Israel's problem seems to me to be the variation of the Trolley Problem in which five people are on the track and will be killed by the trolley unless you throw the switch to another track where there is only one person--but that one person is your own child. Is your moral duty to save more people or your own child? How many innocent Gazans should Israel be willing to kill to save 20 live hostages? I don't know the answer. But the non-Jewish world seems to believe Israel should sacrifice their own to save innocent Gazans. I wonder if they would want their own governments to act that way, if it were their children held hostage. When this war ends, if it ever ends, there will be 50,000 dead civilians in Gaza and 2000 dead Israelis. Hamas will have won the PR battle. Israel will have won the war. But both victories will be equally hollow to those who have lost loved ones.
Yes, and the other Trolley Problem, which should be of great interest, is that of the live hostages vs. the dead Israeli soldiers Israeli Mothers are weeping in both cases. A dilemma not to be quibbled with.
With all due respect Jay, I just can't see that Israel has such a "problem".
Self-defense isn't some hypothetical moral *choice*. Self-defense doesn't even require contemplating the morality of a response. You simply respond with the necessary force to survive.
Isreal isn't the aggressor. The IDF is only fighting with the goal to -stop- the killing, to -stop- the terror. Hamas must be and will be defeated.
I appreciate your view, but I don't agree. When someone is hitting you or shooting at you, you don't think, you act to preserve your safety or your life; once they retreat, you make a reasoned decision about whether to pursue them. I'd say Israel was fighting in self-defense on October 7, 2023. Once Hamas went back to Gaza, Israel began fighting a strategic war with two goals: destroying Hamas and bringing home the hostages. I'm not sure there's any moral difference. But the optics are different. To call what Israel is doing self-defense would be like saying the US killed Bin Laden in self-defense.
I think there's a military term for what Israel did. (Excuse my snark...) It's called destroying the enemy. Another word might be: winning — creating the circumstances whereby there will be no chance for the enemy to regroup. Recall: Hamas isn't the Taliban, several thousand miles from America. It is next door, and still a fighting force.
No. It’s like an intruder prepares to kill your other child tomorrow while hiding behind their mothers, wives and daughters. They just killed your first child and are loading the bullets for tomorrow’s onslaught.
And they have called 911 to report the imminent death of their mothers, wives and daughters.
After the "retreat"... If you know for certain that they only plan on returning to kill you in your sleep, rape your wife while your children watch and then take them as hostages -yes- you must pursue them.
Isreal is responding with a reasoned and logical pursuit.
I am not the one to have this argument with--I don't necessarily disagree with the choices Israel has made. But they are choices. If they weren't, there wouldn't be parents and families of hostages urging a cease fire to get their relatives back.
You've hit on the rawest nerve. And it's right to point that out. Let me hit on one more. I believe I'd mentioned it my essay: Hamas will never give up all the kidnapped people they hold. Ask yourself, why they would willing surrender the only bargaining chip they hold? When they do, they know they are finished. Surely, you must know this. If not, I'd be interested in hearing a good reason or two that explains why Hamas would give up everyone — including the dead bodies. I would never underestimate their intelligence, at least as it pertains to their hatred of Israel and the Jewish people.
Far be it for me to guess what Hamas will do. Their logic is not our logic. Your argument certainly makes sense. But I could also imagine them releasing all the hostages in order to get time to regroup, reload, and recruit during the presumed cease fire.
According to the Midrash the angels observed [the drowning of the Egyptians in the Red Sea] from on high and also wanted to chime in and praise. G-d reprimanded them saying, “My creations are drowning in the sea and you wish to sing?!” From here we learn that that the joy of the salvation must be tempered by sorrow over the destruction of the enemy, as in the verse “Do not rejoice in the downfall of your enemy” (Prov. 24:17). https://ohr.edu/3474
Incredibly insightful! Redemption of hostages is a core Jewish value with it's basis in the sanctity of innocent human life. Any innocent Gazans are prevented from leaving Gaza by Hamas. Hamas murders any Gazan that resists their radical Islamic terrorism. Hamas is directly responsible for any innocent Gazans that are killed, not Israel.
A number of thoughts. 1st it was a good well thought out piece. Second, Why didn't hamas build things like bomb shelters for the civilians? Should the the Israelis care more for their people (Hamas ) people then the leadership does? And yes while innocent does apply to the babies but one doubts to the teens with guns and the mothers who are perfectly ok with there kids being killed. If not where are the 100, 000 of thousands of at least women protesting.
In your infinite wisdom, please educate the rest of us exactly how to permanently eliminate the Hamas genocidal threat whilst not harming the civilians behind and underneath which they are hiding - their main strategy to maximize their own civilian casualties in order to cater to their Western useful idiots enablers.And it's interesting that while reciting that horrifying litany of destruction you neglected to mention that 25,000 of the already proven falsified Hamas reported casualty figures of 58,000 are identified terrorists, and it also includes an unknown number killed by the 2000+ misfired rockets that fell within the Strip, plus those shot directly by Hamas, plus combatants disguised as civilians, including minors/women who are directly participating (this has been repeatedly documented, with subsequent IDF casualties due directly to reluctance to fire on children), plus those who died from natural causes. And this perhaps 1.5:1 civilian:combatant ratio is unprecedented in modern urban warfare, as attested to by numerous military experts.
Tragically innocent civilians always suffer and die in war. Perhaps it’s best not to start one in the first place, with an unprovoked invasion and the most savage single day massacre and mass abductions this century.
Peter's column is thorough, well-thought out & grounded, and accurate.
It would be nice to think those calling for Israel to end the war unilaterally, would read it and think through the implications.
These horrible deaths are not caused by Israel; they are caused by Hamas and their chosen tactics.
Israel's actions are not for retribution; they are for prevention.
Israel's problem seems to me to be the variation of the Trolley Problem in which five people are on the track and will be killed by the trolley unless you throw the switch to another track where there is only one person--but that one person is your own child. Is your moral duty to save more people or your own child? How many innocent Gazans should Israel be willing to kill to save 20 live hostages? I don't know the answer. But the non-Jewish world seems to believe Israel should sacrifice their own to save innocent Gazans. I wonder if they would want their own governments to act that way, if it were their children held hostage. When this war ends, if it ever ends, there will be 50,000 dead civilians in Gaza and 2000 dead Israelis. Hamas will have won the PR battle. Israel will have won the war. But both victories will be equally hollow to those who have lost loved ones.
Yes, and the other Trolley Problem, which should be of great interest, is that of the live hostages vs. the dead Israeli soldiers Israeli Mothers are weeping in both cases. A dilemma not to be quibbled with.
With all due respect Jay, I just can't see that Israel has such a "problem".
Self-defense isn't some hypothetical moral *choice*. Self-defense doesn't even require contemplating the morality of a response. You simply respond with the necessary force to survive.
Isreal isn't the aggressor. The IDF is only fighting with the goal to -stop- the killing, to -stop- the terror. Hamas must be and will be defeated.
I appreciate your view, but I don't agree. When someone is hitting you or shooting at you, you don't think, you act to preserve your safety or your life; once they retreat, you make a reasoned decision about whether to pursue them. I'd say Israel was fighting in self-defense on October 7, 2023. Once Hamas went back to Gaza, Israel began fighting a strategic war with two goals: destroying Hamas and bringing home the hostages. I'm not sure there's any moral difference. But the optics are different. To call what Israel is doing self-defense would be like saying the US killed Bin Laden in self-defense.
I think there's a military term for what Israel did. (Excuse my snark...) It's called destroying the enemy. Another word might be: winning — creating the circumstances whereby there will be no chance for the enemy to regroup. Recall: Hamas isn't the Taliban, several thousand miles from America. It is next door, and still a fighting force.
No. It’s like an intruder prepares to kill your other child tomorrow while hiding behind their mothers, wives and daughters. They just killed your first child and are loading the bullets for tomorrow’s onslaught.
And they have called 911 to report the imminent death of their mothers, wives and daughters.
Not a theoretical problem, rather life and death.
After the "retreat"... If you know for certain that they only plan on returning to kill you in your sleep, rape your wife while your children watch and then take them as hostages -yes- you must pursue them.
Isreal is responding with a reasoned and logical pursuit.
I am not the one to have this argument with--I don't necessarily disagree with the choices Israel has made. But they are choices. If they weren't, there wouldn't be parents and families of hostages urging a cease fire to get their relatives back.
You've hit on the rawest nerve. And it's right to point that out. Let me hit on one more. I believe I'd mentioned it my essay: Hamas will never give up all the kidnapped people they hold. Ask yourself, why they would willing surrender the only bargaining chip they hold? When they do, they know they are finished. Surely, you must know this. If not, I'd be interested in hearing a good reason or two that explains why Hamas would give up everyone — including the dead bodies. I would never underestimate their intelligence, at least as it pertains to their hatred of Israel and the Jewish people.
Shi’ism ideology.
Far be it for me to guess what Hamas will do. Their logic is not our logic. Your argument certainly makes sense. But I could also imagine them releasing all the hostages in order to get time to regroup, reload, and recruit during the presumed cease fire.
I'm only arguing for logic.
Isreal will succeed and I'll just leave it at that. Best regards-
It’s not a theoretical problem - it’s the Shi’ism ideology.
And all because of Shi’ism ideology. Still looking for the 12th Imam. Hard to believe in this day and age.
That fateful flight from Paris to Tehran in 1979.
According to the Midrash the angels observed [the drowning of the Egyptians in the Red Sea] from on high and also wanted to chime in and praise. G-d reprimanded them saying, “My creations are drowning in the sea and you wish to sing?!” From here we learn that that the joy of the salvation must be tempered by sorrow over the destruction of the enemy, as in the verse “Do not rejoice in the downfall of your enemy” (Prov. 24:17). https://ohr.edu/3474
Incredibly insightful! Redemption of hostages is a core Jewish value with it's basis in the sanctity of innocent human life. Any innocent Gazans are prevented from leaving Gaza by Hamas. Hamas murders any Gazan that resists their radical Islamic terrorism. Hamas is directly responsible for any innocent Gazans that are killed, not Israel.
A number of thoughts. 1st it was a good well thought out piece. Second, Why didn't hamas build things like bomb shelters for the civilians? Should the the Israelis care more for their people (Hamas ) people then the leadership does? And yes while innocent does apply to the babies but one doubts to the teens with guns and the mothers who are perfectly ok with there kids being killed. If not where are the 100, 000 of thousands of at least women protesting.
You are too nice.
This is what I would have responded:
In your infinite wisdom, please educate the rest of us exactly how to permanently eliminate the Hamas genocidal threat whilst not harming the civilians behind and underneath which they are hiding - their main strategy to maximize their own civilian casualties in order to cater to their Western useful idiots enablers.And it's interesting that while reciting that horrifying litany of destruction you neglected to mention that 25,000 of the already proven falsified Hamas reported casualty figures of 58,000 are identified terrorists, and it also includes an unknown number killed by the 2000+ misfired rockets that fell within the Strip, plus those shot directly by Hamas, plus combatants disguised as civilians, including minors/women who are directly participating (this has been repeatedly documented, with subsequent IDF casualties due directly to reluctance to fire on children), plus those who died from natural causes. And this perhaps 1.5:1 civilian:combatant ratio is unprecedented in modern urban warfare, as attested to by numerous military experts.
Tragically innocent civilians always suffer and die in war. Perhaps it’s best not to start one in the first place, with an unprovoked invasion and the most savage single day massacre and mass abductions this century.
Thank you.
Great piece Peter. Concise thoughtful and accurate.