I don't know what the full article is saying to be honest so can't fully comment on what the exact message is supposed to be but really? You can't see the problematic nature of legally justifying the killing of children, during an ongoing conflict where there is, at the very least debate about whether a genocide is onging, being militarily and diplomatically covered by the country the Atlantic is based in?
For me, to help emphasise the awful dehumanisation of Palestinians and the difference in rhetoric between the two, I would think about whether the Atlantic would ever write an article about whether Palestinians have the moral or legal right to strike back against the people occupying them. And whether there is really much of a distinction between civilian and military in a country where military service is essentially compulsory for the overwhelming majority.
Of course though they would't write this and there would be widespread revulsion if they did. There is a pretty awful double standard here and the reality is that Palestinian lives mean almost nothing to most.
