"My question pertains to how, and I'm not saying human shield, do you fight in that environment?"
Your military knowledge far exceeds mine, but I think the most enlightening way to answer this question is to ask what Israel would do if those "unmentioned mostly not Hamas" were Israeli instead of Palestinian civilians. I think there's stil…
"My question pertains to how, and I'm not saying human shield, do you fight in that environment?"
Your military knowledge far exceeds mine, but I think the most enlightening way to answer this question is to ask what Israel would do if those "unmentioned mostly not Hamas" were Israeli instead of Palestinian civilians. I think there's still a point at which they'd accept those casualties. But I think they'd be far more likely to hit targets like that with troops instead of bombs in that instance. Troops allow for a degree precision and restraint that bombs don't.
Military forces have claimed that civilian-filled targets were covers for military infrastructure forever. There's no way to confirm which claims are true and which are false. But I don't know what military target, especially in a place like Gaza, justifies over 4000 dead children.
"Military forces have claimed that civilian-filled targets were covers for military infrastructure forever. There's no way to confirm which claims are true and which are false. "
While it was training for riot control it would also apply to counter insurgency. "They are your fellow Americans. Use the minimum force necessary, but all that is necessary." The uncomfortable meaning is clear. I can never forget those words.
"My question pertains to how, and I'm not saying human shield, do you fight in that environment?"
Your military knowledge far exceeds mine, but I think the most enlightening way to answer this question is to ask what Israel would do if those "unmentioned mostly not Hamas" were Israeli instead of Palestinian civilians. I think there's still a point at which they'd accept those casualties. But I think they'd be far more likely to hit targets like that with troops instead of bombs in that instance. Troops allow for a degree precision and restraint that bombs don't.
Military forces have claimed that civilian-filled targets were covers for military infrastructure forever. There's no way to confirm which claims are true and which are false. But I don't know what military target, especially in a place like Gaza, justifies over 4000 dead children.
"Military forces have claimed that civilian-filled targets were covers for military infrastructure forever. There's no way to confirm which claims are true and which are false. "
I think "false" is a far safer presumption.
While it was training for riot control it would also apply to counter insurgency. "They are your fellow Americans. Use the minimum force necessary, but all that is necessary." The uncomfortable meaning is clear. I can never forget those words.
"With the border wide open, open warfare at home within the USA is a certainty"
Some would opine that that is the true purpose of the wide open border, to enable terrorism to strike at home and inspire support for war.