I don't think I'd be in least bit unfair if I said that I can see no evidence whatsoever that the IDF or indeed the Israeli govt. in general, give a flying fuck how many innocent women and children they murder in the course of their operations - collateral damage and the more the merrier!
This is not a war; this is a punishment beating pure and simple!
If you keep a dog and you kick it and beat it every day, you should not be too surprised if one day it turns on you and rips your face off. The Palestinians have been the underdog; beaten and kicked every day for over 70 years so why is everyone so surprised that the worm has turned.
I think what Hamas did was horrific and disgusting but am I surprised, not in the least, nor should anyone else be who pays any attention to what the IDF and jewish settlers have done, day in and day out, to the Palestinians for 75 years!
@Paulos_the_fog "This is not a war; this is a punishment beating pure and simple!" But then what is the alternative; what would they be doing differently if their goal was truly and purely just to make sure that Hamas could not do this sort of thing again? (Hamas has said they intend to, for whatever that is worth.) My point is that I think they'd be doing the same thing they're doing now.
On some level, who cares their actual intent; that's kind of a category error anyway.
Your point remains though about worms turning. This is yet another reason they really need to do this with minimal casualties, at least.
@Paulos_the_fog IMO the implied argument here is valid: if one group is being oppressed by the other enough, and the power imbalance is skewed enough that action against military targets is hopeless, then the oppressed group maybe is justified in hitting soft targets, for lack of any other choice. In other words, terrorism.
Comparisons are regularly made between John Brown (Harper's Ferry/Bleeding Kansas/etc) and October 7, to illustrate the point. (Or Nat Turner.) Although I think this comparison with Brown is obviously problematic for a variety of reasons, there's a point here. I think a lot of Hamas' detractors aren't willing to consider and acknowledge this obvious truth.
Here's the thing, though: you need to prove that level of oppression. Here, it's worth noting that the IDF had withdrawn from Gaza decades earlier; I think it's reasonable to color most or all of their action, in Gaza at least, since then, as reactive. It's true that Egypt and Israel restrict trade into Gaza, for example, but it's worth considering *why* Egypt and Israel do this. There are, as I understand them, serious concerns about due process (e.g. the bulldozing of the house of an estranged wife of a suicide bomber), and concerns about things like the IDF/police not stopping settler violence aggressively enough, etc: I mean, I'm not saying Israel is pure and flawless, not by a long shot.
Ultimately I think we're forced to conclude that John Brown probably would not have killed hundreds of civilians and raped women to death in this context.
There's a separate issue about conducting defensive military operations against Hamas in a way that minimizes civilian casualties; this to me is the interesting question. (Unfortunately there are few choices other than military here, and civilians always pay the price in these kinds of operations; but still – there are ways to make this worse or better.)