if you think Israel is intentionally targeting civilians you really haven't been paying much attention to what's actually going on. Furthermore, what in the world would they have to gain from such an action? The criticism is heavy enough as it is.

Riverman is correct.

2/325Falcon,

I don't understand this like "end of story" stuff. What's the end of the story? I said clearly:

Maybe there's more of the story to tell about that. Go for it.

Or like, you want to debate the axiom, like wantonly targeting civilians or behaving recklessly such that they die is open for debate? Go for it chief. That story can also continue. I think you *are* clearly trying to have that debate, but just by burden shifting any kind of argument for assuming that if no one can come up with some better plan you like, then armies should be able to wantonly targeting civilians or behaving recklessly such that they die. That's not an argument, it's a fallacy; it's called a false dilemma. If you have an argument to make, please proceed. It's the internet, bandwith is cheap.

Introducing external factors that were clearly not part of the original question isn't really a good answer. Yes, if the house fell down because someone brought a wrecking ball to it, it clearly wasn't the carpenters fault.

However - if no one did, if the foundation was sound and no earthquake or other factor was registered, you do not have to know how to do a better job than the carpenter to criticize him.

It's not your job to build a house. That does not mean you can't see when someone has done a bad job when doing it.

"Hey, is that city block packed with innocent civilians?"

"Yeah. I guess we shouldn't launch an airstrike there."

#AlternateIsraeliWarStrategies

Now that we can agree on. 100% even.

This too, of course. Israel should just take it if they can't prevent civilian casualties in Gaza?

You guys do realize Hamas has tried to tunnel numerous times into Israeli civilian areas using tunnels that have existed for years, right? In fact today they popped out and detonated a suicide vest, killing two soldiers and capturing another before retreating back underground.

Israel should just let these tunnels be? What should they do otherwise?

I don't think so, no. I'm not arguing for pacifism.

Not enough information to answer the question.

Pretty clear you've already come to the decision that Israel is wanton and reckless here even though you won't say what you think they should be doing instead. Are you going to show your work here or not?

If you say so.

People and groups act irrationally all the time. Like I said, one of the beauties the justice system has when adjudicating recklessness is that you don't have to wade into questions about mens rea. I don't hazard to guess what Israel thinks X or Y does to its reputation, or if it cares about the criticism it faces.

"Hey, that city block has fired 20 rockets at us today, causing extensive damage in Israel proper and potentially injuring or killing Israeli civilians. There are terrorists mixed in with the civilians on the block. What do we do?"

Serious question. Just let them continue to shoot the rockets?

Sure, people act irrationally. But is it in Israel's best interests to kill civilians? I think that's a pretty clear no and when has Israel done ANYTHING that isn't in its best interest? There's just no motive for some massive conspiracy to target and kill Palestinians. Israel could have wiped out all the Palestinians in Gaza or the West Bank by now if they wanted to, and pretty easily. You are reaching here or relying on some pro-Palestinian propaganda.

Also, are we talking about recklessness or intentional targeting of civilians? Or are you saying the two are linked now? I read your initial post as separating them out, at least for the purposes of discussion.

Israel airstrikes have devastating precision which makes the high percentage of civilian deaths even more unacceptable. They may not be targeting civilians directly, but they're making next to no effort to minimize collateral damage. Basically, they're operating against Hamas as if civilians aren't even part of the equation. You could argue otherwise but the proportion of militant deaths to innocents leaves no other conclusion.

They do, indeed. Montana is home to one of a few intercontinental nuke silos.

Sent from my VS980 4G using 2+2 Forums

Are you for real? *I'm* not showing my work?

sigh

OK. I already gave a link. Let's go to a second one:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/22/wo...i-strikes.html

And then lets go back to the total body count:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/21/wo...za-israel.html

I am suggesting this is entirely reckless based on empirics alone. But unlike when I said I won't debate the moral axiom that wantonly killing civilians or behaving recklessly such that they will die is wrong, I'm happy to at least entertain alternative takes here: maybe there's some truly good reason so many civilians (on a percentage basis) are dying relative to any actual Hamas combatants. I get that "Hamas is hiding amongst them" is a reason but see above: I don't find that very compelling.

And one of the alternative takes I find completely uncompelling is "WHAT'S YOUR ALTERNATIVE?" That's the true 'not showing the work' and just making completely lazy arguments.

How many people actually get harmed by those rockets after Israel put the Iron Dome in place?

There's a glaring asymmetry in the acrual death tolls that, to me at least, suggests that Israel's response isn't really proportional.

No matter how precise Israeli airstrikes are, no military assault can be perfect. Expecting Israel to be able to hit one dude in a building without touching anyone else is unrealistic. Of course, the obvious followup is how much are you willing to accept potential collateral damage. The bolded is also bull****--they warn pretty much everyone before they strike, drop leaflets warning people to leave, drop roof knockers before actual bombs, etc. You can argue over whether or not these are sufficient measures, but saying they make no effort to reduce collateral and civilian damage just isn't true.

No doubt this is a biased account, but it's also possible the casualty numbers are biased as well.

http://time.com/3035937/gaza-israel-...an-casualties/

I think I've been clear it's entirely possible if not likely they aren't intentionally targetting civilians as much as they are behaving recklessly.

Seems like a weird non-sequitur. I agree Israel could easily be doing worse.

They are of course separate. I'm arguing that in either case, Daniel ignored the moral ramifications of either possibility, which seems critical to actually answering the arguments Israel's critics are making.

So instead of #feelings what Dvaut is basing all this on is #scoreboard, I guess. Shockingly when armed conflict occurs the people living in and around the area closet to the fighting are the ones that wind up dying. That certainly doesn't make Israel wanton and reckless, it just means Hamas is incapable of launching some D-Day style human wave attack into Israel proper.

Is bombing buildings in Gaza stopping the tunnels?

I for one welcome my new Jewish neighbors

So just because Israel can defend itself with the Iron Dome, they should just suffer the attacks from Gaza? How does that make sense? You do realize that rockets are launched from schools, from hospitals, and smuggled through tunnels. Furthermore, Hamas operatives emerge out of tunnels and try to kidnap or kill Israeli civilians. Do you believe Israel should just let all of this happen?

Why is there little to no outrage over Hamas using civilian shields, or at the very least, setting up their rockets and mortars in civilian areas? Why do you guys never talk about that?

When I play COD I can target my Predator DRONEZ precisely, I don't see why Israel can't do better than a videogame jockey.

Yes, because they obviously can't get to the tunnels to blow them up or whatever if people are shooting rockets from these buildings at the people who have to blow up the tunnels. These tunnels are hidden and they have to go around and look for them manually. Or would you prefer they just nuke everything to ensure the tunnels are destroyed?

goofy,

I might have some gifs cued up #don'tsweatitbro.