More examples of Ethan Bronner's reporting

I'm continuing to look over Ethan Bronner's war in Gaza reports. Here are some that I have comments on (in reverse chronological order):

In this article on January 5th, I have a quibble about what Bronner writes in the 11th paragraph:

"Israel has said it wants to end Hamas’s will or ability to shoot rockets at civilians in southern Israel, which Hamas has been doing for years, terrifying tens of thousands of inhabitants."

While I would imagine that the rockets have been terrifying Israelis and that the rockets fall in random places though generally near the southern border with Gaza, in comparison to Israeli firepower, they haven't been causing that much damage, and is it really true that "tens of thousands have been terrified"? Are they or have as many been as terrified as the Palestinians are right now with American-made warplanes, helicopters, and drones flying overhead dropping more accurate bombs or other weaponry, not to mention an army ground invasion? That last part of the above sentence could have come straight out of an Israeli official's mouth.

I also had thoughts about the following:

"Some officials here and abroad began exploring ways to keep Hamas from rearming as it has through smuggler tunnels in the Sinai. Some were suggesting a huge concrete underground wall, and others suggested heavily armed international monitors."

Yeah, I guess it's not good for Hamas to be able to smuggle arms into Gaza, but then what about Israel being able to rearm itself with American aid? Shouldn't there be a limit on what America provides to Israel, particularly with the destruction Israel is causing in Gaza and what it did to Lebanon in 2006? I don't read reporting about that possibility however remote. If you're going to let Israel be infinitely rearmed, why shouldn't Hamas have some armament? I never liked Hamas when they were carrying out the suicide bombings in Israel a few years ago. Yes, I viewed them as a terrorist organization that was harming the peace process rather than helping it. And Hamas is still terroristic with its rockets, but I cannot help feel some sympathy for their cause and the Palestinians as a whole when they have been blockaded and then pummeled by overwhelming Israeli firepower.

Because of its rockets, here is an article published Jan 3rd about how Hamas can be removed from power. Because of its disproportionate use of force, I ask how can the Israeli leadership be removed from power? There is no such talk of that.

This article on Dec 30th focuses on the ceasefire negotiations first and then goes onto describe the casualties of the war. Might one want to recount the immediate death and destruction first and then report on negotiations for a ceasefire? Wouldn't that properly highlight the horror that is going on in Gaza?

Here's one more for this post, and article published on Dec 29. What I don't like is in the 12th paragraph and a general point of the Israelis is the unchallenged assertion by Ehud Barak, Israel's Defense Minister, that he has nothing against the citizens of Gaza. Well, if he has nothing against Gazan citizens, then he shouldn't be commanding his forces to wreck their cities and towns. These types of statements are stupefying, and apparently Bronner accepts them.