Israeli bombing has killed many thousands of Gazan civilians. Recently, an Israeli airstrike directly and intentionally hit a refugee camp, on their account to try and take out a Hamas leader:
My question for Israel’s supporters is this. If that camp had been filled with thousands of Israelis plus some Hamas targets, instead of Palestinians plus some Hamas targets, do you think Israel would have done this? And while we’re on the topic if the camp had been filled with American citizens (let us specify, lily white) plus some Hamas targets, do you think America would have tolerated this?
Indeed if, somehow by some dark magic, every time a Palestinian civilian died an Israeli civilian died, or an American civilian died, do you think Israel would be conducting its bombing campaign like this? Let us make it even starker. If every time five Palestinian civilians died, one random Israeli or American citizen died, even then, do you think Israel would be bombing like this?
The reason I ask is this. Both the law of war and the common sense morality of war, dictate that the intentional killing of civilians is impermissible. However, doctrines have developed whereby the foreseen, but unintended killing of civilians as a byproduct of trying to hit military targets is permissible. This exception only applies if the value of the military targets is proportionate to the civilian deaths. Once proportionality goes out the window, it’s as much murder as if you’d looked them in the eye while running a knife through them.
I’d suggest that a good test for proportionality is this: would you still be doing it if it were your own civilians? But in case you think the equality of humanity is too demanding a test for assessing claims of murder, you can set the bar at a five-to-one ratio if you like.
I want to know if you think Israel would still be doing what it is doing, by the means which it is doing it, under those conditions. I don’t.
Relevantly, 83% of the Israeli Jewish population and 70% of the general Israeli public think that Israel should take into account the suffering of civilian Gazans “Not at all” or “Not so much”. The current right-wing government is elected by a coalition of even more right-wing voters than that population baseline.
I have to wonder if those who meekly lament the "tragic but unavoidable" deaths in Gaza would agree to simply lay down their lives for the greater good if they and their families were the ones seeking shelter amid the rubble.
I honestly can't believe I've never heard this obvious point enunciated before.