slims---i mentioned the surreal distinction between civilians and other because i happened to catch a press conference last night involving someone or another from the united nations (it was late, i was tired so didn't catch who it was) on c-span in the context of which this question---so what you're saying is that men cannot be civilians?---came up and the response was basically a punt---we exclude men simply in order to be able to say something about casualties, but make no claim that the number of women and children killed and wounded is equal to the number of civilians killed and wounded.
which sounds like a disinformation victory for israel.
ink: have a look at this article, which i posted earlier:
Gaza tactics and long-term goals divide Israeli military analysts | World news | guardian.co.uk
the israelis have assumed repeatedly that violence coming from israel would delegitimate the political structure amongst palestinians. it is by this point self-evident that this is not only absurd in principle, but is demonstrably wrong in fact. it is precisely the opposite of what i think they should be doing. this is a consequence of the israeli right being in power, and nothing else.
what the israelis were trying to get at was the capacity of hamas--and the plo before that--to maintain solidarity by providing some basic services. it didn't work, it won't work.