ALL armed conflict under ANY circumstance is wrong, they are making a nonsensical point.

      War sucks. People die. No getting around that. The key to avoiding that is to not attack in the first place. For four days Israel warned HAMAS et al to desist with the rockets, mortar shells and missiles lest they face a military response. HAMAS and allied groups made the calculated choice to continue their barrage and so Israel kept its word.

      So, if the author wants to truly cut hairs on who deserves to be faulted, they should be harping about HAMAS and company, NOT Israel.

      Reply to Comment
      • Goldmarx

        Of course, because Israel is never at fault, right?

        The boys at the beach were not alone. They were playing there with a number of journalists, one of whom works for MSNBC and reported on what he saw. Were they also warned? Do you have a reliable source of info, or is it just Hasbara central, i.e. Algemeiner or Jerusalem Post?

        Reply to Comment
    9. JohnW

      “or is it just Hasbara central,”

      Would a Zionist use such a phrase with derision in order to demean the claims of another Zionist? Even if there is a disagreement, not likely. Yet you claim to be a Zionist Goldo, what does that make you? Here, I’ll help you out with a few letters:

      L–R!

      Reply to Comment
    10. Alan

      Haaretz Editorial | Aug. 1, 2014

      “Absent high-quality intelligence and battle plans, the IDF chose the Operation Cast Lead solution – massive fire at populated zones, with major harm to civilians. The number of Palestinian dead has reached 1,400, most of them civilians. Hundreds of thousands have become refugees; many homes have been destroyed.
      Despite the cloak of legal approval with which the army covers itself, it is hard to be persuaded that a real effort has been made to limit harm to the innocent, to maintain the morality of the fighting, and to avoid deepening the hatred of our neighbors, next to whom we will have to live when the weapons fall silent.”

      Does anyone need to write any more words than this editorial?

      Reply to Comment
    11. Click here to load previous comments