Israel's claim about civilian casualties rebutted by former Israeli artillary crew commander

Idan Barir, a former artillery crew commander in the Israeli army during the Second Intifada, wrote this, which was printed on Huffington Post:

". . . Harsh criticism of Israel followed each incident [bombing of the U. N. school and a busy market place] but -- as in the past -- Israel defended its actions, arguing that it was targeting militants and doing its best to avoid civilian casualties.

"I served as a crew commander in the Israeli artillery corps . . . .  and I feel compelled to counter this claim from Israel. . . .  In using artillery against Gaza, Israel therefore cannot sincerely argue that it is doing everything in its power to spare the innocent.

"The truth is artillery shells cannot be aimed precisely and are not meant to hit specific targets. A standard 40 kilogram shell is nothing but a large fragmentation grenade. When it explodes, it is meant to kill anyone within a 50-meter radius and to wound anyone within a further 100 meters. . . .

"It's true that in at least some cases, the army has informed civilians of its plans to attack a certain area and advised them to leave. But this in no way excuses the excessive damage and huge toll on civilian lives.

"I write this with great sorrow for civilians hurt on both sides. Sorrow for our soldiers who have fallen in this operation, and sorrow for the future of my country and the entire region. I know that as I write, soldiers like me have fired shells into Gaza.

"They had no way of knowing who or what they would hit.

"Faced with so many innocent casualties, it is time for us to state very clearly: this use of artillery fire is a deadly game of Russian roulette. The statistics, on which such firepower relies, mean that in densely populated areas such as Gaza, civilians will inevitably be hit as well. The IDF knows this, and as long as it continues to use such weaponry, it will be hard to believe when it claims to be minimizing civilian deaths.

"As a former soldier and an Israeli citizen, I feel compelled to ask today: have we not crossed a line?"

Perhaps the Israeli defense forces feel they have no choice, that the Hamas military forces and weapons are so intertwined with the dense population that it is their only defense.   

Is that not itself an argument for finding a non-military solution?    Israel says that the Palestinians scuttle the negotiations for peace;   but the Palestinians have an equally believable claim that the Israelis refuse to budge on their basic demands, too.

Consider this:   which one has come closer to destroying the other?

Ralph

PS:   I just read another plea from a former member of the Israel Defense Force, Yehuda Shaul:

" . . . .  Hamas is a cruel and cynical enemy. But what have we become? Is it not a cynical act to bomb Hamas members’ family homes that don’t . . . .  pose an immediate threat to soldiers or civilians – with the knowledge that there are innocent family members who will be harmed inside? Does the fact that a family didn’t heed our telephone request to leave a building grant us the right to sentence them to death?

"I wrote that Hamas controls Gaza, but Hamas isn’t alone. . . .  Israel controls the daily entry and exit of goods from the Gaza Strip;  prevents access to Gaza from the air and the sea, limiting the fishing area for Palestinians;  Israel even controls the population registry in the region. . . .  Can we as Israelis earnestly shrug off our responsibility to the residents of the Gaza Strip? . . . .

"We must stop sending our friends and our soldiers on operations that will definitively harm civilians. We must end Israel’s protracted control over the Gaza Strip."