Is that a bleating I hear from around the globe? “Israel’s response to Hizbollah is disproportionate.” “Israel must abide by the doctrine of proportionality.” And so forth.
If that is indeed bleating I hear, the sheep are once again being misled by wolves that only look and sound like sheep. Their diet reveals them for what they are . . . a revelation that tends to come too late for the wooly, short-sighted mutton clan.
If Hizbollah has expended 10% of its missiles and rockets against mostly-civilian targets, it seems a proportionate Israeli response would be to use at least 10% of its arsenal against Hizbollah.
If Hizbollah has been attacking Israel on and off for six years, then it seems a proportionate Israeli response would be at least six year’s worth of on-and-off attacks against Hizbollah . . . compressed into six weeks (for example).
If Hizbollah is using civilian areas for launching attacks, then it seems a proportionate Israeli response would be at least attacks on those same civilian areas.
If Hizbollah precipitated this latest round of conflict by killing eight Israeli soldiers and abducting two in an unprovoked raid, then it seems there can be no proportionate Israeli response. Mathematically, how do you match a 0/8 proportion? It is a proportion of infinity. It is without limit.
Now, why do I say at least as often as I do? Because it doesn’t seem proportionate to me to allow the aggressor to define that proportion. That in itself is utterly disproportionate.
Look at it mathematically again. If the aggressor kills one in an unprovoked attack, is the proportionate response to kill only one? Of course not! The aggressor, by attacking unprovoked, leaves his target free to respond way out of proportion to the initial attack . . . because that is precisely what the aggressor did. You see, an unprovoked attack is already a disproportionate action.
Thus, those calling for a proportionate Israeli response are unwittingly calling for Israel to unleash her military might on her enemies.
(Does this post reveal a bloodthirsty streak in a non-resistant conservative Mennonite heart? Of course not. Each life lost in this conflict was so precious in God’s sight that He sent His only Son to die for that person’s eternal redemption.)
Hey Mark. I’ve seen you around Worldmag – first visit to your blog, though. I like it. I often find we agree on subjects, but you are usually much better at communicating them. Good comments!