# airstrikes on Gaza **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 11, 2014, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856 "2014-07-11T14:55:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Grey](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@Grey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grey)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/81 "2014-07-11T18:21:17Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > I was scaling both the attack and response down. So the relevant question is, is the ratio (shooting one person)/(airstrikes that kill a hundred) more similar to the ratio (shoving someone)/(mostly ineffectual unguided rockets) or to the ratio (shooting someone)/(mostly ineffectual unguided rockets.) > > I don’t mean to suggest that Israel wanted all those people dead, but only that they acted in a way that could have been reasonably expected to cause about that number of deaths, fair number of whom are innocent civilians. The fact that Israel would surely prefer to have weapons that could hit Hamas targets while avoiding all innocent civilians doesn’t necessarily mean they’re justified in using the weapons they do have. I still don’t understand your issue with military strikes against weapons deliberately positioned in civilian populations. I’ve found a [cite](http://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-vows-harsher-strikes-on-defiant-hamas-as-conflict-enters-3rd-day/)that states the Israeli military has made 900 strikes with 90 Palestinians killed. Leave aside that at least some of those killed are actual militants (I take it you have fewer issues with non civilian deaths) and lets up the rate x10 (to include injuries) we have a injured/killed per strike ratio of 1. I’m not appalled by that. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/82 "2014-07-11T18:21:44Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > But what’s the point of making peace with guys who are not the guys you’re at war with? > > For that price, why bother with any of these Arab nations? I’ll offer to make peace with the Israelis at far better terms. > > Point is that making “peace” is only relevant if all the parties actually at war make peace. Otherwise you get nothing, and any concessions at all are pointless. IIRC, Israel is still at war with a lot of these countries. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/83 "2014-07-11T18:23:29Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > IIRC, Israel is still at war with a lot of these countries. But those are not the ones they’re facing an immenent threat from. To make peace with them and not with Hamas accomplishes very little. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/84 "2014-07-11T18:25:41Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > It’s rhetoric because they know it ain’t gonna happen. I don’t think they know it, and even if they do, that’s not going to stop them from doing their best to make it happen. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/85 "2014-07-11T18:25:57Z")
> [@cmkeller](#): > > Hamas could break that impasse if it wanted to. Israel can’t afford to without Hamas’s willingness. So there is nothing Israel could do that would make hamas more willing? Or is Hamas supposed to sue for peace under current conditions? > [@](#): > > If done in a believable way, yes. What is a believable way? > [@](#): > > Responsibility for security would have to be part of the treaty arrangement. So Israel with all their guns and military can’t control Hamas militants but a disarmed Palestinian government is supposed to do so? Or are you saying that the new Palestinian government could have its own military? > [@](#): > > It would be nice if this was one of those times, but it’s not. Despite at least some evidence to the contrary. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/86 "2014-07-11T18:28:16Z")
> [@handsomeharry](#): > > Me too. I’d call it Jordan. There is already a country called Jordan. I think the Palestinians want to call theirs Palestine. But if you want to go back in time to what we could have done differently, perhaps the Zionists shouldn’t have created a country for themselves in the middle of land that was already occupied. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/87 "2014-07-11T18:31:53Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > It’s hard to draw an _exact_ line, but I think this is pretty far beyond where I would draw it. If Israel could dramatically reduce the chance of further rocket attacks by killing, say, 10 innocent people (and some number of Hamas members), I’d still feel pretty conflicted about it, given that the rocket attacks haven’t killed anyone. But somewhere around there, maybe I’d say “Yeah, that’s justified”. Killing 100 people while seemingly not having much effect on the attacks you wanted to stop doesn’t seem close to justified, all the more so because the Hamas attacks weren’t that effective anyway. > > If the number you’d have to kill to end (or substantially curtail) the rocket attacks is way more than the number I could ever see being justified in response to a mostly ineffectual attack, then there really isn’t a middle ground of “the right amount of force”, and it becomes a case where responding with military force just isn’t a good option. Again, this part seems to me the key difficulty in your argument: > [@](#): > > Killing 100 people while seemingly not having much effect on the attacks you wanted to stop doesn’t seem close to justified, all the more so because the Hamas attacks weren’t that effective anyway. [Emphasis mine] What if - just for the sake of argument - the Israeli actions actually _ensured_ that the attacks weren’t “effective”? That there was a causal link between “Israeli attacks on Hamas rocket launchers” and “Hamas rocket launchers overall failing to harm Israeli civilians”? Seems to me that - in this case - the very effectiveness of Israeli actions at protecting civilians becomes, in your view, proof of Israeli brutality. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/88 "2014-07-11T18:34:49Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > Or it might be that the Palestinians never get the upper hand. Or the entire dynamic could change in some unforseen way. Point is that just unilaterally caving in is just suicide. The other way, at least you have a shot. What shot is that? Unilaterally caving in? We should have adopted the same strategy with Germany and Japan after WWI and kept our boot on their neck. We’d be so much better off today. And before anyone gets their panties in a twist, I’m not saying they are exactly the same situation but sometimes keeping your boot on the other guy’s neck isn’t the best way forward. And your attitude that taking your foot off his neck is unilateral caving is the attitude I am talking about. Israel will have just as much military power the day after they “cave” as the day before they “cave” > [@](#): > > In that case then there just are no permanent solutions. If you assume the other guy is crazy and bloodthirsty then no there is no solution as long as you have the upper hand. Perhaps we should work towards changing who has the upper hand. > [@](#): > > The fact that you can’t think of a solution unless you make certain assumptions doesn’t make those assumptions any more likely to be true. > > [Like a guy who can’t think of a solution to his terminal illness unless he assumes that Dr. Quack’s Miracle Cure is true. Doesn’t make it any more likely, and the fact that you “can’t think of another solution” is not part of the equation from a logical standpoint.] Were the arabs crazy and bloodthirsty before the creation of the state of Israel or did they have a latent form of crazy bloodthirstiness that blossomed into full bloom after the creation of the state of Israel. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/89 "2014-07-11T18:36:00Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > There is already a country called Jordan. I think the Palestinians want to call theirs Palestine. But if you want to go back in time to what we could have done differently, perhaps the Zionists shouldn’t have created a country for themselves in the middle of land that was already occupied. Perhaps the Persians shouldn’t have invaded Judah 2500 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/90 "2014-07-11T18:36:54Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > But those are not the ones they’re facing an immenent threat from. To make peace with them and not with Hamas accomplishes very little. What sort of threat are they facing from Hamas? We have had serial killers here in the USA that have been more deadly than Hamas over the last few years. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/91 "2014-07-11T18:39:01Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Perhaps the Persians shouldn’t have invaded Judah 2500 years ago. I’m not the one that started the stroll down memory lane. We need something equitable today. Not something that would be equitable 60 years ago or 160 years ago. I would guess that most of these Palestinian militants weren’t even born when Israel was created. But we can’t entirely disregard the recent history. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/92 "2014-07-11T18:40:07Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > What shot is that? > > Unilaterally caving in? We should have adopted the same strategy with Germany and Japan after WWI and kept our boot on their neck. We’d be so much better off today. And before anyone gets their panties in a twist, I’m not saying they are exactly the same situation but sometimes keeping your boot on the other guy’s neck isn’t the best way forward. And your attitude that taking your foot off his neck is unilateral caving is the attitude I am talking about. Israel will have just as much military power the day after they “cave” as the day before they “cave” Um, you do realize that both Germany and Japan were forced to surrender unconditionally after WW2 - Japan after being nuked, twice - and the leaders of both countries mostly rounded up and executed in war crimes trials? Is that really the pattern you want Israel to subscribe to vis. the Palestinians? It is, in fact, way harsher than anything Israel has ever attempted. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/93 "2014-07-11T18:40:52Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Unilaterally caving in? We should have adopted the same strategy with Germany and Japan after WWI and kept our boot on their neck. We’d be so much better off today. And before anyone gets their panties in a twist, I’m not saying they are exactly the same situation but sometimes keeping your boot on the other guy’s neck isn’t the best way forward. Right. Sometimes it’s not and sometimes it is. > [@](#): > > And your attitude that taking your foot off his neck is unilateral caving is the attitude I am talking about. Israel will have just as much military power the day after they “cave” as the day before they “cave” True, but Hamas will have a lot more. > [@](#): > > If you assume the other guy is crazy and bloodthirsty then no there is no solution as long as you have the upper hand. Perhaps we should work towards changing who has the upper hand. You’re saying if you assume the other guy is crazy and bloodthirsty you should change things to give that guy the upper hand? That’s an interesting strategy. > [@](#): > > Were the arabs crazy and bloodthirsty before the creation of the state of Israel or did they have a latent form of crazy bloodthirstiness that blossomed into full bloom after the creation of the state of Israel. What’s the difference? You keep going further and further back in history, which suggests that you see events today based on what you perceive to be historical grievences. But it makes no difference. (You want to go that route, Jews were second class citizens in Palestine and all other Arab countries for hundreds of years.) What counts is the current situation. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/94 "2014-07-11T18:41:56Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > What shot is that? > > Unilaterally caving in? We should have adopted the same strategy with Germany and Japan after WWI and kept our boot on their neck. We’d be so much better off today. And before anyone gets their panties in a twist, I’m not saying they are exactly the same situation but sometimes keeping your boot on the other guy’s neck isn’t the best way forward. And your attitude that taking your foot off his neck is unilateral caving is the attitude I am talking about. Israel will have just as much military power the day after they “cave” as the day before they “cave” Um, you do realize that both Germany and Japan were forced to surrender unconditionally after WW2 - Japan after being nuked, twice - and the leaders of both countries mostly rounded up and executed in war crimes trials? Is that really the pattern you want Israel to subscribe to vis. the Palestinians? It is, in fact, way harsher than anything Israel has ever attempted. (I assume you mean “WW2” here, as Japan was on the allied side in WW1) Edit: sorry about the double post! ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/95 "2014-07-11T18:43:08Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > What sort of threat are they facing from Hamas? > > We have had serial killers here in the USA that have been more deadly than Hamas over the last few years. Hamas has killed as many people as they could (other than to the extent that they’ve been pressured into ceasefires by bombings and invasions). That seems pretty threatening to me. Making a peace treaty that they don’t subscribe to while leaving them strengthened as a result does not seem like such a bright idea to me. ---
**Author:** ![tim314](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tim314/32/3468_2.png) [@tim314](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tim314)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/96 "2014-07-11T18:50:36Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > What if - just for the sake of argument - the Israeli actions actually _ensured_ that the attacks weren’t “effective”? That there was a causal link between “Israeli attacks on Hamas rocket launchers” and “Hamas rocket launchers overall failing to harm Israeli civilians”? Yes, I suppose that would make a difference. Do you think there’s evidence that this is why Hamas’s attacks have been ineffective? I guess it seems to me the main reason is just that their weapons aren’t very good – otherwise I would have expected them to start out as being more effective at causing Israeli casualties, and then those numbers would go down as the Israeli’s destroyed more and more of their weaponry. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/97 "2014-07-11T19:01:01Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I’m not the one that started the stroll down memory lane. We need something equitable today. I beg your pardon, I thought you did. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Not something that would be equitable 60 years ago or 160 years ago. I would guess that most of these Palestinian militants weren’t even born when Israel was created. But we can’t entirely disregard the recent history. People don’t work that way, especially the people who live in and near the area. I’d like to give the Palestinians part of Alaska and put in a Ford motor company factory to provide employment. At least both sides would be out of range of each other. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/98 "2014-07-11T19:01:26Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > Yes, I suppose that would make a difference. Do you think there’s evidence that this is why Hamas’s attacks have been ineffective? I guess it seems to me the main reason is just that their weapons aren’t very good – otherwise I would have expected them to start out as being more effective at causing Israeli casualties, and then those numbers would go down as the Israeli’s destroyed more and more of their weaponry. Depends. Part of the reason for Hamas ineffectiveness, I have heard, is that the set up a firing location in some civvy’s property, fire a rocket or two, and skedaddle before Israeli counter-battery fire tracks back the missile and blows them to bits. If they were allowed the leasure of setting up a permanent firing post, without fear of retaliation, they would be more accurate and score more hits - or at least, so goes the theory. If this is true (and it sounds credible enough), one would expect that this would be as true for the first rocket as for the last. As for degrading the experience of Hamas crews, that is a long-term affair: this isn’t the first go-around between Israel and Hamas by any means. The point being that if Israel should stop counter-battery attacks, the Hamas rocketeers could gain accuracy (by firing from more permanent locations) and experience (as Hamas crews would not be risking depletion by death). All of which seems reasonable enough to me, though I admit I have no proof that it actually works this way. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/99 "2014-07-11T19:07:58Z")
> [@Batistuta](#): > > But I get the distinct feeling that many in Israel have no interest in reducing even preventable, unnecessary suffering. Hell, just the other day I read an Israeli newspaper that called for Gaza to be returned to the Stone Age. That kind of attitude, in one of the most heavily-armed countries on the planet, worries me quite a lot Except clearly that’s not a majority attitude among Israelis, because if it was, they would have done it years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Cashless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ad7895/32.png) [@Johnny\_Cashless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Cashless)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856/100 "2014-07-11T19:19:25Z")
> [@tim314](#): > > That was a horrible, despicable crime. But I don’t really think these airstrikes make it less likely that such a thing will happen in the future. Do you? It was, of course, an immediate response to this: > **[CCTV footage of Palestinian teenagers being shot dead - video](https://www.theguardian.com/world/video/2014/may/20/cctv-footage-palestinian-teenagers-shot-dead-video)** > > Video released via the human rights organisation Defence for Children International shows two Palestinian teenagers being killed during a protest in Beitunia And now someone brings up the last 2000 years … On the air strikes, I guess it was time for the periodic rattling of the cage - the very last thing Israel wants is a calm Gaza; that doesn’t serve the agenda at all. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/airstrikes-on-gaza/692856.md?page=6)