This just in: Israel returns fire on Syrian targets from the Golan Heights

[DinoDoc]

The death rate of innocents on the Palestinian side is almost 18 times higher than Israel's.

So? The point of a “proportional” response is that it is intended to end the current hostilities and return to the status quo. And in this case, it implies that the status quo prior to the provocations was acceptable.

Hamas speaks of a “truce,” but their definition of a “truce” is one that no one else would recognize as valid. It consisted of a steady, constant bombardment of Israel by rocket and mortar shells. In the past when they have declared the truce to be at an end, they escalated the attacks, which in turn prompted Israel’s air strikes. Had Israel restrained itself to a “proportional” attack, then it would have been saying that the prior status quo — the rocket and mortar attacks reduced to one or two a day — was acceptable.

[Asher]

The nature of these rockets is they don't need permanent installations.

That's exactly why despite 1350+ air strikes, the rockets keep on coming.

It's a game of whack-a-mole, but every time they miss they kill civilians.

[giblets]

Let's put this in perspective again. The rockets are decidedly low-tech, Israel has a hugely expensive anti-rocket defense system, and 3 people have died after thousands of rockets.

In response, 113 Palestinians have died.

The death rate of innocents on the Palestinian side is almost 18 times higher than Israel's.

At what point is the country in "self-defense" slaughtering an unacceptably high number of civilians? It's the equivalent of getting punched by someone, then you marching over to their house and gun down the guy and all of his family. Self-defense becomes a stretch in such a case.

If one country attacks another country that is ten times stronger, they'll end up suffering ten times more casualties. SHOCKER. Maybe Hamas should agree to a cease fire.

[Sava]

If one country attacks another country that is ten times stronger, they'll end up suffering ten times more casualties. SHOCKER. Maybe Hamas should agree to a cease fire.

Hamas isn't a country. Nor is Israel under attack from a country.

Could Hamas membership even fill a high school gymnasium?

[DinoDoc]

Hamas is the government of the Gaza Strip.

[regexcellent]

Maybe the dead civilians wouldn't be there if Hamas fighters wore uniforms and didn't use human shields. You should be blaming Hamas for every single civilian casualty.

[Hauldren Collider]

I have pointed out multiple times to Asher the ways in which Israel is exceedingly careful to reduce civilian casualties. He has ignored each one, Ben-style. I'm getting tired of his dishonest method of debate.

[Hauldren Collider]

Egypt has more allies and can put up more of a fight.

Egypt would get smashed to pieces if Israel decided to attack. The reason they don't attack Israel is because the Egyptian military cares about self-preservation and the lives of its citizens. It cares if its country loses lives and livelihoods. Fatah does. Jordan does. Egypt does. Syria does (Kind of. Assad doesn't want to lose a war). Hamas doesn't.

[regexcellent]

In 1967 Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan all attacked at once.

Today if Egypt attacked, Jordan wouldn't join them. Syria would love to but has its own problems. Lebanon is fractured and at best Hezbollah would launch a missile barrage. Egypt's military would be fighting a 1-front war against a superior foe with no help. The Israelis would be in Cairo in a couple weeks.

[dannubis]

If you try to shoot me, then hide behind your brother and I accidentally shoot him instead of you, I was acting in self-defense.

While that may be true, you shoudl still go to jail for killing an innocent bystander.

[Felch]

The charge in that case would be manslaughter, if anything. Manslaughter is not a war crime.

[Asher]

I have pointed out multiple times to Asher the ways in which Israel is exceedingly careful to reduce civilian casualties. He has ignored each one, Ben-style. I'm getting tired of his dishonest method of debate.

What's dishonest is espousing the same rhetoric over and over and then accuse people who don't buy it as engaging in a dishonest method of debate. You've done nothing but say "they're careful because they are! They are careful because they do careful things. Why do you still argue this. Did you not see my posts? They are careful! You are being dishonest!"

[regexcellent]

In 2008/2009 (Operation Cast Lead) the Israelis took 3 hour breaks from fighting to let relief in and let civilians evacuate, get aid and food, etc. That is a ridiculous amount of restraint which significantly improved Hamas' ability to keep fighting, but the Israelis did it anyway for humanitarian reasons.

The Israelis use very good operational intelligence but it's very difficult to precisely kill people without hitting bystanders. It would be much easier if all of Hamas' men were sitting in a barracks wearing uniforms instead of quartered among civilians, moving among civilians, and dressing like civilians. Of course, then Hamas would lose immediately. The only reason Hamas is able to survive is because the Israelis show restraint in attacking near civilians.

[Asher]

Mmhmm.

[giblets]

Excellent rebuttal, Asher. The Israelis are such savage monsters.