Thanks for your love and care for the innocent people who are dying. Yes, I totally agree with your solution. Just because one side commits crimes against humanity, it does not release the other side to do the same thing. I pray that both sides will embrace FORGIVENESS. It's the only way to stop the cycle of hate and violence.
I think that is what Israel is doing. Gaza is riddled with tunnels, missile launches, ammunition manufacturing facilities, arms caches, etc. There are thousands of armed fighters still in Gaza. (The IDF estimated that 3,000 fighters infiltrated Israel on October 7.) And Hamas placed all of this right in the middle of civilian areas.
Israel cannot feasibly send in small commando units and kill 2 or 3 terrorists, or take out a small arms cache. The IDF commandos would lose.
Israel could try a policy of containment and a strong defense. Selective bombing, bigger walls, better security, a blockade, the Iron Dome. That's been the strategy towards Hamas, more or less, since 2006. And its failed.
The only feasible strategy for Israel is a more intensive offensive campaign. The IDF will take out the offensive infrastructure in Gaza and kill Hamas fighters. Israel will do what it can to minimize civilian deaths, but some are inevitable.
Just war theory raises 2 inquiries: (1) whether there is a just reason to go to war, and (2) whether specific conduct in war is just. (1) is easily met here. No country should have to live with terrorists on their border who kill and kidnap civilians. (2) is a more difficult question. It applies to each specific military situation.
A word about proportionality. Proportionality does not mean that Israel's response is limited to killing 1,400 civilization, the number Hamas killed on October 7. Instead, it means that the just military objectives is proportional in some sense to the harms caused. So killing 1 Hamas fighters by bombing a building with 1000 civilians would not be proportional. But killing 1,000 Hamas fighters and destroying
a large arms cache while killing 100 civilians might be proportional.
Part of the problem is that Hamas is deliberately using civilians as human shields. And Israel's attitude is that the standards of proportionality when Hamas was trying to kill 5 or 10 people is now different than when Hamas has actually killed 1,400 and its leaders vow to do it again (if not stopped). The benefits of destroying Hamas's ability to wage terrorism is much larger now.
With all that said, Israel must make every reasonable effort to protect civilians. Humanitarian pauses (which it is now doing), urging people to flee to the south while it fights in the north, restraint while targeting, etc. should all be on the table. But at the end of the day, Israel and Gaza will both be better places once Hamas is gone.
Hi, long time reader and first-time commenter here.
First and foremost, for clarity's sake, I'm an Israeli of Jewish descent, though it doesn't define my opinions.
I agree with the title of your article wholeheartedly- any preventable death is a tragedy, especially the deaths of innocent children, and should not be cheered for or even excused as necessary.
It is our moral imperative to amplify this message and advocate for solutions that minimize suffering, particularly during times where people are most vulnerable to emotional and impulsive actions.
Even so, while reading your article one quote comes to my mind:
"It seems to me that you are not an evil person, but most terribly ignorant, and confident in your ignorance; as I once was, a long time ago. "
- Dumbledore, HPMOR 77
While many have already challenged the "official" reports of the Hamas controlled Gaza health ministry, I believe that to be a false point of contention- many Palestinians have died and will continue to die while the war is ongoing, and the numbers will not be known to us until after the end of this current tragedy. Nonetheless, I will advise against confidently quoting numbers by either the IDF or Hamas when making a point, as it creates an opportunity for bad actors on all sides to derail important conversations.
The more important question, as you observed, is “what Israel should do, if not this?”.
Many in Israel are calling now for the path of righteous fury, letting the full might of the IDF fall upon Hamas.
This should be understood as temporary grief and rage, as most everyone in Israel know personally someone who died in 7.10, and many have seen in real-time the grotesque ways in which they have been killed by barbaric terrorists and worse- random people from Gaza.
The photos shared by news organizations are very much the milder of the ones released by Hamas operatives on social media and telegram.
This is for the best, in my opinion, as one can mostly understand the situation without self-inflicting the psychological damages of seeing the very limits of human cruelty.
But reacting logically to such events requires great self-control, and should not be expected from the general public. The government however, is a different story.
I came across the Vox article you highlighted when searching for the answer for the impossible question: “what Israel should do?”. I found it lackluster and uninformative.
Targeted operations are the bread and butter of the IDF. Anyone with prior knowledge of the conflict should know that attempting to kill the leaders of Hamas and avoid civilian casualties while hitting unpopulated Hamas run facilities is the automatic response Israel has tried to maintain- heck, the books those experts quote were written mainly about Israel’s experiences dealing with terror organizations in populated areas.
There are many problems with this answer, and while it still might be the correct one, no one proficient current affairs needed 5,000 words worth of article to say- ‘do what you have always done before’.
And anyone who read chapter one of “How terrorism ends” by the delightful Audrey Kurth Cronin, would remember that Israel attempted “Targeted Killings” against Hamas, which proved to be ineffectual because recruitment rates and training times for Hamas couldn’t be dealt with barring major civilian costs.
All this of course is completely irrelevant, since the real moral dilemma in Israelis’ minds at this time is how to deal with the 240 hostages taken by Hamas.
I would be happy to discuss this further in private, if you wish to hear the perspective of a fellow EA who finds himself involuntarily stuck inside one of the most misunderstood moral quandaries of our time.
You have made the same mistake as those you criticize for using the past to justify current actions, just on a shorter time-scale. Israel's response is already history. What's needed now is a vision for the future.
First off, no Jews (maybe a few crazy extremists) are cheering the deaths of Gazan children.
Second, I didn't really get Beauchamp's piece. Isn't that roughly what Israel is doing? They are targeting Hamas as much as possible, but Hamas uses human shields. Are they supposed to send Navy Seal equivalents alone into crowded Gaza City looking for a few Hamas commanders without causing civilian casualties? The IDF is good, but not that good.
Thanks for your love and care for the innocent people who are dying. Yes, I totally agree with your solution. Just because one side commits crimes against humanity, it does not release the other side to do the same thing. I pray that both sides will embrace FORGIVENESS. It's the only way to stop the cycle of hate and violence.
I think that is what Israel is doing. Gaza is riddled with tunnels, missile launches, ammunition manufacturing facilities, arms caches, etc. There are thousands of armed fighters still in Gaza. (The IDF estimated that 3,000 fighters infiltrated Israel on October 7.) And Hamas placed all of this right in the middle of civilian areas.
Israel cannot feasibly send in small commando units and kill 2 or 3 terrorists, or take out a small arms cache. The IDF commandos would lose.
Israel could try a policy of containment and a strong defense. Selective bombing, bigger walls, better security, a blockade, the Iron Dome. That's been the strategy towards Hamas, more or less, since 2006. And its failed.
The only feasible strategy for Israel is a more intensive offensive campaign. The IDF will take out the offensive infrastructure in Gaza and kill Hamas fighters. Israel will do what it can to minimize civilian deaths, but some are inevitable.
Just war theory raises 2 inquiries: (1) whether there is a just reason to go to war, and (2) whether specific conduct in war is just. (1) is easily met here. No country should have to live with terrorists on their border who kill and kidnap civilians. (2) is a more difficult question. It applies to each specific military situation.
A word about proportionality. Proportionality does not mean that Israel's response is limited to killing 1,400 civilization, the number Hamas killed on October 7. Instead, it means that the just military objectives is proportional in some sense to the harms caused. So killing 1 Hamas fighters by bombing a building with 1000 civilians would not be proportional. But killing 1,000 Hamas fighters and destroying
a large arms cache while killing 100 civilians might be proportional.
Part of the problem is that Hamas is deliberately using civilians as human shields. And Israel's attitude is that the standards of proportionality when Hamas was trying to kill 5 or 10 people is now different than when Hamas has actually killed 1,400 and its leaders vow to do it again (if not stopped). The benefits of destroying Hamas's ability to wage terrorism is much larger now.
With all that said, Israel must make every reasonable effort to protect civilians. Humanitarian pauses (which it is now doing), urging people to flee to the south while it fights in the north, restraint while targeting, etc. should all be on the table. But at the end of the day, Israel and Gaza will both be better places once Hamas is gone.
"One's first inclination". Is this something we can control? Sounds related to what some people are calling epistemic injustice?
Hi, long time reader and first-time commenter here.
First and foremost, for clarity's sake, I'm an Israeli of Jewish descent, though it doesn't define my opinions.
I agree with the title of your article wholeheartedly- any preventable death is a tragedy, especially the deaths of innocent children, and should not be cheered for or even excused as necessary.
It is our moral imperative to amplify this message and advocate for solutions that minimize suffering, particularly during times where people are most vulnerable to emotional and impulsive actions.
Even so, while reading your article one quote comes to my mind:
"It seems to me that you are not an evil person, but most terribly ignorant, and confident in your ignorance; as I once was, a long time ago. "
- Dumbledore, HPMOR 77
While many have already challenged the "official" reports of the Hamas controlled Gaza health ministry, I believe that to be a false point of contention- many Palestinians have died and will continue to die while the war is ongoing, and the numbers will not be known to us until after the end of this current tragedy. Nonetheless, I will advise against confidently quoting numbers by either the IDF or Hamas when making a point, as it creates an opportunity for bad actors on all sides to derail important conversations.
The more important question, as you observed, is “what Israel should do, if not this?”.
Many in Israel are calling now for the path of righteous fury, letting the full might of the IDF fall upon Hamas.
This should be understood as temporary grief and rage, as most everyone in Israel know personally someone who died in 7.10, and many have seen in real-time the grotesque ways in which they have been killed by barbaric terrorists and worse- random people from Gaza.
The photos shared by news organizations are very much the milder of the ones released by Hamas operatives on social media and telegram.
This is for the best, in my opinion, as one can mostly understand the situation without self-inflicting the psychological damages of seeing the very limits of human cruelty.
But reacting logically to such events requires great self-control, and should not be expected from the general public. The government however, is a different story.
I came across the Vox article you highlighted when searching for the answer for the impossible question: “what Israel should do?”. I found it lackluster and uninformative.
Targeted operations are the bread and butter of the IDF. Anyone with prior knowledge of the conflict should know that attempting to kill the leaders of Hamas and avoid civilian casualties while hitting unpopulated Hamas run facilities is the automatic response Israel has tried to maintain- heck, the books those experts quote were written mainly about Israel’s experiences dealing with terror organizations in populated areas.
There are many problems with this answer, and while it still might be the correct one, no one proficient current affairs needed 5,000 words worth of article to say- ‘do what you have always done before’.
And anyone who read chapter one of “How terrorism ends” by the delightful Audrey Kurth Cronin, would remember that Israel attempted “Targeted Killings” against Hamas, which proved to be ineffectual because recruitment rates and training times for Hamas couldn’t be dealt with barring major civilian costs.
All this of course is completely irrelevant, since the real moral dilemma in Israelis’ minds at this time is how to deal with the 240 hostages taken by Hamas.
I would be happy to discuss this further in private, if you wish to hear the perspective of a fellow EA who finds himself involuntarily stuck inside one of the most misunderstood moral quandaries of our time.
Take care and never stop reading (and writing)
You're extremely ignorant.
"There may be times when it is appropriate—if the alternative were, for example, the wholesale destruction of Israel. "
Which is what Hamas charter calls for. And Iran explicitly states it wants.
You have made the same mistake as those you criticize for using the past to justify current actions, just on a shorter time-scale. Israel's response is already history. What's needed now is a vision for the future.
First off, no Jews (maybe a few crazy extremists) are cheering the deaths of Gazan children.
Second, I didn't really get Beauchamp's piece. Isn't that roughly what Israel is doing? They are targeting Hamas as much as possible, but Hamas uses human shields. Are they supposed to send Navy Seal equivalents alone into crowded Gaza City looking for a few Hamas commanders without causing civilian casualties? The IDF is good, but not that good.