No civilian "deserve" what they get in war, though unfortunately, that does not stop them from "getting it". War is ugly and should be only the last resort of diplomacy. Once unleashed, it has its own unintended consequences. If you view the conflict in Israel as war and make the Israeli civilian population "fair game" and thus their targeting a legal act, then, my friend, you are opening the gates to making the Palestinian civilian population fair and legal targets, certainly not something I would like to be deciding, since as you know, the Israeli have the means to bomb back to the stone age the whole west bank and Gaza, making Dresden and London "child play". They have not even done that on a minute scale, ask yourself why not? After all, in Vietnam, if a hamlet gave succor to few vietcongs, we naplamed the place to cinder. The Israeli are using the tactic of erasing the house were a know terrorist emanated from, very selectively, not the whole village, nor the city, just that one house, and that action is bringing ire in some sectors. An Israeli soldier, when swearing allegiance to "the flag", also must swear to keeping his "arms pure", namely to be used selectively, in self defense or against declared combatants and avoid at the risk of his own life as much as possible hurting civilians. Many Israeli soldiers have been put in jail when they violated that oath, whether intentionally, or during the heat of battle, or simply in error. A movement of "refusniks" (right now some 500 plus reservists that refuse to serve in the territories, for political, not moral reasons) would no be legal in our country, less so in the countries neighboring Israel. It thus ires me to no end when analogies are attempted between that situation and Europe of WWII.
Zeev
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
