Goldberg’s claim is correct—to a point. Lopsidedness of civilian causalities is not itself proof of criminal behavior, and for just the reasons he gives. But it is still a worrisome sign.

Unintended but foreseeable civilian deaths are permissible only when they are the by-product of an action that is justified by “military necessity,” or when the deaths are “proportionate” to the military advantages of the action. But since Hamas seems mostly impotent at carrying out their (murderous) plans, it is not obvious that the deaths of innocents in Gaza can be justified in those terms.

One rough test for this would be: would Israel be willing to carry out the same actions with the same foreseeable civilian deaths if Hamas were hiding their rockets and fighters in Tel Aviv (assuming they posed the same threat in other respects)? Would the civilian deaths there still be “worth it” to create a deterrence and kill a few Hamas leaders?