In this video, which is about Israel’s border guards being able to shoot those who attempt to approach the wall dividing them from Palestinians we see the march of technological progress against sheer numbers. The removal of border guards to relative safety and the use of remote cameras and controlled weapons is an obvious advantage.

These weapons systems are sold by the US and paid for from US aid monies provided by the Americans to Israel. Thus it is proxy war, and a US driven market of death.

It will expand as it obviously is beneficial for the dominant side, they lose nobody, whereas the “other” loses everyone.

The counter argument is that such mollycoddling is not making real soldiers out of the forces, indeed the combination of the apparent distance (i.e. like a video game) and the guilt (causing death to another human being) could produce mental disorders in these vets of the technocracy – probably disabling them from indulging in virtual games in the future. Not as bad as losing a leg, certainly. And the mental effects on the solider are the not the issue. It is a stupid argument to pursue, disingenuous at best.

A more feasible reason to understand the rise of the role of technology in battle is to question the very need for it. We need technology, I am assured of that part. It is the use of death as a form of control, that I question.

The most instructive aspect of this video are the divided comments, pro Israel and anti – both are irrational. A good life is not one led under the fear of death, random or certain. A good life is not one won as a result of killing other humans.

The human race paused in the 1980s when Prof Helen Cauldicott made the world aware that there was no winnable nuclear war scenario, only the destruction of all of us. It is the same thing with all forms of war. There is nothing to gain, there is everything to lose.

But if we start to believe that routine random execution of the unwanted is the only way ahead, we must question who we are to make that decision.

The same goes for the other side. Hurling bombs over the wall is not going to provide political progress for your children. It ruins the chance at clear dialog. There is nothing harder – to talk to someone who slayed children.

What gets me is that both sides historically commit and accumulate more injustice with acts of war. Mutual tolerance is the easy way to do it. Segregation and bulldozing residences, shooting at people or the random blowing up of innocents, these measures provide no progress. Military action always brings chaos.

Imagined political change is not sufficient reason to justify violence.

In 40 years nobody has tried peace as a solution.

Sharing the wealth with education and respectively putting up with the strange rituals of the other as something private as more successful pluralities emerge.