Green Energy
The War is being used to test a new weapon. Like all weapons tests the outcome will determine how the weapon is revised for future deployment. The weapon being tested is not a drone or a missile or a bunker buster bomb. It's a rhetorical weapon: the argument against so-called 'disproportionate response'.
The disproportionate response (DR) argument is all over the left-wing Web, from Prospect.org to the disreputable wingnut sites. The DR is an attempt to restrain Israel in a situation, conventional warfare, where they have the advantage. "Proportionality" is never defined. No examples of such are ever provided aside from the cheap and easy cry to "only hit Hezbollah targets."
Hezbollah committed an act of war. The leader of Hezbollah declared "open war". Under the old rules of war, this is justification for Israel to destroy Hezbollah utterly. But under the DR argument Israel has to be restrained to only cause a 'proportionate' amount of damage. Hezbollah indescriminately targets Israeli civilians. Israel bombs runways and roads and TV stations. Israel drops leaflets telling Lebanese to evacuate certain areas prior to attacks. Yet Israel is accused of disproportionality.
There are two kinds of disproportionality weasels. The first, the most simple minded, just count the casualties on each side and declare the side with the most dead to be the "victim" of the disproportional response. This argument display gross historical ignorance and a bizarre ethical system to say the least. Under this notion, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were the victims of disproportionate US response. Sad.
The other DR weasels are more clever. They argue that "Israel has not taken every precaution to avoid killing innocent civilians". Naturally Every Precaution can never be taken as the number of precautions included in 'Every' would be infinite. Israel's attempts to avoid hitting civilians, which are inevitably incomplete, are dismissed because "intent is not enough." Israel is described as "belligerent" and "eager for war." These DR weasels ignore Hezbollah's belligerence. Indeed Hezbollah is dismissed as mere terrorists, or downplayed as a Shia gang, all the better to portray Israel in a worse light for "going balistic" on the poor Lebanese.
If this new rhetorical weapon succeeds then it will be deployed later against the US. I can hear it now. "Iran only killed 10,000 Americans. You can't destroy an entire country. You can't wipe out an ancient civilization. You can't," they will whine. "That's a disproportionate response."
Watch us.
- There Can Be No Moral Equivalency Regarding Israel And Hezbollah
Micah Halpern writes in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin about the problems with moral equivalency: Let's get this clear from the outset. There is no moral equivalency between the war Israel is waging against Hezbollah and the war Hezbollah is waging...
- Ben Stein Knows Best
How to Lose to Terrorists By Ben Stein Published 7/31/2006 12:09:22 AM We are in real serious trouble, and I'll tell you how and why I know it: * Because the Hezbollah -- as has been well reported -- launches missiles at purely civilian targets in...
- Canada's Leader Leads In Support Of Israel
A few weeks ago, Pastorius kindly invited me to IBA and this is my first post, to invite you to take a gander at my just-published "Why Stephen Harper is my hero" at Covenant Zone. It is fairly typical of my posts there and at Flares. The post is an exploration...
- The Netherlands Standing With Israel
Minister of Foreign Affairs Ben Bot has reportedly told Israel that the Dutch government understands Israel's situation and reaction. He also said that it would be more difficult for The Netherlands to support Olmert if there are too many Lebanese...
- Pretty Much Sums This Issue Up For Me.....
OK, not even close. But this was a beautiful interchange I found in an article in Haaretz: "The European Union is greatly concerned about the disproportionate use of force by Israel in Lebanon in response to attacks by Hezbollah on Israel," according...
Green Energy
Weapon Testing
The War is being used to test a new weapon. Like all weapons tests the outcome will determine how the weapon is revised for future deployment. The weapon being tested is not a drone or a missile or a bunker buster bomb. It's a rhetorical weapon: the argument against so-called 'disproportionate response'.
The disproportionate response (DR) argument is all over the left-wing Web, from Prospect.org to the disreputable wingnut sites. The DR is an attempt to restrain Israel in a situation, conventional warfare, where they have the advantage. "Proportionality" is never defined. No examples of such are ever provided aside from the cheap and easy cry to "only hit Hezbollah targets."
Hezbollah committed an act of war. The leader of Hezbollah declared "open war". Under the old rules of war, this is justification for Israel to destroy Hezbollah utterly. But under the DR argument Israel has to be restrained to only cause a 'proportionate' amount of damage. Hezbollah indescriminately targets Israeli civilians. Israel bombs runways and roads and TV stations. Israel drops leaflets telling Lebanese to evacuate certain areas prior to attacks. Yet Israel is accused of disproportionality.
There are two kinds of disproportionality weasels. The first, the most simple minded, just count the casualties on each side and declare the side with the most dead to be the "victim" of the disproportional response. This argument display gross historical ignorance and a bizarre ethical system to say the least. Under this notion, Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were the victims of disproportionate US response. Sad.
The other DR weasels are more clever. They argue that "Israel has not taken every precaution to avoid killing innocent civilians". Naturally Every Precaution can never be taken as the number of precautions included in 'Every' would be infinite. Israel's attempts to avoid hitting civilians, which are inevitably incomplete, are dismissed because "intent is not enough." Israel is described as "belligerent" and "eager for war." These DR weasels ignore Hezbollah's belligerence. Indeed Hezbollah is dismissed as mere terrorists, or downplayed as a Shia gang, all the better to portray Israel in a worse light for "going balistic" on the poor Lebanese.
If this new rhetorical weapon succeeds then it will be deployed later against the US. I can hear it now. "Iran only killed 10,000 Americans. You can't destroy an entire country. You can't wipe out an ancient civilization. You can't," they will whine. "That's a disproportionate response."
Watch us.
- There Can Be No Moral Equivalency Regarding Israel And Hezbollah
Micah Halpern writes in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin about the problems with moral equivalency: Let's get this clear from the outset. There is no moral equivalency between the war Israel is waging against Hezbollah and the war Hezbollah is waging...
- Ben Stein Knows Best
How to Lose to Terrorists By Ben Stein Published 7/31/2006 12:09:22 AM We are in real serious trouble, and I'll tell you how and why I know it: * Because the Hezbollah -- as has been well reported -- launches missiles at purely civilian targets in...
- Canada's Leader Leads In Support Of Israel
A few weeks ago, Pastorius kindly invited me to IBA and this is my first post, to invite you to take a gander at my just-published "Why Stephen Harper is my hero" at Covenant Zone. It is fairly typical of my posts there and at Flares. The post is an exploration...
- The Netherlands Standing With Israel
Minister of Foreign Affairs Ben Bot has reportedly told Israel that the Dutch government understands Israel's situation and reaction. He also said that it would be more difficult for The Netherlands to support Olmert if there are too many Lebanese...
- Pretty Much Sums This Issue Up For Me.....
OK, not even close. But this was a beautiful interchange I found in an article in Haaretz: "The European Union is greatly concerned about the disproportionate use of force by Israel in Lebanon in response to attacks by Hezbollah on Israel," according...