The difference between good guys and bad guys in this world: They kill civilians because they’re evil. We — our armies and allies — kill civilians with the purest of intentions. Sounds ridiculous, right?
Sorry my friend I can’t get behind you on this one. While I understand your point (dead is dead irrespective of intent), INTENT MATTERS. The entirety of our criminal justice system is built upon this notion. A drunk driver and a serial killer both kill someone. But there is a difference between the two. Someone who cannot form intent (child, mental instability or mental deficiency, etc) are also judged differently under this auspice. INTENT MATTERS
Collateral damage deaths are different than deliberately targeted deaths, which are different than deliberately targeted deaths that are killed in horrific manners (raped to death or tortured to death, etc). There is a continuum here. A spectrum.
As to Israel, while we can certainly judge the tactics they use, those implying they shouldn’t attack Hamas, get a fucking clue. No nation on earth would allow a hostile entity like this who has sworn to destroy them, and actively attacked them in the most horrific of ways (not only deliberately targeting civilians (including children) but doing it in the most horrific ways to sow terror and hatred). That is not a sustainable paradigm. And it’s Hamas who is refusing to allow its people to flee, to use the bomb shelters and tunnels they built with the billions of dollars they’ve received in aid over the decades. It’s them using their own people as human shields. To Hamas, it’s win/win. The good Muslims die in jihad, which means they go straight to the bosom of Allah instead of waiting like Muslims who die outside of jihad and must be judged. The “bad” Muslims go to hell, just as Allah wants. They can make no mistakes with this kind of mindset. It’s heads I win tails you lose.
And people eat it up, just like Hamas wants. It’s hard to feel anything other than rage and sadness when you see children’s bodies being drug out of bombed out structures. But to Hamas? It’s a pure win.
This is asymmetrical warfare taken to a new level. How do you, as a soldier or cop or security officer, deal with people, including women and children, in a humane way who may be a walking fucking bomb. Every single person you encounter in this conflict may well be a human bomb, ready and willing to blow themselves up.
This is the mindset that Israel must contest with - one willing and anxious to not only sacrifice their own people as human shields, but to use them as walking and talking bombs. They want to maximize casualties, even on their own side.
Whereas the other side broadcasts warnings and leaflets telling civilians to get out. They actively try to minimize casualties, however imperfectly.
If one can’t spot a moral difference between the two sides here, I’m not sure what to say.
I honestly don't see how it can be argued that they aren't targeting civilians. It's not like there is an actual military there for them to target; apartment blocks are not government buildings. It's like the allies' firebombing of Dresden or the A bombs dropped on Japan. There's just no way you can target a civilian population center and claim you're not targeting civilians.
Sorry my friend I can’t get behind you on this one. While I understand your point (dead is dead irrespective of intent), INTENT MATTERS. The entirety of our criminal justice system is built upon this notion. A drunk driver and a serial killer both kill someone. But there is a difference between the two. Someone who cannot form intent (child, mental instability or mental deficiency, etc) are also judged differently under this auspice. INTENT MATTERS
Collateral damage deaths are different than deliberately targeted deaths, which are different than deliberately targeted deaths that are killed in horrific manners (raped to death or tortured to death, etc). There is a continuum here. A spectrum.
As to Israel, while we can certainly judge the tactics they use, those implying they shouldn’t attack Hamas, get a fucking clue. No nation on earth would allow a hostile entity like this who has sworn to destroy them, and actively attacked them in the most horrific of ways (not only deliberately targeting civilians (including children) but doing it in the most horrific ways to sow terror and hatred). That is not a sustainable paradigm. And it’s Hamas who is refusing to allow its people to flee, to use the bomb shelters and tunnels they built with the billions of dollars they’ve received in aid over the decades. It’s them using their own people as human shields. To Hamas, it’s win/win. The good Muslims die in jihad, which means they go straight to the bosom of Allah instead of waiting like Muslims who die outside of jihad and must be judged. The “bad” Muslims go to hell, just as Allah wants. They can make no mistakes with this kind of mindset. It’s heads I win tails you lose.
And people eat it up, just like Hamas wants. It’s hard to feel anything other than rage and sadness when you see children’s bodies being drug out of bombed out structures. But to Hamas? It’s a pure win.
This is asymmetrical warfare taken to a new level. How do you, as a soldier or cop or security officer, deal with people, including women and children, in a humane way who may be a walking fucking bomb. Every single person you encounter in this conflict may well be a human bomb, ready and willing to blow themselves up.
This is the mindset that Israel must contest with - one willing and anxious to not only sacrifice their own people as human shields, but to use them as walking and talking bombs. They want to maximize casualties, even on their own side.
Whereas the other side broadcasts warnings and leaflets telling civilians to get out. They actively try to minimize casualties, however imperfectly.
If one can’t spot a moral difference between the two sides here, I’m not sure what to say.
I honestly don't see how it can be argued that they aren't targeting civilians. It's not like there is an actual military there for them to target; apartment blocks are not government buildings. It's like the allies' firebombing of Dresden or the A bombs dropped on Japan. There's just no way you can target a civilian population center and claim you're not targeting civilians.