Why do people keep calling Israel's attack "disproportional"?

Originally posted by xEphon

Remember a few weeks ago when Isreali killed 7 people on the palestinian beach which caused Hamas to end their cease-fire??
www.cnn.com...


[edit on 20-7-2006 by xEphon]

Remember when that story was later debunked becaused it turned out that the people were killed by a land mine placed on the beach by palestinians to keep Israeli commandos from coming ashore there?

article

Buzzwords plague discussion of the Middle East conflict. For too long the buzzword phrase was the so-called “occupied territories.” But today the new buzzword is “disproportionate response,” meaning that Israel is being admonished to not overreact to an act of war by her enemies.

Today the buzzword crowd seems more concerned about restraining Israel than in defeating the Islamic terrorists

visit source to read the (excellent) full article

Jan Hugland rightly points out that if Israel actually followed along with the media's idea it would ensure a "cycle of violence".

If we are to take this line of argument to its logical conclusion, then whenever a party kills one of your citizens, the "proportionate" response is to kill one of his in return. Leftists typically bemoan a "spiral of violence" in the Middle East, but obviously according to these international law "experts," a cycle of violence is not only a bad idea, it is the law!

A proportionate response to abuses of international law

So Israel can't win either way. They are helping a cycle of violence remain as it has for years, or they are reacting to harshly. I suppose the only choice left for them is to let the terrorist kill them all. Maybe that's what many people are hoping for.

Originally posted by Denied

"Disproportional" sounds a sad word for the total destruction of Lebanon.?

I take your point, and understand where you are coming from, but when you see Images such as these, than the word "Disproportional" does seem to fit rather well.

Israel has continued its campaign of air strikes with war planes bombing more than 40 targets, mainly in southern parts of Beirut in the early hours of Friday.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora said the number of Lebanese killed in the 10 days of violence is now more than 330.

Thirty-four Israelis have been killed in the fighting, including 15 civilians killed by rockets fired by Hezbollah into Israel
Source.

330 Lebanese lives for 34 Israelis. Again, seems "Disproportional" to me.

[edit on 21/7/06 by Implosion]

U.N. humanitarian chief Jan Egeland will travel to Beirut, hoping to win agreement to create safe routes into Lebanon for relief convoys.

Your link proves that it may hapen while nothing is hapening at present time, dont make predictions of the future.

* The Red Cross sent 22 tons of food and supplies, along with a nutritionist and a surgeon, from Beirut to Tyre, Lebanon, on Friday, according to the international relief agency.

Where are the red cross points, that food never got to the people, israely air jets just bomb everything coming from any point.

No it didn't. As they kidnapped the soldiers they fired rockets and mortor rounds into Israel. That's what started this whole thing. This is common knowledge.

Yes it did, and only after the boming of the international airports, I guess the pictures from above show clear that the whole city is in ruble and that this atack
is way about comon sence.




[edit on 21-7-2006 by pepsi78]

Noam Chomsky gives his opinion:

www.informationclearinghouse.info...

I saw the Lebanese prime minister on T.V. asking if the lives of Lebanese people were worth less than the lives of people in other nations. I felt the predominant opinion of the Western media, that Israel is justified in their 'measured response', as Harper said early into the attack, seems to evoke that idea.

Originally posted by Implosion

Originally posted by Denied

"Disproportional" sounds a sad word for the total destruction of Lebanon.?



I take your point, and understand where you are coming from, but when you see Images such as these, than the word "Disproportional" does seem to fit rather well.

Isreal is being bombarded by rockets coming from Lebanon.

Isreal's gets information that the leaders of Hizbollah are in a certain part of Beruit and other factions of them are in other parts of Beruit. Hizbollah leadership and forces are hiding cowardly among innocent people in a city. So, do you let them stay there safe and continue the attack on your country, or do you decide to take them out and prevent further attacks on your citizens.

So they bomb where they think the threat is coming from against its citizens.

Isn't that what you hope your country would do for you?

[edit on 22-7-2006 by Keyhole]

Originally posted by Keyhole

So they bomb where they think the threat is coming from against its citizens.

Isn't that what you hope your country would do for you?

I would hope that my country targets the right target and not places that have no connection. Thats not going to accomplish anything by hitting things that aren't firing at me.

10th Paragraph

As U.S. missionaries are reported safe, Lebanese Baptists describe suffering

For the first time, a July 19 attack targeted one of Beirut's Christian enclaves. Nobody was reported killed or injured in the attack, which reportedly struck well-drilling equipment parked in a lot.

Costa, the Lebanese Baptist leader, said in his July 19 communication that "New areas [of Beirut] were hit early this morning and at noon today -- both being areas where there are no Hizballa presence. Rationale? No one knows!"

It just proves they are not protecting their country but destroying another one.


Pie

Associated Baptist Press

If someone throws a rock at you, and you shoot them for it, its disproportionate.

The Nazi's had a policy of shoooting ten civilians for every german killed by the resistance - that was disproportionate.

Ripping out an entire nations infrastructure to respond to a minority is disproportionate.

I'm going to wade in on this one, with an analogy.

If the UK had applied the same rules to the IRA as Israel is doing with Hezbollah, large sections of Dublin, and other parts of the Irish Republic would have been bombed.

The Irish Government would have - rightly - pointed out that it had nothing to do with the IRA (as the Lebanese government is doing with Hezbollah) and asked for the attacks to stop, but the UK would have ignored that still have bombed out every bridge in Dublin, the power stations and any places suspected that might be holding IRA Terrorists.

The UK would also be massing troops at the Northern Irish border and carrying out incursions into the Republic of Irelands territory, after dropping leaflets telling people to get out of the way.

The Royal Navy would have put in place a blockade around the Irish coastline.

Now, if Britain had carried out this action in response to the atrocities carried out by the IRA Terrorists (they attacked our cities with bombs btw, just so you know - I was in the vicinity of two of the bombs that wrecked Manchester and Warrington when they went off - the Warrington bomb was originally intended to knock out a high pressure gas plant that would have levelled everything within a couple of miles of the detonation - such lovely people the IRA) a whole slew of people in the US would have described it as "disproportionate response"

Hell - take it to the extreme - I've seen some idiot posters on ATS advocate nuking the area to get rid of the probem. Maybe the UK should have nuked Dublin?

But....as its the Israeli's doing it to a bunch of Arabs, those people who would have condemned the UK's actions condone those of Israel.

Think about it. Theres so much rhetoric on here and most of it is mis-guided, stupidity from people who think they know about the situation, but are only seeing it from one side.


[edit on 22-7-2006 by neformore]

[edit on 22-7-2006 by neformore]

[edit on 22-7-2006 by neformore]

You have voted neformore for the Way Above Top Secret award.

Great post, now try to convince the ignorant of your statement.





[edit on 22-7-2006 by Mdv2]

Originally posted by marg6043
Well the problem is that while targeting Hezbollah militants Israel attacks are also bringing casualties into the Lebanese population that has nothing to do with Hezbollah.

Going in full force into a country just to target one group could be seen as to excessive by some.

Hahaha. I'm not sure if you meant that as a double, for the USA attacking Iraqi citizen's because Al Quida was there, but I think you nailed it!!!

I wish I could wake up one morning and everyone was nice to each other.

EDIT:

I think I should also add..

The USA should bomb the hell out of itself for housing terrorists (those guys that learned to fly here in America).

[edit on 7/22/2006 by Arcane Demesne]

Lol how would it be for england to atack irland for the IRA organisation, just bomb the crap out of them.

Man, you can't possibly be this clueless...

Originally posted by pepsi78
Your link proves that it may hapen while nothing is hapening at present time, dont make predictions of the future.

That's UN relief. Other relief (like the Red Cross) is already sending supplies,.

Where are the red cross points, that food never got to the people, israely air jets just bomb everything coming from any point.

wtf are you talking about??
The Red Cross trucks (or whatever they're using) have not been bombed...

Yes it did, and only after the boming of the international airports, I guess the pictures from above show clear that the whole city is in ruble and that this atack
is way about comon sence.

Again, what in the world are you talking about?
Look at any source

They will all say that this whole thing started when

The crisis was sparked when Hamas militants kidnapped Israeli soldier Cpl. Gilad Shalit three weeks ago, prompting Israel to launch a military offensive against the Gaza Strip. Hezbollah guerrillas then carried out a cross-border raid last Wednesday, kidnapping a further two Israeli soldiers and launching rockets and mortar bombs at towns in northern Israel and outposts in the disputed Shabaa Farms area.

If you have ANY source. ANY source (credible or not) at all that says otherwise, please show us.


As are as the throwing rocks, and IRA comparisons.....LOL!!
This is starting to be hillarious!
They're not throwing rocks, just to throw rocks. They're throwing rocks to wipe you off the planet. If someone was throwing rocks at you desperately trying to kill you, what would you do? Just stand there??
No! Don't be silly. You'd stop them!

The IRA's goal is political in nature. Their goal is not annihilation so the situations are dealt with differently....

[edit on 22-7-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

As are as the throwing rocks, and IRA comparisons.....LOL!!
This is starting to be hillarious!
They're not throwing rocks, just to throw rocks. They're throwing rocks to wipe you off the planet. If someone was throwing rocks at you desperately trying to kill you, what would you do? Just stand there??

No! Don't be silly. You'd stop them!

The IRA's goal is political in nature. Their goal is not annihilation so the situations are dealt with differently....

[edit on 22-7-2006 by ThatsJustWeird]

Oh dear.
I feel sorry for you.
You aren't intelligent enough to understand the comparison I made.
I'm not going to argue with you, I'm just going to pity you.

Originally posted by neformore
Oh dear.
I feel sorry for you.
You aren't intelligent enough to understand the comparison I made.
I'm not going to argue with you, I'm just going to pity you.

Maybe they are special rocks only found in Palestine ?

Originally posted by centurion1211
Remember when that story was later debunked becaused it turned out that the people were killed by a land mine placed on the beach by palestinians to keep Israeli commandos from coming ashore there?

Derbunked by who? The israelis? palestinian doctors and Human Rights Watch said it was not wounds from a land mine but wounds from shells. This was what started everything, first the appology, then the denial, then placing the blame on the new government, then 2 days later a "pinpoint target" attack missed the carload of "terrorists", hit a 5 year old child and a pregnant civilian walking on the street as well as several others dead or injured. No terrorists were killed or injured in the attack.
Talk about adding insult to injury.



Pie

Originally posted by neformore
Oh dear.
I feel sorry for you.
You aren't intelligent enough to understand the comparison I made.
I'm not going to argue with you, I'm just going to pity you.

No I understood completely. It's just not a good example as the two situations are in every way different.

The structures that are being targeted (not saying that other non targeted structures haven't been hit as you can see) in Lebonan are essential to Hezbollah and it's operations. If you were fighting a war against a group that was trying to completely destroy you, what would you do? Wouldn't you go after everything that they need to continue their operations?
Yeah it sucks for Lebanon, but that's their and the UN's fault for not dealing with Hezbollah sooner.

Funny how that question is never answered and I know it probably won't get answered this time. If someone was trying to wipe you out, how would you react and what would you do?

Originally posted by centurion1211

Originally posted by xEphon

Remember a few weeks ago when Isreali killed 7 people on the palestinian beach which caused Hamas to end their cease-fire??
www.cnn.com...


[edit on 20-7-2006 by xEphon]

Remember when that story was later debunked becaused it turned out that the people were killed by a land mine placed on the beach by palestinians to keep Israeli commandos from coming ashore there?

article

Read the entire article. Including the discussion at the end.
Clearly there are conflicting opinions. There was no argument from either side that this was an artillary shell from the IDF, however, once the Palestinians got up in arms about it, and started to retaliate because Isreal once again walked over the cease-fire agreement, magically the IDF started to claim no fault, and released their "investigation," contrary to what the Human Rights Watch has found.

So! Who am I to believe?
The IDF, who could very well be trying to cover their butts...
Or an independent Human Rights Watch...

I really dont know, but I would hardly call it 'debunked'.
Afterall, what was the IDF firing artillery into Palestine during a time of cease fire anyway!?

[edit on 22-7-2006 by xEphon]

[edit on 22-7-2006 by xEphon]

Originally posted by xEphon

I really dont know, but I would hardly call it 'debunked'.
Afterall, what was the IDF firing artillery into Palestine during a time of cease fire anyway!?

That other group had been attacking Israel. It was not Hamas but they blamed Hamas for not doing anything, of course since they had no money, no fuel and employees working for over a month with no pay, who was going to chase a bunch of terrorists risk his butt and not even be able to feed his family. It was a catch-22 for them and I think Israel just waited for the right excuse to get rid of them. As witnessed in the unwarranted arrest of practically their entire cabinet.


Pie

How can lebanon army stop hesbolah when the army is weaken after a long israely invasion and a civil war.
How can you blame some one that does not have the power to do anything because the army it's self fears hesbolah.
In stead of aiding the lebanon army by making it more powerful by international aid to try to combat hesbolah, israel decides to bomb the crap of it's civilans and kill people in mass only a week and a few days passed and there are already 300+ people killed, alot more injured and people wondering around with out shelter,food, and no place to lay their heads.
I thought that civilians always came first, that in the line of fire civilians were the most important ones that had to be speard.
At the moment I see israel no more better than hesbolah.

Originally posted by ThatsJustWeird

The structures that are being targeted (not saying that other non targeted structures haven't been hit as you can see) in Lebonan are essential to Hezbollah and it's operations. If you were fighting a war against a group that was trying to completely destroy you, what would you do? Wouldn't you go after everything that they need to continue their operations?

Yes. As the Provisional IRA tried to wipe out the entire British Government in an unprecedented attack on the Conservative Party conference in Brighton, I'd say they were trying to destroy the British way of life. Therefore - using your logic - the UK should have bombed Dublin, surely?

sucks for Lebanon, but that's their and the UN's fault for not dealing with Hezbollah sooner.

Yes, it would have sucked for Dublin, but they should have dealt with the IRA sooner.

Funny how that question is never answered and I know it probably won't get answered this time. If someone was trying to wipe you out, how would you react and what would you do?

Thats because your question is a stupid one and proves absolutely nothing. Of course people would react to a deadly force with its equivalent. However, as I've stated previously, wiping out an entire countries infrastructure to prevent a handful of people from doing something is crassly disproportionate.

If you think Hezbollah can wipe out Israel then you are sadly deluded. The comparison between Hezbollahs actions and those of the IRA is hugely valid, and if you don't believe me, read about what they did here

en.wikipedia.org...

Or were their actions acceptable to you?

Why are you just spouting the continual rhetoric thats spoonfed as propaganda and not looking at the real picture?

[edit on 22-7-2006 by neformore]