Well, from the Jerusalem Post (Registration needed), here’s the list…20 dead, 6 of them children
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1061350051488
And from the article that goes with that list:
So there’s a second source for the 100 wounded.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/A/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1061438426187
In all fairness, this is the first time that no innocents were killed as part of an Israeli Missile raid. While I would rather they arrested terror subjects and brought them to justice, or even the PA did that, I feel the IDF were very lucky that it was only the 3 casualties. firing 3-5 missiles at a car in a busy road isn’t exactly pinpoint targetting.
CA,
It appears that I read the Yahoo article wrong. I thought it referred to the missile strike. Mea Cupla.
(bolding mine)
Boo Boo Foo - I must say that I object to your claiming a parity between Israeli and palestinian actions. A Palestinian terrorist murdered INNOCENT, CIVILIAN WOMEN AND CHILDREN - MURDER FOR THE SAKE OF MURDER (yes, I’m screaming!) in retaliation to what similar deed (purposeful murder of women and children with nary a legitimate target in sight - murder for the sake of murder)?
And Israel retaliated - by going in and murdering innocent civilians, right? NOT - we responded by taking out a HAMAS MILITARY LEADER. To which they now say they will retaliate by murdering more civilians.
NOT a parallel situation!
Noone Special,
they didn’t murder anyone innocent this time, but they have on plenty of other occasions. On those occasions do you feel it was correct to murder innocents just so they could kill their target?
My personal choice would be to move.
The first attacks by Palestinians towards Jews goes all the way back to 1929 at the Wailing Wall. Apparently 1200 odd people died. Ever since then it’s been a tit for tat cycle of recrimination, war, land grabs, disenfranchisements, and terror attacks - by both sides. Some more stealthy than others, but both sides have got shitloads of blood on their hands. Spare me the partisanship, please. No side has the right to claim the high moral ground. It’s all bad. It’s all ugly. It’s all wrong.
Agreed.
I think the only justice for them is death, but that would do more harm then good.
But the thing is though Israel has killed far more innocent Palestinians during the intifada than Palestinians have killed innocent Israelis (infact the total number of Palestinian minors killed is just about the same as the total number of Israelis killed in suicide bombings) so the results worse.
Where are these numbers coming from?
Two points:
Your question is very difficult ot answer, and is in fact a major debate point among Israelis. Should we completely avoid hitting terrorist leaders because they hide behind human shields? Or must we accept that we will end up killing innocents in the cases where we can pinpoint and shoot at the terrorists? Squarely between the horns of the dillema.
But at least, either way you look at it, we try to hurt as few civilans as possible, not as many as possible, as the palestinians do.
The way I see it, the Palestinian modus operandi has zero morality, while our actions are, granted, in a grey area (although I honestly think that the planners really try to minimize the carnage) - but we just can’t let the terrorist leaders get away, literally, with murder.
Sorry for being so long-winded. Do you still honestly think the situation is really identical on both sides? That intentions are identical?
Dan Abarbanel
The greatest and most exceptional thing Israel could do now is nothing. No retaliation. No more murders.
The only way to break a spiralling cycle of tit-for-tat killings and murders is for one of the involved parties to take the (unprecedented) step of holding up its hands and saying “Enough. No more.” This stance, I believe, will have to come initially from Israel. Violence only begets more violence, and Israel are the ‘side’ most capable of making the first step. Of course, this is much easier said than done and it will be a hell of a tough sell in light of this horrible attack. It would be a huge step, a lot to swallow, but is the only decision which can, perhaps, get the Road Map back on the table.
Terrible times indeed. 
And yet there are more dead Palestinian civilians.
B’Tselem the Israeli human rights group
Palestinian minors killed in the OTs since start of the intifada: 388
Israeli’s killed by Palestinians within Israel: 348
(I’ve added the victims of the bus -bombing myself, as the list is correct to 13th August only)
A further 190 Israeli civilians have been killed in the occupied territories
About 2,103 Palestinian civilians in total have been killed in the occupied territories, the number who weren’t militants is hard to ascertain but 50%-60% is a conservative estimate.
Apologies for my previous response which was based on a misreading of the OP as “What the fuck do you do if you’re IN Israel?”
No suggestions (or real interest in) what Israel should do on a personal or political level.
I would tend to agree with you - although my blood is still simmering (cooled down from the boiling point it was at yesterday) - if I thought that there were any chance that non-reaction would do anything other than convince the terrorists that they can get away with it.
Unfortunately, I’m afraid that you are unrealistically idealistic and optimistic. Not ragging you, I know you mean well, but we’ve tried restraint in the past, and have reaped more violence in return.
I wish it were not so.
Dan Abarbanel
Noone Special, question for you:
Is it more morally defensible to allow the guilty to go free than to risk further deaths? Is the avoidance of (the possibility of) killing civilians not more important than punishing the ‘guilty’?
In NI we had a similar situation: one of the major steps towards peace was the release of the guilty from prison. It stuck in everyone’s throats at the time but was a major catalyst in getting the peace process that extra step forward. It was worth it to keep the peace, to stop the continuation of murders.
I believe punishing the guilty is a secondary action to the protection of innocent lives. YMMV.
Firing missiles into a apartment block is minimising carnage? I’m sorry, I can’t accept that. the IDF are less concerned with civillian casualties than they are with getting their target.
In addition to what Aro has said, another reason that Israel is the beleagured country that is the only one that can take this noble and unpopular step: even if Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa et al stopped their terror, or if Arafat suddenly grew a halo and decided to hand over total power to Abbas, who cracked down on every single terrorist and miltant in the whole of the OTs, it would still only take one Palestinian asshole with a bomb to fuck things up again. So far, and thank God, there are few Israeli “terrorists” to contribute to the mayhem. Israel’s actions are still controlled by the government.
You are forgetting that we are targeting TERRORIST LEADERSHIP - thereby foiling further terrorist action against Israelis, and saving Israeli lives. So when innocent Palestinians are killed in the process, we are essentially trading their lives for the lives of Israeli innocents that are thus saved. Not exactly a moral pinnacle, but far from plain “killing the innocent along with guilty” as you (simplistically, I think) put it.
Sort of like accident-proofing one less mile of road in order to finance cancer research - playing god and choosing who lives and who dies. Awful, but not evil.
And yes, if I have to choose who dies, I will save my own at the expense of innocents in my enemy’s camp. Sorry, that’s just the way it is.
Well, that’s what we were doing when the latest attrocity was unleashed on us. As well as handing over several West Bank cities back to PA responsibility. We all know what the Palestinian reaction to this was. Back to the drawing board
As I said above, I think this is overly simplistic.
Dan Abarbanel