Now, about the question of legitimacy of human shields, perhaps some reminding of how war used to be may be useful.
War is a matter of two communities deciding that they are unconfortable enough with each other to escalate things to armed conflict. For most of human history it was an almost instinctive answer to demographic concerns: when population levels rise too much for confort (political, feeding, habitational confort, you name it), hostilities become more frequent and harder to appease until eventually the idea of simply crossing swords to decide which group should have suppremacy becomes widely accepted and seems reasonable.
War is not so much unacceptable as it is gross and primitive. Even fishes can wage war.
But these days political considerations, most of them fueled by unhealthy myths about the meaning and power of a Nation, have changed quite a lot of the meaning and effects of war.
War is no longer a practical if crude way of reaching a quick, brutal solution for difficult conflicts that have little better alternative. It is now a matter of pride and/or despair asserting itself by means that usually rely on either suicidal fanaticism or inconsequential money-burning.
In effect, it is often just terrorism that happens to be backed by some country or another. It has lost anything resembling moral legitimacy or justification.
That is why I agree so much with the OP. I can't bring myself to accept the Israeli argument that "Hamas should not use human shields" with any degree of seriousness or respect. It does not deserve such attention or respect. It is obscene, immoral, offensive, disgusting, ridiculous, insulting. It is a full-blown abomination. It is not even egotistical; it has degenerated into self-destructiveness, because it is simply not conceivable that Gazans will ever be swayed by the feeble argument that "Israel has a right to defend itself". People who see their own blown away by hostile fire will forget the circunstances (which are questionable at best to begin with) and remember those who actually fired the shots. And they will remember for generations. Any Zionists who hope otherwise are being tragically naive and will suffer a lot for it.
No amount of national pride or bias can change the fact that it is Israel shooting at Gaza, and it does have options that are far more constructive, albeit very difficult at the short term. Choosing to give up on them and decide that it is a kill-or-die situation only plays into Hamas' efforts at raising radicalism.
War is a matter of two communities deciding that they are unconfortable enough with each other to escalate things to armed conflict. For most of human history it was an almost instinctive answer to demographic concerns: when population levels rise too much for confort (political, feeding, habitational confort, you name it), hostilities become more frequent and harder to appease until eventually the idea of simply crossing swords to decide which group should have suppremacy becomes widely accepted and seems reasonable.
War is not so much unacceptable as it is gross and primitive. Even fishes can wage war.
But these days political considerations, most of them fueled by unhealthy myths about the meaning and power of a Nation, have changed quite a lot of the meaning and effects of war.
War is no longer a practical if crude way of reaching a quick, brutal solution for difficult conflicts that have little better alternative. It is now a matter of pride and/or despair asserting itself by means that usually rely on either suicidal fanaticism or inconsequential money-burning.
In effect, it is often just terrorism that happens to be backed by some country or another. It has lost anything resembling moral legitimacy or justification.
That is why I agree so much with the OP. I can't bring myself to accept the Israeli argument that "Hamas should not use human shields" with any degree of seriousness or respect. It does not deserve such attention or respect. It is obscene, immoral, offensive, disgusting, ridiculous, insulting. It is a full-blown abomination. It is not even egotistical; it has degenerated into self-destructiveness, because it is simply not conceivable that Gazans will ever be swayed by the feeble argument that "Israel has a right to defend itself". People who see their own blown away by hostile fire will forget the circunstances (which are questionable at best to begin with) and remember those who actually fired the shots. And they will remember for generations. Any Zionists who hope otherwise are being tragically naive and will suffer a lot for it.
No amount of national pride or bias can change the fact that it is Israel shooting at Gaza, and it does have options that are far more constructive, albeit very difficult at the short term. Choosing to give up on them and decide that it is a kill-or-die situation only plays into Hamas' efforts at raising radicalism.
