Hi Rhian,

"Just because something is the “official Israeli line” doesn’t make it wrong." True, but it does remind me of that old adage; "The first causality of war is truth", and in this situation I think that is the case. Its an inescapable fact, 40,000 Palestinians have died at the hands of the Israelis, not all could have been the simple shields of Hamas, I think there has been an element of retribution against the innocent Palestinian people on the part of the Israelis, which is a war crime in my book.

Hi Paul

Yes, the old saying about truth being the first casualty on war has a lot of validity. In this and most other conflicts, it pays to fact check claims by all sides where possible.

But while neither side should be taken at their word, that does not mean they are equally untrustworthy. In most cases where Israel makes a claim that something is true and its enemies say it is false, or vice versa, independent analysis suggests Israel is correct. Hamas blamed the al-Ahli Hospital explosion early in the conflict on Israel, but it was probably a misfire of a rocket fired from Gaza and aimed at Israel. Iran blamed Israel for the bombs that killed dozens of people commemorating general Qassem Soleimani in January, then Islamic State admitted responsibility. Israel was blamed for the rocket explosion that killed 12 Druze children in the Golan Heights, but it was more likely fired by Hezbollah. Hamas denied hiding military facilities under hospitals. The IDF has taken journalists to see the tunnels for themselves. Hamas denied that it committed mass atrocities in its October attacks, but there is overwhelming evidence of widespread rape, torture, mutilation and murder.

The tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths are utterly tragic, and I agree that if this was indeed retribution then it would be a war crime. But I’m not convinced it is, for several reasons. As the expert I cited earlier indicated, Israel has done more to minimise civilian casualties than any other military. Given its superiority in weaponry and manpower, if its intent was to kill large numbers of Gazans, the numbers would surely be even higher. The number of new casualties each day has fallen substantially in recent weeks, as Israel appears close to achieving its military objectives in Gaza. Unnecessary civilian casualties do nothing to advance Israel’s military objectives and undermine its support internationally.

[...continued]

«but laws exist precisely to minimise suffering.»

That may be the intention, maybe even a good intention, but in reality nobody can prevent another from suffering. Once someone did something bad, they will have to pay for it accordingly and suffer no matter what: one could say (as a figure of speech) that God sees to it that they suffer the consequences of their actions, that none of which can escape his oversight.

But then, if you believe in chaos, then I perfectly understand why you conclude that laws can reduce sufferings.

«Functioning societies don’t rely on chaos or gut feelings to make decisions about justice or public safety.»

For that you would first need to show me a functioning society.
A society where people are coerced to follow laws (moreover when it is a system of laws they never freely consented to have anything to do with), and live in fear is, in my view, a dysfunctional society.

A society that attempts to produce justice, duplicating the justice that is already inherent in the universe, is as ridiculous as that king who commands the sun to rise and set at the exact times when the sun would do so anyway.

As for safety, the only way to be safe is to refrain from doing evil, nothing else can save you, but those who believe in chaos shrug it as "accidents".

«Participation isn’t futile as you make it sound.»

Things changed historically once majorities opposed slavery and supported suffrage.
However, the majority still believes in chaos and therefore expects or wishes the state to save them (ultimately from themselves), which it cannot, but they believe that it can.

I can't see that changing in my lifetime.

«It's about finding common ground so that society can function without descending into chaos.»

How is common ground possible between those who believe that the default is chaos and those who understand that we live in a God-given cosmos?

Hi Rhian,

The Gaza War is a dirty war, there is no such thing as a clean war, heaven help those poor bastards trapped in that situation, innocent people on both sides, Israelis and Palestinian. For me the actions of Hamas, totally wrong, retribution by the Zionists, totally wrong. Of course both sides consider themselves to be in the right, the old God is on my side BS, justification of all kinds, more BS. As a pacifist I find nothing right and good in war, its totally abhorrent to me, it has no value, it serves no purpose.

"What this means isn't that they are actually against the war, which was started by Hamas on October 7 with a grisly and unprovoked massacre. It means that they are against Israel winning the war."

Israel already lost the war.
October 6, no-one was talking about a 2 state solution.
With the Abraham accords and normalising relations with Saudi Arabia the 2 State solution was dead.
All that changed on Oct 7.

Israel's stated aim was to defeat Hamas.
That's not going to happen and never was, you can't bean an ideology.
Now the world sees Israel for who it really is, it's more a pariah on the world stage than ever before.

The world 'anti-Semitic' doesn't even really work anymore when it comes from pro-genocide mouths.
The land thieves got a smack in the mouth when Hezbolloh kicked them out of Northern Israel, which is actually Lebanon anyway.
Israel is becoming economically non viable, right now they need help from their Arab US puppet ruler neighbours (axis of assistance) and their adversaries (axis of resistance) have shown all they have to do is send a single hypersonic missile to get through all their air defense and hit them anywhere, anytime.
- And I bet Israel knows there's plenty more where that came from.

Finally a 2 state solution can't be enacted without creating civil war amongst the settlers that will rip the country apart.

The reason for their pager knee jerk reaction was probably because their Unit 8200 got blown up, the country is on the verge of civil war, there's no deal to get the hostages back.

Netanyahu's trying to order an attack on Lebanon, but even his military are opposing it.
- All this from a man who just wants to avoid going to prison.

Hamas knew the price they would have to pay.
If you take that into account, despite the civilian casualties it looks like the Palestinians have fared better overall, despite the destruction of their homes and subjugation.

Israel is on the ropes.

Dear Critic,

I sadly have to agree with most of your analysis, except that:

* Northern Israel is not Lebanon.
* That missile you were speaking of was not super-sonic after all. It was intercepted but not completely destroyed and therefore broken into several parts which were difficult to re-target.
* Unit 8200 was not blown up. The pagers were targeted at that particular time because two Hezbollah operatives in Europe became suspicious of the devices and were about to expose them.

Netanyahu did not actually want to attack Lebanon - after all, what does he care about Israel's displaced northern population?
All he planned, was to order his defence-minister, Gallant, to attack Lebanon, then see the latter refuse or linger and use it as a pretext to sack him. Surprisingly, Gallant obeyed and actually did attack Lebanon and now Netanyahu is searching for the next excuse.

Why sack Gallant, which the Americans view as "the only responsible adult in Netanyahu's government"? So that he can use his position to bribe a small faction (4 MK's) that formerly left the Likud party to return to the Likud and his coalition, thus use their votes to override the high-court by legislating a conscription-exemption for the Ultra-Orthodox, so that the Haredi parties don't leave his coalition, so that he can remain prime-minister and out of jail.