Yeah, you got where I was going with it. Notice that he never resolves the question you quoted above, though. And without that, doesn't it throw the whole article into contention? I'm with you and KB 100% on the logistical aspects/the calculus behind it. The thing that ends up sticking in my craw is the clumsy attempt at spinning it into a moral decision rather than tactical.

I did notice, and yes it does. If it's some sort of sliding scale, though... as in, by even allowing the second point onto the debate floor, we admit that if Israel could figure out the right way to wage this mess, it could be "moral" -- under Schwartz's definition.

Where do you fall on all this, anyhow? Not fightin' whards, just curious.

I have some thoughts. I don't take a side, because as kleinbl00 so eloquently pointed out in the most badged post in the history of hubski, there's no good side to take. Even if I agree with the New Republic and think the invasion is moral ... sometimes moral things suck. Today in Gaza every fucking thing sucks. Have you read this? I wish I knew what his inspiration was, because if we could pull that off in Jerusalem it would shove gum in the dam.

One -- if you don't know what the Sykes-Picot Agreement is, you are not allowed to have an opinion on this conflict and your blather is leaving my facebook feed forever. I know dozens of Muslims and Jews (and hell everyone else too), and if I were of the inclination, I could convince any of them that they were in the wrong about this war. That is what comes from having an opinion without having knowledge, which is dangerous.

Two -- another important conclusion I have drawn is that I was wrong a few years ago when I thought twitter and instant-media were going to have a net positive contribution to the conflicts in the Middle East. When the Syrian Civil War (ha!) began, and when various despots started trying to limit internet access etc, it seemed to me that the "anyone is a reporter" mentality was going to save us from ourselves. Wrong, at least at the moment.

Three, and more tangibly related to Gaza -- I get the vibe when reading about the invasion that everyone would feel a lot more "okay" about this conflict if only more Jews were dying. If both sides had lost about the same number of troops. There is a sense that this war is maybe worse than other wars because it is not fair. And when that is a serious thought that is occurring in the liberal subconscious or wherever ... something is seriously broken. Somewhere.