Nobody seems to be answering my question: most of the thread becomes a discussion of exactly how many Palestinians support Hamas. Whatever the answer, I fail to see how that has any relevance to the moral, or legal, legitimacy of Israel's attempted actions.
Let us agree that Hamas is not supported by all Palestinians, though it has much support -- as Hitler was not supported by all Germans, though he had much support. When Nazi Germany was, on Hitler's orders, bombing Britian with rockets and bombers -- as Hamas is doing to Israel -- with the expressed goal of destroying Britian -- as Hamas says it will do to Israel-- it was hardly a "human rights violation" on Britian's part to blockade German ports if it could, even if it hurt ordinary Germans in the process, and even if not all those hurt were Nazi party members or high government officials in the German Fuhrer state.
Please explain to me why this was legitimate, and that it was absurd to suggest Britian supply Nazi Germany with food, electricity, etc. as it was bombed by it at the same time -- while on the other hand, may not blockade, and indeed must supply food, gas, etc., to a terrorist entity that daily bombs its cities.
I'd say that if, as some people here do, one has a "moral" position where one claims a country daily bombed by another must still supply the country which bombs it with food, water, electricity, etc., then one's moral position needs serious revision, as it leads to obviously absurd conclusions.
In any rate, until such revision is made, it is hardly worth while listening to any "moral arguments" made by someone with such a position, much like there's little point in looking at a stopped watch to get the exact time.
