How did the Israeli military respond to the October 7, 2023 attack?

1. Rapid escalation: from strikes to full-scale ground operations

Within a day Israel declared war on Hamas and transitioned from targeted retaliatory strikes to a broad campaign that included intensive air bombardment and a ground offensive aimed at degrading Hamas’s command, tunnel networks and governance in Gaza; government statements framed goals as destroying Hamas’s military and returning hostages ^{[2] [3]}. International reporting and official sources describe the response as a massive, sustained military operation that by late 2023 had pushed Israeli forces deep into Gaza and displaced the vast majority of the territory’s population ^{[3] [4]}.

2. Firepower and consequences: scale of strikes and civilian toll

The Israeli campaign relied heavily on air power, artillery and ground forces; multiple outlets documented widespread destruction across Gaza and tens of thousands of Palestinian deaths according to Gaza health authorities, figures that have been central to international criticism and allegations of disproportionate use of force ^{[3] [4] [7]}. Western and U.S. government assessments noted that by the end of 2023 Israel had disrupted much of Hamas’s de facto control over Gaza, even as humanitarian agencies reported a catastrophic civilian impact and mass displacement ^{[2] [4]}.

3. Hostage rescue and tactical priorities

A declared central objective of the military campaign was the recovery of hostages taken during the October 7 attacks; Israeli operations and messaging repeatedly framed strikes and ground maneuvers as necessary to pressure Hamas and locate captives, even as some specific hostage rescue attempts and exchanges became publicly visible months into the campaign ^{[2] [3]}. Reporting also recorded operational trade-offs: investigators later noted that some air missions on October 7 were directed at Hamas leadership locations while forces and civilians under attack on Israeli soil lacked timely defensive response ^[5].

4. Admissions of failure and institutional reckoning

In the months and years that followed, the IDF itself acknowledged critical failures in preparedness and response on October 7, describing the day as a “complete failure” to protect civilians, flagging slow responses, misread intelligence and coordination breakdowns, and prompting internal investigations and resignations of senior officers ^{[5] [8] [7]}. Those probes led to disciplinary measures and dismissals of senior personnel, reflecting intense domestic pressure for accountability ^[6].

5. Doctrinal shifts and enduring questions

Israeli military and strategic commentators describe consequential changes in doctrine and force posture after October 7: efforts to bolster rapid-response units, improve air–ground coordination, and harden frontier defenses were publicly discussed as lessons learned ^[9]. At the same time, critics—human rights groups and some international bodies—have argued that the scale and conduct of the campaign raised legal and moral questions about proportionality and the protection of civilians, prompting inquiries at international forums ^{[4] [10]}.

6. Competing narratives and limits of available reporting

Official Israeli aims—destroying Hamas’s military and recovering hostages—are uncontested in government and U.S. accounts, and many sources credit the campaign with fracturing Hamas control in much of Gaza by late 2023; however, reports diverge sharply on casualty totals, the proportionality of tactics, and the adequacy of pre-October 7 intelligence and readiness ^{[2] [3] [5]}. Reporting here relies on the cited investigations, government statements and international summaries; where sources conflict or do not provide detail—such as precise battlefield decisions during specific hostage-rescue attempts—this account does not speculate beyond those materials ^{[6] [5] [3]}.