Israelis v. Palestinians

Who is worse?

I think there is a difference between collateral damage and intended targets. Palestinian terrorists intend to kill as many jewish civilians as possible. Israel takes incredible steps to limit that damage when attacking a specific target. If the Palestinians had the Israeli power, the Israelis would not exist.

It is a provable assertion that Palestinians want Israel to cease existing, because it has been in the PLO platform since the beginning of that organization, and is still unapologetically the Hamas and Islamic Jihad position that Israel will be destroyed. On several occasions, Arab states have attacked Israel with the intent of wiping it out, while Israel, with the power to destroy all those in the Palestinian territories and most of their neighbors, do not do so. Unless the Palestinians are just joking...and really would be happy to let Israel exist.

Under the Geneva Conventions, forces have a duty to limit the amount of damage necessary to accomplish a legitimate military purpose. Killing the leadership of terrorist organizations is legitimate, and the Israelis do it with the least amount of force to accomplish the mission. So yes, they can reasonably believe that their actions will cause collateral damage, and so long as they do their best to limit that damage, it is a valid and legal use of force. In contrast, Palestinians seek out the softest targets they can find and try to kill as many as possible, including children. And they use their own children to carry out the attacks. There is no place in the conventions that allows this behavior.

Israelis have no duty to treat those who deny the right of existence for their nation as though it was simply a border dispute. Nor do they have to allow terrorists who hide in public spaces the ability to escape.

I simply do not believe it is even remotely close in legitimacy, legality, or morality. Israel is right to defend itself, Palestinians wrong to target children and civilians.