|
Ok, you are right. I should explain my objection more clearly.
To begin with, I am not saying that rockets are excusable, and I am also not saying that Israel must stand by and do nothing. What I am saying is that what Israel is currently doing is inexcusable because it is a reaction completely disproportionate to the original provocation.
You began by saying you would react if someone shot at you, even if they missed. That is perfectly reasonable. You might shoot back, and that seems reasonable too. But if someone shot at you from a building populated by lots of innocent people in addition to your attacker, it would be extreme to knock down the whole building, yes? Certainly you are within your rights to act, but at some theoretical point, I think you would admit that the repercussions of your action on the innocent must be factored in, yes? Perhaps you think that many of the victims are not so innocent, or perhaps you regret what happens to them but feel that there is no other available course of action that might mitigate the loss of life. We could debate either of those points, but since they were never made explicit, all that came across to me was: "Israeli civilians are the victims of potentially lethal rocket fire, and therefore Israel's reaction is justified"-- without any reference at all to what that reaction actually is, what it looks like, what its human costs are, and what its impact will be on the continuing conflict.
I don't even actually think that the argument from proportionality is the best argument that what Israel is doing is wrong, nor an unassailable one. But I was so confused by your initial objection ('you can't use spitballs as an analogy for anything lethal') that I felt compelled to explain myself better.
|