The philosopher who gave the IDF moral justification in Gaza

[shira]

The philosopher who gave the IDF moral justification in Gaza

By Amos Harel

Tags: Hamas, Gaza, IDF, Asa Kasher

When senior Israel Defense Forces officers are asked about the killing of hundreds of Palestinian civilians during the fighting in the Gaza Strip, they almost all give the same answer: The use of massive force was designed to protect the lives of the soldiers, and when faced with a choice between protecting the lives of Israeli soldiers and those of enemy civilians under whose protection the Hamas terrorists are operating, the soldiers take precedence.

The IDF's response to criticism does not sound improvised or argumentative. The army entered Gaza with the capacity to gauge with relatively high certainty the impact of fighting against terror in such a densely populated area. And it operated there not only with the backing of the legal opinion of the office of the Military Advocate General, but also on the basis of ethical theory, developed several years ago, that justifes its actions.

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1062127.html

[ProgressiveProfessor]

1. Its a classic force protection argument and its not without merit

[bemildred]

2. So we have three categories now: civilians, soldiers, and terrorists.

I suppose the main question would be who decides whom is a terrorist, and is therefore outside the rules, and is therefore a justification for ignoring the rights of civilians?

Some of the comments are interesting. I would point out #27:

This logic works both ways

Using the same logic Hamas terrorists have moral right to target our civilians to achieve their military objective because this way they take less risks than affronting our solders.

And if you follow that, you wind up with no rules at all.

[LeftishBrit]

3. It;'s of course the usual rule of war anywhere; but one could perhaps do without people trying to

justify it in moral/philosophical terms.

I wonder if Kasher actually influences government or IDF policy; is influenced by it; or whether the two are really independent.