Would the alternative (Israeli occupation of Gaza in order to be close enough to rocket launch areas to catch the terrorists) be more acceptable to you? Because Israel tried that before, and guess what? The UN hated that even more, and it didn’t even work.
Because like it or not, Israel’s army is called the Israeli Defense Force, and their number one priority should be to protect the Israeli population. Ignoring things that kill Israelis is the worst thing the IDF can do.
No, they do it because they hate Israel and don’t recognize its right to exist. That simple.
This isn’t the room for that debate, so I won’t respond to this.
That doesn’t change the fact that they are dangerous killers. Whether they attack because of brain washing or a draft, they still kill.
At least we can agree on SOMETHING. 
Though body counts still take people as described above as civilians.
Would you say that people who shoot soldiers or throw rocks at them should be arrested and tried?
Good, but you still insist that picture of the baby with guns is worse:
*Guess I should have added: As much as I hate those shirts, the Palestinian baby with guns is about 50 times worse. *
If you’re talking about the safety matter of having a baby photographed with may be loaded weapons then, yeah, I agree that it’s worse than a cartoon t-shirt. If you’re talking about the repugnancy of the message that that photo sends then you’re out of your mind. Both send the same kind of disgusting message, albeit in different ways.
Also, you’re missing the bigger picture here. There is, no doubt, a thick level of hatred that many Israelis feel for the Palestinians which, in turn, gives rise to the kind of atmosphere that would make someone think it was ok to make or wear something like that. It’s also the kind of atmosphere that makes people think they have a justification for everything Israel does, even if that includes killing children or other civilians.
I’m not really frum anymore, but no one who claims to be of the Torah can write off the deaths of innocent people as it being their own fault.
Well, what I was thinking of was similar; putting a real life child with a real life gun is sick and wrong; putting a picture with terrible humor sends the same horrible message. But the fact that the baby is ACTUALLY sitting there with guns and bullets sends the message stronger. Oh, and guess what career that kid is going to (be raised to) take?
Of course the atmosphere is bad. It’s one of Israel’s biggest problems. But luckily, it’s not that widespread. Can you find racism? Sure! But the racism is held back by both Israeli culture (which is pretty accepting) and Israeli law, which prevents much of it.
If you don’t believe the culture bit, read what I said earlier about the telephone incident.
Well, I don’t like it. Isn’t that the point of the thread? There are two major problems with that line of reasoning. The first is “if they can why can’t we” If Iran thought that it’s best protection is bomb the living daylights out of Israel they would be justified under that rational. Once you start killing civilians in other nations, protecting your population is not a valid enough justification.
The other problem is there isn’t any evidence that the bombings protect the Israeli population. There is however decades of evidence that if you retaliate they will retaliate back.
Let us say a single Israeli was shot to death. You can take out the killer, but it will lead to his brother killing two more Israelis. Would you do it?
This is pretty meaningless statement. They don’t hate Israel because they don’t think it should exist. Lots of things exist that I don’t think should. It doesn’t tend to make me hate them. You are mixing up reasons with consequences. And yes the why is vitality important. Israel is never going to stop the cycle of violence without understanding why they are hated.
Do you really expect Palestinians to pull that off? In one of their documentaries, Frontline asked a citizen in Afghanistan why he wouldn’t rebel against the Taliban. His explanation was that if America couldn’t defeat the Taliban, why would anyone expect him to do it?
So now you claim Israel has the right to kill truck loads of civilians whenever a small group of terrorists in that country decide to provoke it. You also claim that the economically depressed population of Palestine should defeat the terrorists themselves even when the Israeli army can’t do it.
Well what if Palestinians actually don’t want terrorists running their territories and provoking Israel with rockets? And what if they can’t leave the territory nor defeat the terrorists even if they wanted to? What would be your justification for Israel’s actions then?
Intent and cognition counts, in my morality.
Depends on where and when it happens, but as a general principle, yes.
Well in that case there is no hope for a Palestinian state, is there? We should stop pretending that the Palestinians have the will or the ability to have a state capable of living in peace with Israel. Maybe Israel should just conquer all the territories and make them part of Israel. Aside from the Palestinians having their feelings hurt they would be better off. Israel would punish the few bad apples that are interfering with the rest of the Palestinians who want peace. The economy and infrastructure would improve and Palestinian children woudn’t be turned into suicide bomber. In a few years thy;d all be Israelis getting beers and talking smack about the Germans who vacation there.
The irony, it burns! 
Firstly IME Palestinians who have criticised Palestinian terrorism whether at home or abroad are non existant.
There may well be some maybe but I’ve never seen or heard of them IRL, on the net or in the media.
Secondly Palestinian terrorists routinely and cynically conduct operations using their own people, preferably women and children, ( because it causes more of an emotional effect on the Western media) as human shields.
For them it is a win/win situation as either the I.D.F. withholds fire for fear of hitting them’ and Israelis both military and civilian may die.
Or they open fire, members of the human shield get killed and the Palestinians weep crocodile tears for the benefit of the worlds press .
Even though they put those very self same civilians into that situation quite deliberately.
As to the poster who said that there was a widespread belief that the I.D.F. wasn’t worried about causing Palastinian civilian casualties I’m sorry but thats nonsense.
If only for publicity purposes alone they’d do their level best to avoid them as they rely very heavily on American goodwill just to keep in existance.
As to it actually being a widespread belief I couldn’t say, but if it is then so is Creationism and Holocaust denial and they are just as believable.
Ah, so you haven’t encountered them, therefore they don’t exist? Yes, that’s a good start.
If Palestinian terrorists are using civilians as human shields, do you think they ask for volunteers beforehand?
As for Israel showing restraint, it seems to me and others that if they didn’t have the world watching them carefully, they would be treating Palestinians much less favourably.
No they don’t necessarily ask for volunteers beforehand.
Perhaps you could point me in the direction of Palestinians who have unambigiously condemned Palestinian terrorism?
If you can actually find any I think you’ll find that they’re pretty thin on the ground.
Speaking to Palestinians personally I never ever met one who did so.
And as I said before I’ve yet to see any in the press, on t.v., on the radio or on the internet or in books, magazines, live political speeches…
I think you are almost completely wrong on why Palestinians do what they do. I don’t think they have a hate Israel gene nor think that they believe killing their children and wives is good sport. They fight the way they do, because that is what they can do. They don’t have an army that hold its own against Israel. The leaders live among civilians because well where else would they live?
Anyways what the Palenstinians should do isn’t really the topic at hand. The topic is what should Israel do. If your answer is wait until the Palestinians do exactly what we want them to do you are going to waiting a long time.
Has there been any war in modern history in which civilians of other nations have not been killed?
Seems to me that your logic would effectively rule out fighting for any reason, no matter what aggression is directed at it, because nothing can justify risking an enemy civilan’s life - which is fine, but no nation on earth abides by such restraints.
I can understand such radical pacifism on the part of individuals, but it strikes me as utterly senseless to insist on a nation observing it.
The correct thing to do would be to simply send their commandos to take out these individual leaders and avoid civilian casualties at all costs. The problem with taking over Gaza is that the Israelis were pretty much occupying foreign land.
This obsession with civilian casualties is not trivial. You seem to want the Israelis to wipe out large areas of Palestine indiscriminantly which isn’t going to help them because 1) they don’t have the will or the power to go all the way (ie. US dropping the Bomb on Japan), and 2) they have to still live with these people or their neighbors
Such civilian deaths should be minimized; I don’t see anyone claiming it can be 100% prevented. But some things like blowing up hospitals or schools should not be done.
It is not radical pacifism to direct attacks on actual terrorists instead of civilians. Israel would be a fool not to observe it, as they have shown time and time again that they are not in an existential fight for survival. The intifada from the early 2000’s killed hundreds of Israelis, but the terrorists were not under any notion that it would completely be able to destroy Israel. Israel, no matter how many dozens of buses or pizza parlors are blown up, will survive. They should stop fighting like their country is on the verge of being overrun and employ less drastic tactics
The idea seems to be that these crazy arabs are hurling rockets at us for no reason at all. Perhaps there is an option other than military occupation or bombing schools. Maybe you can address some of the reasons why these crazy arabs are so mad.
Personally, I think Ghandi type marches would go a LOT further in galvanizing the international community against some of what is going on in Israel but I guess thats what made Ghandi such a special man.
I don’t know which picture sends the message stronger (seems like a matter of opinion) but you seem to think we should probably kill that kid now because he is going to grow up to shoot rockets at Israel. Perhaps Israel can do soemthing ebtween now and when that kid grows up that will reduce the child’s desire to hurl rockets at Israel.
I understand that the kids in Dublin don’t grow up hating the English nearly as much as they used to. In fact some of them don’t even know how to rig a carbomb.
No time to respond to the rest, but I most certainly do NOT think that.
Oh really? I want the Israelis to “…wipe out large areas of Palestine indiscriminantly”? 
That’s news to me. Perhaps you could back that up?
How about in the quote I quoted?
It is radical pacifism to demand perfection in avoiding civilian casualties while doing so.
By nature, terrorists (or “insurgents” or whatever terms are used) hide among civilians for cover. Rooting them out with no civilian casualties is not possible, though it should, to the extent possible, be minimized.
The reasonable position is that civilians should not be specifically targeted and that, to the extent reasonable under the circumstances, civilian casualties ought to be minimized.
Though when you say things like "You seem to want the Israelis to wipe out large areas of Palestine indiscriminantly ", you are not exactly bolstering my opinion of your ability to reasonably judge the situation.