Note - I have never disputed the fact that rockets have been fired at Israeli civilians nor have I disputed Israel's right to defend itself.
Perhaps not "disputed", but you certainly question the moral acceptability of Israel defending itself. In fact, you appear to actively vilify Israel for defending itself and for Israeli citizens to witness Israel defending itself.
Woah. The fact that Israel has the right to defend itself doesn't mean that right is unlimited or unconditional - at least ethically. Israel shouldn't be expected to stand by and allow rockets to be flung inside it's borders, but does that mean Israel should nuke Gaza? (yes, that's an extreme example, but it's to make a point).
Does the fact that Israel has a right to defend itself exempt it from any criticism of what it does?
You did it in the post immediately above this one where you wrote:
You mean watching bombs falling in densly packed civilian areas?
How often do we hear about Palestinians celebrating death, Palestinians being full of hate, Palestinians passing out candy when a terrorist act happens, their text books are full of hatred and calls for violence, how often do we see the same recycled pictures of kids dressed as bombers etc etc in an effort to create such an overwelming narrative that the Palestinians are utterly marginalized. It's a powerful meme.
Yet - when someone shows a picture of Israeli children writing on bombs that will then be shot into Gaza or Israeli families celebrating the bombing of Gaza - or Israeli children playing with guns and dressing as soldiers, it suddenly becomes a different situation. It's justified, excused, or unfailingly - someone yells "false moral equivalency", the ultimate way of shutting down the topic and maintaining the narrative that Palestinians are the source of all evil and there can be no comparison or even a hint of criticism.
How can you claim to support Israeli's right to defend itself, while also condemning her for defending herself? You make the assumption that Israelis "enjoy" watching innocent civilians die -- an assumption entirely without merit -- and yet claim that she has every right to defend herself.
The right to defend yourself is not equivalent to the deliberate murder of innocent people.
If you are watching bombs falling into a densely packed urban area,
you damn well know that non-combatents are going to be killed, particularly children. If you are watching white phospherous trails and have been in the military, I'm sure you know what the effects are on human skin.
The U.S. used napalm in Vietnam war, and there are horrible iconic photographs from it....people running and burning.
Should Americans have been cheering over it? Having a picnic and clapping at each successful hit?
Is it EVER acceptable to cheer bombs falling, while hidden out of sight, the deaths of innocent civilians under those bombs? Or is it a grotesque mockery? There is a difference between celebrating with an uncaring attitude exempified in an atmosphere resembling a tailgate and accepting that what is being done, while horrible is absolutely necessary. Maybe it's the utter banality of it, the indifference towards what's happening beneath the bombs that is grotesque.
That is the similarity and the difference. In one, there is the celebration in the murder of "the enemy" (Palestinians killing Israeli civilians) in the utter, the callous indifference towards the death of "enemy" civilians (Israeli's picnicing and watching bombs).
