# Is Israel's killing of Hamas leaders a good strategy in the long run? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 18, 2004, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636 "2004-04-18T04:57:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Karmagun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/4af34b/32.png) [@Karmagun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Karmagun)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/41 "2004-04-18T16:05:38Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > expressed willingness to chop up innocent bystanders I don’t think Israel is interested in chopping up innocent bystanders any more than the US are willing to shoot their own allies in friendly fire incidents. That is the difference between Israeli actions and those of Hamas, who target innocent bystanders on purpose. Intention describes action. > [@](#): > > Isreal has, of course, a right to exist and a right to defend herself. Which it is doing with a fair degree of success. Once we open our eyes and realise that the Geneva Convention was drawn at a time when the whole concept of asymmetric warfare, terrorism and post-modern conflicts were simply non-existent (the closest thing would have been guerrilla, which has since then become part of contemporary military training), it becomes clear that the Convention could not address issues that were not present at the time. Time to change the Convention in response to terrorist strategies. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/42 "2004-04-18T16:34:12Z")
> [@](#): > > Actually, yes. There is a reason that Clinton never went after bin Laden - he didn’t feel that there was enough evidence for a conviction. Clinton decide to forgo such pleasantries and signed orders calling for his killing. There is a lot more to the story, but the fact is, they did want to kill Bin Laden, and tried to more than once. ---
**Author:** ![kezami](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eb8c5e/32.png) [@kezami](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kezami)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/43 "2004-04-18T18:05:20Z")
The OP’s question could be changed to read: Is America’s killing of Al Quaeda leaders a good strategy in the long run? What’s the difference? War is war. There seems to be so much concern with so called “extra-judicial killing” when in fact it comes down to kill or be killed - that simple. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/44 "2004-04-18T18:16:00Z")
> [@kezami](#): > > What’s the difference? War is war. There seems to be so much concern with so called “extra-judicial killing” when in fact it comes down to kill or be killed - that simple. As long as your side is doing the killing, right? ---
**Author:** ![Fang](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/96bed5/32.png) [@Fang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fang)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/45 "2004-04-18T18:40:18Z")
**Desmo** : First off, your points about legality are not only wrong (I’ll get to that in a second), but also irrelevant. The OP asked whether assassination of Hamas leaders is a good strategy in the long run, and unless you wish to argue that Hamas is ultimately concerned with violations of the GC, GC discussion is just a hijack. I believe I made a number of points in favor of this policy as a strategy, and if you want to discuss the OP, I suggest you respond to them. In any case, if you wish to pursue this line of debate in contravention of the wishes of the OP, both your GC arguments can be dismantled. Art 3, Para 1, Sec d is incorrect because Rantissi was “taking active part in the hostilities.” Art 4 is irrelevant because Rantissi was not in the hands of the Israelis, as the article specifies. Note that it takes care to say that the individual is “in the hands of…the Occupying Power”, i.e. not that they are governed by it, but that they are specifically being held by it. ---
**Author:** ![kezami](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eb8c5e/32.png) [@kezami](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kezami)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/46 "2004-04-18T18:43:24Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > As long as your side is doing the killing, right? Excuse me, but my impression of war means there is killing on **both** sides. Anyway, as a long term strategy the killing of terrorist leaders is an effective one. Killing just the footsoldiers would just result in more fodder moving in to replace them. Now, targeting terrorist leaders would likely set the org back on it’s heels for a while, not to say demoralize the rank and file as well. The targeting has to be relentless to be effective over the long run, whatever that may be. ---
**Author:** ![Noone\_Special](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/noone_special/32/2863_2.png) [@Noone\_Special](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Noone_Special)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/47 "2004-04-18T19:54:40Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > As long as your side is doing the killing, right? Well, to put it bluntly, **yes!**. There’s a **war** going on here. It’s not between armies; it hasn’t been “declared”; yet a war it is. In a war, each side’s aim **is** exactly to be the side doing most of the killing. You think I wouldn’t rather play a footbal game against them? OF course I would. But _right now_ it’s war, so we’re behaving as though it were one. A few other points, fired at random back at previous contributions: 1. If Hamas are capable of taking out an Israeli leader… why “if”? Anyone remember the killing of Rehavam (“Gahndi”) Zeevi a few years back? So it isn’t as though they haven’t been trying. Their batting average is just a lot lower, and I hope it stays that way. And if they **do** manage to get Sharon, as someone above seemed to imply might be a good idea (or at least poetic justice of some sort), I just hope whoever likes the idea has measures in place to stop Bibi Netanyahu from inheriting him… 😛 2. Geneva Convention - see the bit above about this being a _de facto_ war situation. While Israel may well be in technical contradiction of the GC, I really don’t think we’re in contradiction of the basic moral underpinning of it - which is: Avoid hurting **non-combatants** (or no-longer-combatants) as much as possible. 3. Actually to address the OP - as others have stated more eloquently than me, the promised revenge for Yassin has so far failed to materialize. AND it isn’t like they weren’t trying for a “Mega-Attack” anyway… so it seems to be working. 4. Kill their leaders Vs. get out - the idea is to do **both**. Sharon aims to get out of Gaza, but **after** dealing Hamas such a blow that they won’t be able to claim “victory over the Zionist enemy” when we do get out. So the two channels of action are inseperable. I’m sure I’ve missed some other points along the way - I just got back from a 10-day vacation and wading through 45 responses right off the bat is stiff punishment 🙂 Dani ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [April 18, 2004, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/48 "2004-04-18T20:31:15Z")
> [@kezami](#): > > Excuse me, but my impression of war means there is killing on **both** sides. Good, I’ll remind you of that after the next time we get attacked. ---
**Author:** ![Fang](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/96bed5/32.png) [@Fang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fang)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 6:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/49 "2004-04-19T06:48:36Z")
> [@Linear Crack](#): > > Well, it will certainly make the next Hamas leader think twice before becoming the next Hamas leader. [Looks like this is already true:](http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/417013.html) > [@](#): > > Hamas has yet to decide on Rantisi’s successor. In principle, Dr. Mahmoud a-Zahar, who was considered Rantisi’s deputy, is supposed to head the organization. However, Israeli intelligence officials have learned that a-Zahar has sent signals to fellow Hamas leaders both in Gaza and overseas, particularly Khaled Mashal, that he does not want the top post, and certainly does not want it to be made public. > > Israeli officials assume that a-Zahar’s reluctance is due to the killing of Yassin and Rantisi as well as an attempted assassination against last summer in which he sustained injuries and one of his sons was killed. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/50 "2004-04-19T10:04:45Z")
> [@Fang](#): > > [Looks like this is already true:](http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/417013.html) If, when you say “true”, you actually mean “false”, I guess you’ve got a point. > [@](#): > > [Hamas keeps new leader’s name secret, Israel vows to continue the hunt > 4/18/2004 11:09 AM > By: Associated Press](http://www.news24houston.com/content/headlines/?ArID=27436&SecID=2) > > GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) – The Islamic militant group Hamas is keeping the identity of its new Gaza leader under wraps after losing two in less than a month to assassination by Israel. > > Hamas sources do confirm a new leader has been appointed to replace Abdel Aziz Rantisi. Israel’s Army Radio reports the new leader is Mahmoud Zahar, second in command to Rantisi. Hamas officials refuse to confirm the report. ---
**Author:** ![Eleusis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Eleusis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eleusis)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 10:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/51 "2004-04-19T10:08:29Z")
Come on, **Desmostylus** , they aren’t admitting the new leader’s name, let alone shouting it from the rooftops like last time. I respect you, but I think your anger is blinding you. In this case, true means true. ---
**Author:** ![Eleusis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f4b2a3/32.png) [@Eleusis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Eleusis)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 10:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/52 "2004-04-19T10:10:48Z")
To add to that, I say the guy obviously thought twice if he doesn’t want anyone to find out. ---
**Author:** ![Fang](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/96bed5/32.png) [@Fang](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fang)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/53 "2004-04-19T14:08:10Z")
> [@Desmostylus](#): > > If, when you say “true”, you actually mean “false”, I guess you’ve got a point. No, when I say “true” I mean “true”. I didn’t deny that Hamas would name a new leader; I just provided evidence for **LC** ’s statement that the next leader would “think twice” before becoming the next leader. Even assuming it is true that Hamas has appointed a new leader – not that I doubt the veracity of “Hamas sources” – that doesn’t refute a-Zahar’s or anybody else’s reluctance to take the position. In any case having to keep his identity a secret makes it a lot more difficult to do PR. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/54 "2004-04-19T14:25:04Z")
Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/55 "2004-04-19T14:38:47Z")
I think it should be conceded that, from a purely pragmatic POV, the policy of assassinating Hamas leaders appears to be working - based on the evidence. As opposed to earlier near-universal predictions, I don’t hear evidence that numbers and violence of terrorist attacks has increased. It has angered the Arab world, to a rousing chorus of yawns in Israel (who correctly I think believe that the Arab world is quite willing to fight Israel ‘to the last Palistinian’); Eurogovernments have condemned it - to the same reaction. Hamas leaders have been driven underground - it seems, contrary to earlier reports, that they _don’t_ actually “embrace martyrdom” or have unlimited replacements, but would prefer to _live_ in hiding. Of course, it is entirely possible that Hamas will carry out a terrible killing spree in the near future. So far (crossing fingers) they appear unable or unwilling to actually do it - and thus has evaporated much of their credible threat. Certainly, the most notable post-assassination response last time was not exactly an inspiring example of glorious resistance - i.e., wiring up a mentally challenged teenager with a bomb. Where were all those hundreds of scarey-looking masked militants with AK-47’s, that paraded so threateningly at the leader’s funeral? So far, a short-term pragmatic win, according to the actual evidence. Naturally, it is impossible to know whether it will be a long-term loss; and the morality of such assasinations is a quite seperate issue. ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/56 "2004-04-19T17:02:37Z")
> [@Noone Special](#): > > 1. Geneva Convention - see the bit above about this being a _de facto_ war situation. While Israel may well be in technical contradiction of the GC, I really don’t think we’re in contradiction of the basic moral underpinning of it - which is: Avoid hurting **non-combatants** (or no-longer-combatants) as much as possible. So Israel has undeniable proof that the other people killed in the attacks on Yassin and Rantisi were combatants? ---
**Author:** ![Olentzero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/90ced4/32.png) [@Olentzero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Olentzero)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/57 "2004-04-19T17:04:57Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > I think it should be conceded that, from a purely pragmatic POV, the policy of assassinating Hamas leaders appears to be working - based on the evidence. As opposed to earlier near-universal predictions, I don’t hear evidence that numbers and violence of terrorist attacks has increased. And we didn’t have 800 dead US soldiers in Iraq the first month after Bush declared and “end to hostilities” either. The response may not be immediate, but it would be foolish to think that it’s therefore not coming. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/58 "2004-04-19T18:19:19Z")
> [@Olentzero](#): > > And we didn’t have 800 dead US soldiers in Iraq the first month after Bush declared and “end to hostilities” either. The response may not be immediate, but it would be foolish to think that it’s therefore not coming. From the post you quoted: > [@](#): > > So far, a short-term pragmatic win, according to the actual evidence. **Naturally, it is impossible to know whether it will be a long-term loss;** and the morality of such assasinations is a quite seperate issue. On the other hand, it is also foolish to ignore positive evidence in favour of a pre-conceived negative opinion. Only time will tell if these acts were, pragmatically, positive or not from a long-term POV. The immediate effect appears positive, based on the actual evidence. The Bush invasion is not a good analogy - because that is a different issue: namely, whether or not it is a good idea to physically occupy the territory of one’s enemy in the ME. The Israeli answer appears to be “no”, seeing as they intend to leave Gaza and the WB. ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/59 "2004-04-19T18:45:49Z")
It is too early to assess positive or negative impacts in a meaningful way. For one thinfg heavy Israeli security activity aside from the assassinations may have rather more to do with Hamas’ quiescense as anything else. Anyway I am on record as saying: 1. I am ambivalent and will likely remain so about the policy of assassination in this context. I can make a convincing argument to myself from either side. 2. That aside, IMHO Yassin’s assassination was a tactical error. Whether anything comes of it or not, I think that making the call in the first place promised to little benefit against the _potential_ harm. And yes I do believe Israel needs to be concerned by international reaction - they don’t live in a vacume and yes, relations with the Arabs _can_ get worse. We’ll see where things end up, but I stand by my initial call on that. 3. However, if you are going to assassinate someone, Rantissi was probably the guy to hit. The potential positives are higher, the potential negatives lower. - Tamerlane ---
**Author:** ![Tamerlane](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tamerlane/32/7602_2.png) [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2004, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636/60 "2004-04-19T18:51:38Z")
> [@Tamerlane](#): > > 1. However, if you are going to assassinate someone, Rantissi was probably the guy to hit. The potential positives are higher, the potential negatives lower. > > - Tamerlane There shouldn’t be a “3” before that statement - I hadn’t been on record with that ;). Also, I meant relative positives and negatives compared to assassinating Yassin. Or in other words, if Israel was going to assassinate someone, it would have been better if they had hit Rantissi in the first place and never hit Yassin at all. IMO. - Tamerlane [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-israels-killing-of-hamas-leaders-a-good-strategy-in-the-long-run/240636.md?page=4)