Gaza.

I don't know nearly enough about the situation in Gaza to "comment" on it. I think everyone knows that the problems in the region are not merely about political power and the distribution of goods and territory, though those things are certainly important. What should Israel do? How could I begin to answer that question?

Citizens of the United States should take an interest in the actions of our allies. In an ideal situation (i.e. one where the USA hadn't done so much to ruin its credibility on human rights--and of course it's worse that we infringed human rights than that we lost our credibility), the USA would make sure that if a major ally, say, bombed civilian targets, that the case for supreme emergency is solid, or at least plausible within standards of proportionality. Above all, I want the USA to be committed to the principle that innocents on either side of battle lines have equal (and intrinsic) moral worth.

These are my principles. I don't know how to apply them to a complex situation that I haven't really studied.

That being said, I was struck by Jeffrey Golberg's op-ed in the New York Times yesterday:

"There is a fixed idea among some Israeli leaders that Hamas can be bombed into moderation. This is a false and dangerous notion. It is true that Hamas can be deterred militarily for a time, but tanks cannot defeat deeply felt belief.

"The reverse is also true: Hamas cannot be cajoled into moderation. Neither position credits Hamas with sincerity, or seriousness."

Troubling.