1. Was the Oct 7 attack justified. ?
No it was a viscious terrorist attack and murder of Israelis.
2. Did it require a military response?
Yes. Any attack of that scope requires a direct and immediate military response
3. Is israel within its rights to remove Hamas from power as acting govt of a terrorist state?
under these circumstances, because Hamas terrorist Govt is sitting directly alongside a 32miles porous border, israel actually has a moral imperative to its citizens to remove that govt by force. Israel was absolutely right to bomb and invade, assuming that Hamas Govt was not resigning en masse (which it wasn't)
4. Does Israel have any duty to protect civilian Gazans from the harm, destruction, and famine that its war machine induces, as it invades and occupies Gazan land and displaces Hamas and captures Hamas radicals?
Absolutely. For however long as Israel acts like a govt, issues orders of a govt, and claims the authority of a govt, it accepts the duties of same, and that includes ensuring some marginal safety of Gazans, ensuring access to food, protecting evacuation routes, and ensuring access to basic emergency medical care.
5. Is the 'Human Shield' tactics/strategy of Hamas mitigate on the above duty Israel has as an occupying force and invading army?
NO. It does not mitigate the Israeli duty to minimize the collateral damage to the local population of its own action , nor does it mean Israel now has the right to engage in collective punishment or that the international prohibition against causing or weaponizing food depravation.
And that is where the Israelis are dead wrong. Those trucks should be rolling in and Israelis should be doing everything it can to protect evacuation routes from its own military attacks. It needs to facilitate the evacuation, and keep that humanitarian aide flowing, regardless of any enhanced military concerns. It cannot protect hundreds of its own people by inducing a mass death event among the innocent Palestinians, and walk away from moral accountability.
