Thomas Friedman (Jan 13) asks a very good question about the situation in Gaza: What is Israel’s goal? In the third week of the massacre, one would hope we’d have a better idea.

I seriously doubt the thinking behind the war is as logic-based as Friedman assumes it is. Human emotion often overpowers logic and reason. While it’s vitally important to be able to defend oneself and one’s tribe, the emotions of nationalism sometimes unravel into us-over-them chauvinism, which too often and too easily can further devolve into immoral, inhumane actions.

In addition, if there’s little or no immediate danger, as with the US and Iraq, it’s just way too easy for politicians to convince people, even in a democracy, that they’re in existential danger and war is necessary when it’s often more about expansion and the domination and control of resources, people, and/or land.

Any attempt to rationally and morally weigh the pros and cons of "education" of an entire group of people by way of high-tech violence strikes me as callous of heart and totalitarian in thought.

The quest for national security, which is necessary for survival, and the quest for domination over others, which is unnecessary, are easily confused. Domination as a general principle and practice cannot exist alongside real peace and justice. When faced with violence and desirous of peace, the wisest, most humane choice would seem to be employing a strong defense– actual defense without unnecessary counter-aggression– in combination with competent diplomacy that humbly understands the relationship between domination and injustice.

---