the relevance of your point to mine depends on whether the older brother in the analogy represents the indirectly applicable collective will of the Israeli people or the directly applicable will of the Israeli government. If the latter is the case, then although the Israeli people do get to choose who makes the choice for them, the government still ultimately makes that choice. If the former is the case (which, I concede, seems more likely on rereading), then the people getting injured or killed still may not agree with the collective decision of their fellow Israelis. Either way, we have a situation where some people are making a decision for others that affect their health or wellbeing. This is very different than the situation with the brothers in which the person who makes the decision is the only one affected by its consequences.
