The current conflict in Gaza really challenges the idea that you can defend yourself without killing innocent people in the process.
Hundreds of rockets hit Israel in the last few days. The rockets are fired from launching sites that are located near hospitals and schools. Many times the rockets are stored in mosques. How can Israel destroy all this infrastructure and kill the militants without hurting the civilian population?
I’m sure the surrounding countries are asking themselves the same thing about Israel.
Precision-strikes, boots on the ground, kinetic-energy-missiles (KEM), etc.
Military-tech is getting continually more precise and force-limited.
It might eventually be possible to use lasers, for instance, to disable launch sites without any collateral damage.
Anyway, it’s also despicable of the Palestinians to locate their launch sites in places that will put innocents in harm’s way.
It doesn’t challenge the NAP, it just creates a moral-quandry for the Israelis.
The simply fact is that concerns about hurting innocents on the other side is only a consideration for people when they have the luxury of it, when they aren’t mortally threatened. If there was a nuke site next to a school, I doubt there’s anyone who would eat a nuke to avoid taking out a school, it would be a question of murder of innocents by nuke on the Israeli side versus the enemy-forced manslaughter of Palestinian innocents to take out the nuke-site.
The bottom line is that it would require highly-trained, dedicated infantry to do such a thing and thats why defense is best left decentralized.
Israeli infantry is exactly such infantry today. And they have tried multiple things. Unfortunately, when they enter Gaza, they suffer high losses. Eventually, Israelis decided not to send their sons into Gaza and strike the rocket launchers from the air instead.
Not that Israelis are not trying to minimize collateral damage as it is. They sometimes call of rockets (mid-flight) if the targetted truck is passing by civilians, and they warn the civilians in an area that a strike is about to happen.
I agree with you that this conflict would benefit from privatized protection services. Such a protection service would come into Gaza, clear out the terrorists and occupy the area indefinitely until it was clearly shown that the citizens (or whoever is in control) are willing to live with the protection service’s clients.
How do you know the “ordinary” Palestinians aren’t complicit with the “terrorists”?
The Palestinians cowardly choice to put launchers next to civilians is an attempt to force Israel to bring in ground troops.
Generally not a good tactic to let your enemy dictate the battlefield.
israel itself is a violation of nap.
Palestinian people are no more complacent than israels people or the american people in war activity.
How do you know that “ordinary” Americans aren’t complicit with the crimes of the state?
There are probably lots of Palestinians who are complicit to some extent, but that doesn’t mean it’s a majority of them. It’s the same with any state or gang - if enough people tolerate these entities, then they will retain power. You also don’t know how many of them are complicit because they support the terrorists or if they fear them.
Any state is a violation of the NAP. Any gangs that aspire to be states are violations of the NAP.
Isn’t Hamas the duly-elected government?
So what?
People in this thread are wondering if the Palestinians will kick out the terrorists. I don’t think that’s going to happen. I’m willing to bet most of them support their antagonism against Israel. Otherwise, they would not have elected an avowed and infamous terrorist group.
Obama was elected.
I think the point about Israel being a state is moot.
Imagine I am a mafia racketeer and force you to pay me protection money for… protection. Then you get attacked by Joe. I do X (whatever it is).
When examining whether X was violation of Joe’s rights (or his family’s right, if they happen to have suffered from my protection of my client and attack on Joe), it doesn’t matter whether I am protecting my client with his permission or without.
FlyingAxe, I’m not sure I’m following your point. Could you rephrase?
Imagine that IDF was a private protection agency hired by Jewish people living in the territory known as “Israel”. Then ask: are IDF’s actions against Gazans a crime? Don’t mix in the crime of Israel being a state with the presumed crime of its attacking Gazans.
For a state formed in the 1940s, Israel sure has seen a lot of war…I wonder why that is.
My Mom visited Israel during the Yom Kippur War.
I agree with that.
An aspiration is not and can not be a crime. As libertarians we do not believe in thoughtcrime.