Israel is responsible for every action they take. If they blow up a bunch of people to save a few, either that’s the right decision or the wrong decision. Same with other events in this war. You might argue that bloodshed is all justified one way or another, but I don’t get the sense that they just have no responsibility.
It’s worth remembering that the US has accumulated a rather high body count this century in the Middle East and Central Asia, sometimes due to mistakes, and sometimes due to the cold calculus of fighting the wars it’s been involved in.
I can easily believe some US decision-makers deciding a 4-hostages for 100 casualties ratio being acceptable, given an exceptional opportunity.
But I do think that bar of acceptability would be set quite a bit higher than it has been for Bibi & Co.
I’ll concede that the elevation of that bar for the US will vary based on who’s in office, how close it is to an election, and the extent to which mainstream press is paying attention and aware.
If it were my wife or one of my kids held hostage by Hamas (or similar bad organization) i would always choose 50 dead babies for their immediate release. That’s not a hard decision for me, the weight of a life of a person I love is >>>> that of a stranger.
The article says that the IDF didn’t know how many of the dead were civilians versus combatants.
I’m sure there were some combatants killed, it also seems to be a given that some unrelated civilians were killed. I don’t weep for dead Hamas, but I still hate the deaths of innocents who are increasingly bottlenecked, bombed, and starved.
200 isn’t an Osama bin Laden style raid, that’s a bloodbath. I don’t think the IDF had much concern about who was on the other side of their gunfire. I’m glad the hostages are safe, though.
I don’t know what I’d do about my own spouse, but my spouse knows that if it comes down to me versus saving a stranger, I’d always prefer to be killed. They can also make their own decision if that happened, but I’d vastly prefer it.
Regarding the food situation, my understanding is there are a large percentage (2/3 IIRC) of pre-war deliveries being made, but that internal distribution is a problem. While still more progress needs to be made in terms of amount, what share of the blame belongs to Hamas for preventing its distribution?
How I think of this, what if the 200 were Israelis? Would it be an acceptable result? Imagine this took place in an Israeli shopping center. The IDF get the hostages and kill 200 people. Some of those killed are Hamas, some are Israeli Hamas sympathizers, some are just Israeli shoppers, is that an acceptable result?
I don’t like dead civilians. I don’t like dead Israeli civilians. I don’t like dead Palestinian civilians. This has been my pretty consistent take this entire time.
I know that the Egypt-Rafah (which is on the southern border) crossing is closed. I believe that the temporary pier and at least one Israel-Gaza land crossing in the north is open and food aid is flowing in. Aid distribution entities are complaining that it is unsafe to deliver. I don’t know how much Israeli military presence is in particular areas, but aid convoys have been attacked. What part, if any, does Hamas as the government of Gaza bear responsibility for this?
When Israel chose to destroy the infrastructure, they took on the responsibility of supporting those people that rely on the infrastructure. The IDF can totally withdrawal and allow open borders for aid then you can blame Hamas for not allowing the distribution. At this time the IDF controls the border and is occupying Gaza.
Aid is available, entry of enough aid, and distribution of the aid is the problem. The IDF could manage both of these (I am sure they do so for their own troops).
Side note: If Hamas is attacking the aid trucks and distribution centers wouldn’t that be a great opportunity for the IDF to defend them and kill Hamas?