Harry’s Place

Creating imaginary consequences and exploiting apocalyptic scenarios in order to terrorize your own population is totalitarian.

PS http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1102ap_lt_venezuela_israel.html

Good article.

André Glucksmann is absolutely right. This is a war between barbarism and civilisation.
War is war. It possesses no rules but that which we could agree upon. Excluding the nonsensical 1977 amendments, the Geneva Conventions provide such an AGREED framework. Civilised states sign up to this - the uncivilised do not.

I’m sorry, Mrs. Weinstein. Your son had to die because it was deemed by the world’s chatterers that our use of amored vehicles and attack helicopters was disproportionate, so instead we ordered him to fight fair.

Well, mesquito, Flanker tells us that Venezuela has expelled the Israeli ambassador.

I’m sure that will make the Israelis sit up and take notice; Chavez is such a friend of Israel!

fwanker argue glucksmann’s points, don’t change the subject.

‘Wanting to survive is not disproportionate.’

- brilliantly said.

Many thanks for posting this.

actually i meant to say argue Glucksmann’s points or bugger off. on second thought, just bugger off.

mesquito:

One may also ask the world’s chatterers what’s so proportionate or selective about hailing thousands of rockets on a southern Israeli town populated by unarmed civilians who are primarily Jews who fled Morocco and other Muslim countries. Even if they don’t kill that many inhabitants, it’s rendered their lives hell with the intent to disposess them yet again because they’re Jews.

I’m on your side here, Lynne T.

HP you’re on fire over Gaza/Israel. Brilliant stuff recently folks. Brilliant.

“If the adversaries were able to reach an agreement on the means to be employed and the ends to be pursued they would cease to be adversaries.”

Perhaps the IDF should have invaded Gaza, a pair of gloves their only weapon, uttering “pistols at dawn you cads.”

Flanker tells us that Venezuela has expelled the Israeli ambassador.

From the article:

“Now I hope that the Venezuelan Jewish community speaks out against this barbarism. Do it. Don’t you strongly reject all acts of persecution?” Chavez said.

Can you imagine the outcry from Fwanker, Zin, JohnG and all the other far left rabble, if an American president in response to a Palestinian bombing in Israel singled out Arab Americans and demanded they prove their loyalty to US government decisions and condemn it?

That would truly be “totalitarian”, Fwanker — take note.

“Given that Hamas, unlike the Palestinian Authority, persists in refusing to respect Israel’s right to exist ”
Those Hamas bastards,refusing to recognise Israel’s right to exist inside wherever Israel decides unilaterally its borders will be located.And Israel has done nothing at all to deny the existence of any Palestinian state.

Lynne, I have seen pictures of some of the damage caused by those paelstinian rockets. I have seen house walls with holes blasted right through them. And I have seen a house that didn’t even get a direct hit, but every tile on the roof was smashed, all the windows were broken, there was a small crater in the road outside, and the windscreens of all the parked cars in the street were blasted to bits.

The roofline didn’t look straight, and the structural integrity must be in some doubt.

If that happened here in England, many more casualties would result because we have no warning system, and we have an expectation of going about our business without being victimised. We consider ourselves entitled to not be bombed, ever. And we don’t keep our gas masks and emergency supplies in the cupboard under the stairs.
I hope we never have to get into that mindset again, but the best way to prevent that is to stand against the terrorists, wherever they are.

” Don’t you strongly reject all acts of persecution?” Chavez said.”
That sod,Chavez.He is trying to start a Will-you condemn-athon! We are the guys who start Will-you-condemn-athons!

‘blahlblahblah’ being the cupid stunt that he/she is might have been in a coma since 1993, and missed efforts by Israel to negotiate a two-state solution. But I think a more plausible explanation might be found for his/her attitude.

Incidentally, it’s worth noting the contrast between blogosphere voices bleating about the current violence in Gaza, and their attitudes towards the Russian onslaught on Georgia last August. In the latter case, the current critics of Israeli ‘brutality’ had no problems apologising for a Russian neo-Imperialist venture against a small neighbouring state that had the gall not to subject itself to Moscow’s will. So much for pacifism and defence of proportionality.

Given that Israel has not committed itself to the elimination of Hamas, an aim that is urely warranted, but whose acheivement would require a far greater loss of gazan citizens, its behaviour is way below the level of proportionate response.

if israel were to match Hamas’s aims it would simply have to bomb Gaza out of existence, destroy its infrastructure and deny all humanitarian aid.

Israel won’t do that so to call its behaviour genocidal is not really worth responding to as if it were a factual statment worthy of a serious response.

HP you’re on fire over Gaza/Israel. Brilliant stuff recently folks. Brilliant.

Seconded.

“Proportionality” is a word that dances between how you respond to a stimulus and the goal you need to achive in response to the stimulus.

“Proportionality” is a plank of wood sitting on a fulcrum. The objective, according to everyone who judges “Proportionality”, is to achieve a horizintal equilibrium of the plank by applying a downward force on either side. A weight if you like.

Now, depending on what the stimulating force is that requires you respond by placing your weight along the length of the plank on your side. But you may choose. You apply a larger force nearer the fulcrum to balance it than you need if its further away.

That is how you define “Proportionality” its an analogue value that is needed to maintain an equal response but that value may be ten times the original stimulus.

99 ………………. 299
—————————————
………………!…………………

See what I mean?

I agree that proportionality as it has been (mis-)defined by knee-jerk Israel-haters is useless, but the concept of proportionality as a guide for how civilised nations conduct themselves in war most certainly is not.

Let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.

The fact is that every single rocket fired from Gaza could have killed one or more Israelis. The fact that they didn’t is irrelevant.

“The roofline didn’t look straight, and the structural integrity must be in some doubt.”

—

That reminds me of the Fawlty Towers episode when Basil hired the Irish contractor against Sybille’s instructions.

Flankey is full of shit as usual.

This is the best part of the article:

“In the Middle East the fight is not about respecting a set of rules but rather in order to establish them.”

Let’s remember that!

Those who want Israel to abide by certian standards need to realize that Hamas and Jihadists don’t acknowledge the same standards as being valid.

They reject all restraints. Hence the imbalance in ends. Yet, those so called humanitarians who are also antisemites, want Israel to abide by some imaginary proportion of means.

HP on fire: Trying to keep up while in the USA, I too am deeply appreciative amid the welter of noise, for the quality and intensity of HP’s invaluable resources over the past week.

“Given that Hamas, unlike the Palestinian Authority, persists in refusing to respect Israel’s right to exist and dreams of annihilating its citizens, do we want Israel to imitate this radicalism and proceed to carry out a gigantic ethnic cleansing? Do we really want Israel to “respond proportionately” to the exterminationist desires of Hamas?”

This is pretty unhinged. You can go to
http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/pdf/hamas_e017.pdf
and read the report by the
“Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center at the
Israel Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center” on
“The Six Months of the Lull Arrangement”, in which it says that
between June 19 and Nov 4,
“Hamas was careful to maintain the ceasefire” and that
after Nov. 4 Hamas attacked Israel “in retaliation” for the
IDF military action.

And the PCHR report of that “action” is here:
http://www.pchrgaza.org/files/PressR/English/2008/102-2008.html

The Six Months of the Lull Arrangement”, in which it says that
between June 19 and Nov 4,

That statement isn’t true. The first breach of a ceasefire was 23rd June with a mortar and then 24th June with three rockets.

Here’s the thing.

Instead of admitting that it fires rockets randomly, Hamas should say:

Actually, we have nothing against the ordinary Israeli citizen. Our issue is with Likud, which flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian state as per its charter, platform and statements to the media.

Therefore, we are firing 100 rockets a day in an attempt to hit their headquarters. Some collateral damage may result, but we’re aiming the rockets towards the Likud HQ’s.

If only Hamas said that, no commentator at HP would oppose the launching of the rockets. Hamas has all the right in the world to try to wipe out Likud: just look at their hateful charter.

The Hasbara Buster - That’s completely stupid as the Likud HQ is in Tel Aviv and the rockets fired don’t have the range to reach there nor are they so inaccurate that they would miss by such a margin if they were. Keep clutching at straws though.

You still can’t kill people.