Generally the Israeli extreme right wants Palestinians to be removed/expelled from Gaza and most or all of the West Bank. I seriously doubt you will find an explicit call from them to murder civilians. Yes there were calls for siege to force surrender. There are calls to conquer all of Gaza. There were calls to completely destroy Gaza. There's definitely a lot of "All Gazans are responsible for the attack on Israel." But you are not going to find an explicit call to go and murder civilians and the Israeli far right doesn't think that way. What you will find is disregard to civilian casualties that are "collateral" damage.
I'm pretty sure that for both Ben Gvir and Smotrich having dozens of civilians killed when the target is a combatant is justified but intentionally attacking dozens of civilians when there is no combatant is not. They also do not represent the official government position though presumably their voters (something like 5% maybe of the public) would also hold similar opinions. They are also religious so they view a lot of this and their morality through a religious lens which I don't fully understand.
Not to compare but Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups have and do intentionally call for and attack Israeli civilians and the presence of a "military" target is not a factor. They prefer to go after civilians. They are also not that "extreme" in the public opinion. Their religious lens is also quite different.
Also yes, Israel has ended up killing a lot more Palestinian civilians while "not targeting" them and Palestinians ended up killing a large (%) of civilians but also some combatants while targeting civilians. I think the ratio on both sides is somewhere around 70% civilians (I'm sure who counts and how you count matters. Israel has always consistently reported details of all casualties including whether or not they are soldiers, their ranks, roles etc. Hamas reports all casualties as civilians.
> But you are not going to find an explicit call to go and murder civilians and the Israeli far right doesn't think that way.
This is exactly what happens in the West Bank every single day. Settlers and IDF soldiers will go shoot up schools, murder random passerby, etc., and then the Israeli state will give them more weapons and supplies to do it again the next day.
>do intentionally call for and attack Israeli civilians and the presence of a "military" target is not a factor.
Settlers occupying Palestinian land, especially that land immediately adjacent to Gaza really aren't civilians in the normal sense, more like an armed militia with their families along as human shields. Comparison point I usually see are armed homesteaders in most colonial scenarios.
Edit: Actually I should mention this also applies in the west bank, and golan heights. Not to leave Syrians moved on for Israels "Buffer Zone" finding out they have been settled out of the bargain. They also have a right to return.
I think the time where Palestinians could be reasonably expected to rehome themselves to their land peacefully has long since passed.
Israeli settlers are just as welcome as always to just get out of the way and permit the resettlement to happen peacably.
I mean you can probably find a Ben Gvir quote where he is advocating killing civilians if you looked for it. Just this one instance was a miss.
Generally the Israeli extreme right wants Palestinians to be removed/expelled from Gaza and most or all of the West Bank. I seriously doubt you will find an explicit call from them to murder civilians. Yes there were calls for siege to force surrender. There are calls to conquer all of Gaza. There were calls to completely destroy Gaza. There's definitely a lot of "All Gazans are responsible for the attack on Israel." But you are not going to find an explicit call to go and murder civilians and the Israeli far right doesn't think that way. What you will find is disregard to civilian casualties that are "collateral" damage.
I'm pretty sure that for both Ben Gvir and Smotrich having dozens of civilians killed when the target is a combatant is justified but intentionally attacking dozens of civilians when there is no combatant is not. They also do not represent the official government position though presumably their voters (something like 5% maybe of the public) would also hold similar opinions. They are also religious so they view a lot of this and their morality through a religious lens which I don't fully understand.
Not to compare but Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups have and do intentionally call for and attack Israeli civilians and the presence of a "military" target is not a factor. They prefer to go after civilians. They are also not that "extreme" in the public opinion. Their religious lens is also quite different.
Also yes, Israel has ended up killing a lot more Palestinian civilians while "not targeting" them and Palestinians ended up killing a large (%) of civilians but also some combatants while targeting civilians. I think the ratio on both sides is somewhere around 70% civilians (I'm sure who counts and how you count matters. Israel has always consistently reported details of all casualties including whether or not they are soldiers, their ranks, roles etc. Hamas reports all casualties as civilians.
> But you are not going to find an explicit call to go and murder civilians and the Israeli far right doesn't think that way.
This is exactly what happens in the West Bank every single day. Settlers and IDF soldiers will go shoot up schools, murder random passerby, etc., and then the Israeli state will give them more weapons and supplies to do it again the next day.
(Yes, shoot up schools: https://www.cnn.com/2026/04/22/middleeast/west-bank-settler-.... Overview of how the system works: https://www.dropsitenews.com/p/israel-organized-settler-mili...)
As for Ben-Gvir specifically, he described mass shooter Baruch Goldstein as a "martyr" and his "hero", and for many years hung a portrait of the man on his wall. https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-ben-gvir-baruch-go...
4 replies →
>do intentionally call for and attack Israeli civilians and the presence of a "military" target is not a factor.
Settlers occupying Palestinian land, especially that land immediately adjacent to Gaza really aren't civilians in the normal sense, more like an armed militia with their families along as human shields. Comparison point I usually see are armed homesteaders in most colonial scenarios.
Edit: Actually I should mention this also applies in the west bank, and golan heights. Not to leave Syrians moved on for Israels "Buffer Zone" finding out they have been settled out of the bargain. They also have a right to return.
I think the time where Palestinians could be reasonably expected to rehome themselves to their land peacefully has long since passed.
Israeli settlers are just as welcome as always to just get out of the way and permit the resettlement to happen peacably.