Thank you for taking the time to express your view here, Bob.

I think you bring up some good points, my inclusion of some of them in the post would have made it more complete.

I agree that politicians say a lot of things that can be excused from time to time. don't believe that these statements represent the Israeli people's opinions, which I point out in the post. That said, the majority of Israelis are still in support of the war and, from the reports I hear, Israeli media is overwhelmingly selective over its coverage of the war. Very little footage is shown of the conditions in Gaza for example. That's a problem.

You are right that I don't mention surrendered, that would be worth pointing out. I assumed that it was within this 20-30% estimate.

When it comes to casualty estimates in Gaza, I know that you are in disagreement with Gaza Health Ministry estimates because they are effectively Hamas, in our shared understanding. Two reasons I trust them: (1) I have seen these widely confirmed by international bodies -- and not just the UN; and (2) the Gaza Health Ministry has a record of giving reliable estimates from previous conflicts. Of course, that second point is not complete reason to trust but it gives some reason for reliability. The main reason for reliability is my first point: international confirmation.

I would push you further here because the IDF gave incorrect estimates in light of Hamas' terrorist attacks (1,400 dead instead of 1,200) and that was because of conflating dead Hamas soldiers with non-combatants. That is excusable in fog of war obviously, but still a blunder. My point here is simply that it seems your intuitions are in favor of estimates of one party of the other (included in this other are many unbiased observers, notably). I have trusted Ukrainian estimates for example in Ukraine which are much higher than what the international community is providing. Moreover, journalist organizations have comprised lists of names of Palestinians killed in Gaza, and they seem easily refutable/verifiable. Regardless, eventually, we will know accurate estimates.

Lastly, I agree that it's easy to say "in retrospect, we should have ...", but actually, many were arguing that restraint should have been the initial policy. My calls for restraint -- as well as the experts who expressed the need for it -- came from a fundamental respect for human life.

I believe that Israel should call for a ceasefire in exchange for releasing the hostages. The last time this happened more than 100 hostages were freed. If Hamas refuses, then Israel should continue to selectively target Hamas -- and particularly its leadership outside of Gaza (Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, etc.).

I would also push you on your portrayal of the need to bomb Japan. Latest evidence reveals that Japan was fully compliant to end the war since the Soviets were already on the Korean peninsula prepared to invade the Japanese islands. The American bombing was a show of force to the Soviets rather than a necessary evil to end the Second World War.

A lot here obviously, but thank you for exchanging and wishing you only the best.