I’m sorry, there’s just very little logic to your accusations of murder and claims of a holocaust. I can think of three reasons to commit a massacre, all of them of course despicable:

1) The eradication of a race or ethnic group. The term for this is genocide, and it was coined by a person appalled by the murder of about a million Armenians in the early part of the 20th century. If Israel is committing genocide, or a ‘holocaust’ as you put it, it’s rather bad at it. With all of those bombs it has, Israel could have evacuated the neighboring Jewish areas and killed all of the Palestinians in Gaza several times over by now.

2) Intimidation. There is no intimidating a suicidal group like Hamas, and committing a massacre would only increase its ranks.

3) Expulsion. Massacres often result in the persecuted group deserting their towns. This couldn’t be one of Israel’s goals either, since the Gazans have nowhere to go! Their only other neighbor is Egypt, and they will not let the Gazans in.

So there you have it. There’s simply nothing that Israel can strategically gain from murder, and the death toll, as high as it is, is far too low to suggest genocide. The only explanation that remains is the one Israel has given all along, that it is fighting Hamas where they are, in defense of Israeli citizens. Unfortunately, Hamas operates in neighborhoods where the overwhelming majority has no interest in killing Israelis but is too afraid to speak up for fear of endangering their families. I think the following NY Times excerpt portrays the main problem quite well:

A car arrived with more patients. One was a 21-year-old man with shrapnel in his left leg who demanded quick treatment. He turned out to be a militant with Islamic Jihad. He was smiling a big smile.

“Hurry, I must get back so I can keep fighting,” he told the doctors.

He was told that there were more serious cases than his, that he needed to wait. But he insisted. “We are fighting the Israelis,” he said. “When we fire we run, but they hit back so fast. We run into the houses to get away.” He continued smiling.

“Why are you so happy?” this reporter asked. “Look around you.”

A girl who looked about 18 screamed as a surgeon removed shrapnel from her leg. An elderly man was soaked in blood. A baby a few weeks old and slightly wounded looked around helplessly. A man lay with parts of his brain coming out. His family wailed at his side.

“Don’t you see that these people are hurting?” the militant was asked.

“But I am from the people, too,” he said, his smile incandescent. “They lost their loved ones as martyrs. They should be happy. I want to be a martyr, too.”

What can Israel do to protect its citizens aside from bombing guys like that into oblivion, wherever they are?

I think you’re the one being presumptuous. I have no interest in arguments related to biblical history. The birth of the Jewish state came from a complicated situation where some Jewish actions were justified and some not. I remember hearing, much to my dismay, an old Jewish guy imply that he had taken part in a massacre. But it was not all massacres and those Jews nasty enough to partake in such acts had plenty of counterparts on the Arab side. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem led what was essentially a proxy of the Nazi military, as he and his group received support and training from the Nazis, in addition to having the shared goal of ridding Palestine of the Jews. This was not just a fight for land, it was a fight for survival. I’m disgusted by the thought that there was even one massacre committed by Jews, but these were very bloody times.

Back to having no interest in biblical history. Are you more interested in righting what you perceive to be a historical wrong than peace and prosperity for the Palestinians? Israel will negotiate much of its land, but it will not negotiate away its right to exist. The situation is only intractable until both parties accept compromise. Ehud Barak’s 2000 proposal shows that Israel is willing to compromise. We’re halfway there.

The land belongs to God.