I was referring specifically to firing from civilian areas, but no they don't target civilians, they don't have the the tech to target anyone in particular. Not that it's ok to indescriminently fire rockets.
I just reject the notion that the army firing rockets from an inescapable ghetto are in someway morally inferior to the modern millatary force who kill civilians at much higher rates.
Hamas has historically used suicide bombers in urban areas. How is that not specifically targeting civilians?
...Which would be wrong. The first intifada happened in 1987, years
after (not
before) Israel's military expenditure reached
an absurd 30% of their GDP. The Palestinian people are clearly the ones resisting here.
If anything, Hamas is used as a scapegoat to justify Israel's existence as both a Jewish state and a democracy, two principles that far too often conflict themselves when regional integration and defense issues arise. Gaza is being mantained in subhuman conditions by Israel solely to breed this scapegoat. It's truly disgusting and I can't approve of
anyone who supports it.
What does Israel's military expenditure have to do with it? Israel is surrounded by it's historical aggressors and have had military campaigns waged against them on more than one occasion by those rival nations who dispute Israel's right to exist.
The problem here is that the willingness to compromise is always held by the one on the weaker side of the conflict, while the willingness to inflict suffering is held by the stronger side. Pre-1948 Palestinians opposed the UN Partition Plan and the borders associated with it. It wasn't until Israel won significant ground in the 1948 War where they were attacked by Palestinian allies from all sides, then the Six Day War where they proactively attacked when those same forces were gathering at their borders for another assault, that they held enough land and military superiority for the Palestinian authority to want to discuss a two state solution.
From a moral standpoint I'd agree that the burden has shifted to Israel as the aggressor. The Oslo Accords had a clear path towards a meaningful peace and when Netanyahu came to power he failed to follow through on Israel's end of the agreement. But at the same time that doesn't really justify Hamas, a group best known for terror attacks on Israeli civilians, becoming a major political factor in Palestinian self-governance.
Gal Gadot is of an age where she grew up in Israel when Palestinian authorities didn't acknowledge the right for Israel to exist. That didn't happen until the Oslo Accords, and it's something that the PLO agreed to, not Hamas. Hashtagging #weareright can simply be stating the right for Jewish people to exist and/or exist in the Middle East where they currently reside.
This isn't a good v. evil fight. This is a conflict between two cultural groups who have been preyed upon by all other culture groups with power they came into contact with, then were forced into cohabitation and have proceeded to prey upon each other based on who has the strength to inflict suffering at a given point in time. It'd be great if a meaningful compromise could be found but neither side is particularly interested in that.
