Ethical and humane
From Dr Jerome Linsner Sir: As a former combat infantryman, I know all too well that house-to-house fighting is definitely not the most efficient way to destroy an enemy force occupying a city ('Stop — in the name of decency', 13 April). Intense bombardment accomplishes that objective without placing your own side in harm's way. Unfortunately, 5001b bombs are indiscriminate: they vanquish the enemy, but they also destroy the town and cause huge numbers of civilian casualties. It has thus not gone unnoticed by me that the Israeli Defence Force has chosen to enter treacherous urban enclaves on foot and to attack heavily armed militants in an unbelievably surgical manner, in order to minimise harm to the general Palestinian population.
However, in choosing this courageous and moral tactic, they knowingly, and repeatedly, expose themselves to a vastly increased level of risk — thus ensuring an ambush like the one in Jenin that killed 13 Israeli foot soldiers. The IDF could have brought in heavy artillery and aerial bombardments, and the battle of Jenin would have been over in 30 minutes with no Israeli casualties. The deaths of those soldiers was the inevitable consequence of the Israeli military adopting rules of engagement that consciously seek to protect Palestinian civilians at the cost of creating greater peril to Jewish soldiers.
Contrary to what Emma Williams writes, these men are conducting themselves according to the highest ethical and humane standards, while confronting an enemy that systematically uses civilians as human shields and human bombs.
Jerome P. Linsner
New York, USA
Previous page
