Yes, because however heartless it might sound, I don't actually care when civilians are killed in warfare. I don't care when children are killed in warfare. That is what happens in war, and to pretend otherwise is plain naive and childish. It's okay to try and be idealistic and say that civilians shouldn't die in warfare but that's just not how it works. Have the Americans and Brits posting in this thread already forgotten the civilian toll of our invasion into Iraq? Sure, people say they don't support the Iraq war, but there certainly isn't the same shitstorm about it as there is about this dispute. So, sorry if I don't care about civilians dying in warfare, because that's just how warfare is.
I know these facts probably more than anyone else because I've stood at the edge of a flight deck while missile loaded jets soared off to bomb a guy with an AK running across a field (and believe me we all laughed at the footage afterward).
howeverAnother reason I support Israel's actions is because of opinion I have concerning the history of modern warfare in general. For instance, the nuclear missiles dropped on Japan killed only civilians but I still think they were the correct choice to bring to a close a long, drawn out conflict. I also think that the obliteration of Dresden was completely called for to gain revenge for the the blitz. In a wholly military sense, I actually think Germany's blitz strategy was a good one, despite the many English civilians it killed. Seriously, if you are at war then there are no civilians; the idea is to make the other side submit to whatever it is you want, and you don't achieve that by nancying around and playing nice. Thinking otherwise, too, is naive.
There's a clear difference between WWII and now.
We have laws that prevent countries from essentially bullying other countries. Sometimes we skate around the laws like Operation Iraqi Freedom
but those laws are still in place and we have to follow them. Everyone on GW voiced their opinion about America attacking Afghanistan in 2003 and 90% of the people I know Navy, Army, Marines, and Airforce hate the occupation in Iraq by US troops but when America carpet bombed whoever they tried their hardest to attack only military targets and if civilian casualties were ever going to be a problem we sent in ground troops to clear the area of civilians. There were complications because Al-Qaeda would take civilians and strap bombs to them but
hamas isn't doing this.Point is, in this "conflict" there is a clear distinction between GUY WITH AK and GUY WITH BABY IN ARMS. Israel is ignoring the Geneva Convention
which they signed. They cannot attack non-military installations unless they are certain without a doubt that these installations are housing military troops. Israel isn't even using infantry, they're just sweeping bombs through the entire country. This is a massacre on a scale that's never happened before in my life (or probably any of our lives) and I can't think of a single armed conflict that has been completely one sided as this.
The last real reason I support Israel is this: if any country fired a missile at England I would want the RAF to carpet-bomb the shit out of whatever area the missile came from. Pure and simple, really. I support the right for a country to do everything it needs to do to irradicate any attacks (of any nature) being carried out on it. And if this means wiping Gaza off the map then Hamas will only have themselves to blame for making the stupid move of engaging a far larger nation.
Eradicate the offending enemy's military? Yeah, sure. That's war for you.
Murdering the people who were unlucky enough to be born there and too poor to leave? Yeah, no.
Is there one set of rules for Hamas and one set of rules for the IDF?
Yes, actually, there is. Israel signed the damn treatise. Gaza didn't.
Gaming World Forums
Israel attacks UN Aid convoy with a tank, bombs UN aid shelter Gaza deathtoll up to close to 600
