A life for a life? Is life beyond any measurement? How does one justify the taking of a life?
This past week has seen hundreds of deaths in Gaza and some in Israel. I've been mulling over these events for the past few days and something has been bothering me. Reading news reports, a lot of reporters focus on the large numbers of Palestinians dead, consciously or unconsciously comparing them to the admittedly far smaller numbers of Israeli casualties. I found myself doing something similar when talking to a friend about the situation. I was very quick to say that I did not think the Israeli deaths were any less tragic and significant, but that I thought the Israeli response was still excessive (in recent counts over 700 Palestinians and 14 Israelis are dead). Am I wrong? I don't think what Hamas does is acceptable but I can't help but feel extremely distressed by the deaths of so many in the Gaza strip.
It is interesting how many readers in the United States respond to this comparison by taking offence that the Gazan deaths are emphasized over those of Israelis because of the larger numbers. But shouldn't the larger number take precedence especially given the extreme disparity? I don't mean that people living in Israel within range of Hamas rockets are less important but simply that Israelis seem to be better protected than Palestinians in Gaza and that Israel's incursion is far more effective than Hamas rockets are and that says something (though I'm not quite sure what).
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
The Palestinian deaths prove what many have long suspected: the utter disregard Israelis have for non-Jewish life. In many Israeli eyes, it's okay to kill 700 Palestinians to stop the Hamas rockets, even though Hamas rockets had killed fewer than five people before this offensive began. We shouldn't be shy or apologetic (your post is close) in pointing out the disparity in deaths, as if there were something wrong in saying, what the fuck, Israel. Now Hamas doesn't seem to value Palestinian lives either, as this NYT article ably demonstrates. But that doesn't change the basic contours of this conflict: it's still oppressor versus oppressed.
Post a Comment