Excellent targeting by the IDF. I believe that we have a divide in the US regarding self-defense. There has been much propaganda since the 60's to convince people using violence to stop violence is a grievous sin. Better to die at the hands of a criminal than kill the criminal to stop the criminal. All kinds of people have been led down this road. Retired from the USN and I have no such problem. I wish the IDF happy hunting and good targeting.
From my own anecdotal experience vis-a-vis family and friends in the formerly United States, I’d venture that cowardice and the Democrat gun taboo are to blame for the lack of American Jewish “creativity” when it comes to actual tikun olam.
@BENJAMINKERSTEIN surprised you didn't mention Spielberg's 2005 Munich, because it was specifically about targeted killings of Palestinian leaders based in Lebanon, Tunisia, and other Arab countries who had masterminded the 1972 massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. Most of these missions subsequently disrupted the operations of various terrorist groups such as Black September and the PLO. Some of them were led by soldiers who later became senior Israeli leaders, such as Moshe Yaalon and Ehud Barak. Few of these operations involved the shedding of innocent blood.
But some did, generating worldwide condemnation, disrupting diplomatic negotiations, fuelling Palestinian anger and, most important, increasing the number of terrorists.
The lesson? Adhere to International Humanitarian Law, both the spirit and the letter. Example: the killing of Saleh Al-Arouri, the deputy chief of Hamas's political bureau and one of the founders of the group's armed wing, the Qassam Brigades, on Tuesday 2 January 2024. Apparently there were zero civilians killed. Nor any Hizbullah Arouri had been meeting, because that would have been counter-productive.
I'm not sure what you mean by international humanitarian law. There's no law that says collateral damage in the course of a defensive operation is per se illegal. Nor do the major conventions that I know of apply to the current war, since they must be reciprocal to exercise any authority. Hamas is not a signatory to these conventions and in any case deliberately violates them as a matter of policy. The fact that the international community routinely lies about this is telling but irrelevant. Israel can undertake its own policies to safeguard innocent lives if it wishes and as it's doing, of course. I've written on this issue before https://www.jns.org/international-law-is-biased-in-favor-of-terrorism/
Most of us are disgusted that Hamas are human shielding, and that inconvenience leads many of us to feel that we are therefore absolved of responsibility for our subsequent actions. 'He started it' is a defence we all become familiar with from the schoolyard.
In any case, wouldn't the treaty you propose be redundant if IHL was actually applied with the caveat that you point to?!
Israel knows what I "mean by international humanitarian law", and has very often in the past scrupulously adhered to both its letter and its spirit, not only because it is moral or legal but also because it makes military and diplomatic sense too. The targeted killing of Salah Shehada is one of many examples, first going to the PA to get him arrested, who refused to do the right thing. The operation was called off its first eight attempts because Shehada was always accompanied by his daughter. His daughter was a civilian, and that's why so many attempts were called off. The operation obeying the law also made good military and diplomatic sense too.
There are so many others. I admit it, I got a thrill over the years whenever the Munich terrorists were 'brought to justice' one way or another. I'm admitting to this schadenfreude because the passion in war can get out of hand. It's why adherence to IHL and Jus In Bello is the not the most but the very least that should be done.
I don't think we actually disagree all that much. Like you, I think Israel should do its best to avoid civilian casualties. Unfortunately, however, that sometimes simply isn't possible. This is also the case regarding the assassination of terrorist leaders. In certain cases, one must consider whether letting that terrorist live will actually result in the deaths of more--perhaps many more--civilians than will be killed in the assassination itself. War is the devil's arithmetic, I fear, and there's nothing any of us can do to change that.
I start with a PS: thank you, Rafi Magen @JEWSTRONG, you are right for pointing out my delusions of navel gazing.
The killing of the World Central Kitchen aid workers is another example of stretching IHL: it was suspected a terrorist was somewhere in the convoy, so the whole motorcade was destroyed. This is what happens in war, Mr Netanyahu said. What he calls collateral damage is what many call something else. Benjamin's get-out clauses have raised Gaza to the ground, so how is that working "towards a constructive end"?
As with the targeted killings after Munich, Israel has always needed considerable international support. Were Israel Russia, it would have been slapped with massive sanctions by now. How can Israel rehabilitate itself?
The despair, though, is far worse. Spawned by Israel's conduct of this war, many more Palestinian terrorists will kill many more Israeli civilians in the decades (and probably generations) to come.
It's Israel that needs to be introspective, don't you think?
Excellent article and the linked article is also an excellent analysis. American Jews, American Blacks and other Americans bought into the peace culture of the 60’s probably really hoping for peace. However, the political party that supported the “Peace-nicks “ was never really about peace, just control. It is not difficult to understand why many of the middle class are non-violent. They generally worked hard to get to where they are and understand that violence will destroy them first. The super-rich profit from wars and violence, the poor are the ones sent to the battlefield. History always repeats itself.
However, it is important to study true history and determine who and what organizations actually have historically oppressed minorities regardless of race, creed or color. In U.S. History, it has and remains the Democrat Socialists who were the oppressors. History repeats itself.
Killing terrorists is definitely part of repairing the world.
Excellent targeting by the IDF. I believe that we have a divide in the US regarding self-defense. There has been much propaganda since the 60's to convince people using violence to stop violence is a grievous sin. Better to die at the hands of a criminal than kill the criminal to stop the criminal. All kinds of people have been led down this road. Retired from the USN and I have no such problem. I wish the IDF happy hunting and good targeting.
From my own anecdotal experience vis-a-vis family and friends in the formerly United States, I’d venture that cowardice and the Democrat gun taboo are to blame for the lack of American Jewish “creativity” when it comes to actual tikun olam.
Wonderfully blunt political appraisal !
On a related issue, consider the widespread Anti Semitism among American blacks and how it warps their conceptions of the Mid East
https://davidgottfried.substack.com/p/why-american-jews-should-forget-about
@BENJAMINKERSTEIN surprised you didn't mention Spielberg's 2005 Munich, because it was specifically about targeted killings of Palestinian leaders based in Lebanon, Tunisia, and other Arab countries who had masterminded the 1972 massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics. Most of these missions subsequently disrupted the operations of various terrorist groups such as Black September and the PLO. Some of them were led by soldiers who later became senior Israeli leaders, such as Moshe Yaalon and Ehud Barak. Few of these operations involved the shedding of innocent blood.
But some did, generating worldwide condemnation, disrupting diplomatic negotiations, fuelling Palestinian anger and, most important, increasing the number of terrorists.
The lesson? Adhere to International Humanitarian Law, both the spirit and the letter. Example: the killing of Saleh Al-Arouri, the deputy chief of Hamas's political bureau and one of the founders of the group's armed wing, the Qassam Brigades, on Tuesday 2 January 2024. Apparently there were zero civilians killed. Nor any Hizbullah Arouri had been meeting, because that would have been counter-productive.
I'm not sure what you mean by international humanitarian law. There's no law that says collateral damage in the course of a defensive operation is per se illegal. Nor do the major conventions that I know of apply to the current war, since they must be reciprocal to exercise any authority. Hamas is not a signatory to these conventions and in any case deliberately violates them as a matter of policy. The fact that the international community routinely lies about this is telling but irrelevant. Israel can undertake its own policies to safeguard innocent lives if it wishes and as it's doing, of course. I've written on this issue before https://www.jns.org/international-law-is-biased-in-favor-of-terrorism/
Thank you for responding, Benjamin.
Most of us are disgusted that Hamas are human shielding, and that inconvenience leads many of us to feel that we are therefore absolved of responsibility for our subsequent actions. 'He started it' is a defence we all become familiar with from the schoolyard.
Your excellent piece in JNS, Benjamin, uses a source in International Humanitarian Law, the 4th Geneva Convention, and the 4th is the one which specifically concerns itself with protection of civilians, not the interests of the warring parties (https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/gciv-1949/article-2/commentary/1958?activeTab=1949GCs-APs-and-commentaries).
In any case, wouldn't the treaty you propose be redundant if IHL was actually applied with the caveat that you point to?!
Israel knows what I "mean by international humanitarian law", and has very often in the past scrupulously adhered to both its letter and its spirit, not only because it is moral or legal but also because it makes military and diplomatic sense too. The targeted killing of Salah Shehada is one of many examples, first going to the PA to get him arrested, who refused to do the right thing. The operation was called off its first eight attempts because Shehada was always accompanied by his daughter. His daughter was a civilian, and that's why so many attempts were called off. The operation obeying the law also made good military and diplomatic sense too.
There are so many others. I admit it, I got a thrill over the years whenever the Munich terrorists were 'brought to justice' one way or another. I'm admitting to this schadenfreude because the passion in war can get out of hand. It's why adherence to IHL and Jus In Bello is the not the most but the very least that should be done.
I don't think we actually disagree all that much. Like you, I think Israel should do its best to avoid civilian casualties. Unfortunately, however, that sometimes simply isn't possible. This is also the case regarding the assassination of terrorist leaders. In certain cases, one must consider whether letting that terrorist live will actually result in the deaths of more--perhaps many more--civilians than will be killed in the assassination itself. War is the devil's arithmetic, I fear, and there's nothing any of us can do to change that.
I start with a PS: thank you, Rafi Magen @JEWSTRONG, you are right for pointing out my delusions of navel gazing.
The killing of the World Central Kitchen aid workers is another example of stretching IHL: it was suspected a terrorist was somewhere in the convoy, so the whole motorcade was destroyed. This is what happens in war, Mr Netanyahu said. What he calls collateral damage is what many call something else. Benjamin's get-out clauses have raised Gaza to the ground, so how is that working "towards a constructive end"?
As with the targeted killings after Munich, Israel has always needed considerable international support. Were Israel Russia, it would have been slapped with massive sanctions by now. How can Israel rehabilitate itself?
The despair, though, is far worse. Spawned by Israel's conduct of this war, many more Palestinian terrorists will kill many more Israeli civilians in the decades (and probably generations) to come.
It's Israel that needs to be introspective, don't you think?
Bubeleh, none of your navel gazing helps one iota. Maybe devote a fraction of your writing effort towards a constructive end as Benjamin has done.
Excellent article and the linked article is also an excellent analysis. American Jews, American Blacks and other Americans bought into the peace culture of the 60’s probably really hoping for peace. However, the political party that supported the “Peace-nicks “ was never really about peace, just control. It is not difficult to understand why many of the middle class are non-violent. They generally worked hard to get to where they are and understand that violence will destroy them first. The super-rich profit from wars and violence, the poor are the ones sent to the battlefield. History always repeats itself.
However, it is important to study true history and determine who and what organizations actually have historically oppressed minorities regardless of race, creed or color. In U.S. History, it has and remains the Democrat Socialists who were the oppressors. History repeats itself.