White House Promises “Proportional Response” to Sony Hack

Obama-Talks-Sony

The White House and its media corps lambasted Israel for disproportionately bombing Hamas in response to its murders of Israelis and rocket attacks. The criticism however makes no sense.

And yet the White House is promising a proportional response to the Sony hack.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest addressed the cyber-attack against Sony over the movie The Interview at Thursday’s daily briefing. Earnest promised a “proportional response.”

REPORTER: What is the United States going to do about it?

JOSH EARNEST, WHITE HOUSE: Well, before we start publicly speculating about a response, it’s appropriate that we allow the investigation to move forward. I do understand that the investigation is progressing, and that as the members of the national security team meet to discuss the matter, they are considering a range of options. As they do so, though, they are mindful of a couple of things.

First of all, as we would be in any scenario, sort of strategic scenario like this, they would be mindful of the fact that we need a proportional response. And also mindful of the fact that sophisticated actors, when they carry out actions like this are often times — not always, but often — seeking to provoke a response from the United States of America. They may believe that a response from us in one fashion or another would be advantageous to them. And so we want to be mindful of that, too, and the president’s national security team is mindful of those two important strategic considerations as they consider a range of available responses

To parse the last part of that gibberish, Obama’s smart liberal power tells us not to respond to North Korea because that will just give it what it wants.

But as for the rest of it, what is a proportional response to unconventional warfare anyway?

Do we hack one of the movie studios they don’t have and post private correspondence from the party bosses who run it and then threaten that if the release of Yankee American Devils Go to Hell goes forward that we might possibly bomb their theaters?

This situation reminds us that the whole talking point of the proportional response is meaningless concept that has no application, especially when dealing with terrorists.

  • http://www.stubbornthings.org NAHALKIDES

    “Proportional response” seems to have been a concept stolen by just-war weaklings from ordinary statutes governing the use of force in everyday situations. Thus if a man attacks me barehanded, I cannot automatically use disproportionate force against him. Note, however, that if I reasonably believe my life is threatened, than I can use lethal force, which is no longer disproportionate to the threat. (E.g., the Zimmerman/Martin case where Zimmerman could have reasonably concluded he was in danger of death or serious bodily injury at Martin’s hands).

    It has no place in international relations, where an aggressor should be met with maximum force, up to and including his total destruction, in response to his aggression. The problem with Israel and with the U.S. for that matter is that we have been far too restrained. Hamas should have been pursued unto its death, while Iran should have suffered massive strikes for its support of the unlawful combatants who planted roadside IEDs that killed many of our troops in Iraq.

  • JJ

    “Proportional response” from this administration means: some sort of a hashtag blitzkrieg, perhaps a beer summit at the White House, or an apology for American imperialism.

  • Rebel

    “To parse the last part of that gibberish”… and that is why I love reading Daniel Greenfield’s articles

  • truebearing

    If the US response is proportional to the rest of Obama’s proportional responses, Obama will close all theaters for one month and threaten to arrest anyone who mocks Kim Fat-un.

  • http://ruleofreason.blogspot.com/ Edward Cline

    Josh Earnest seems fond of the term “mindful.” Perhaps his mind is just full of it, and he’s just joshing us.

  • dwayne roberson

    Leftist policy results in inevitable decline, and is as reliable as gravity. National decline is manifest in it’s economy, military/national security, individual freedom, standard of living, AND freedom of expression. The freedom of expression bit is not a big deal when it involves government intimidate tax policy of tea party folks…but when you leak Madonna’s unreleased demos, well then, you have crossed the line. That IS Terrorism! Sony, based in Japan, still is a major free market icon. They are running scared, Obama doctrine?…apologetic, scattered and about as focused as LBJ on the defeat of the Viet Kong. Maybe now, we could hope and pray some of the folks in Hollywood can spot this pathetic trend of weakness. Crave a Renaissance, an awakening, to stop the left. America is a good thing. STOP THE DECLINE. When we identify our enemy, do not mince words. Don’t break bread with dictators, swap hostages, engage with silly sanctions. You can only expect confusion and disrespect. Stop our decline…”Peace through Strength”. Identify the decline, leftist policy.

  • bob e

    dan .. a cheeky little problem has come up .. after reading your excellent essays. my girl friend has decided she likes you .. more than she likes me ..
    says my mind has turned to rot .. and yours is ‘keen & decisive’ ..

    i told her i would vote for hillary OR fake-a-hontas or both .. so please
    don’t encourage her …

    • Daniel_Greenfield

      In Chicago, you could vote for all three.

  • Texas Patriot

    DG: But as for the rest of it, what is a proportional response to unconventional warfare anyway?

    That does seem to be the thing Netanyahu doesn’t get, doesn’t it. Apparently, he doesn’t see anything wrong (or disproportional) about a kill ratio of 20 to 1 or 40 to 1, or whatever it was. The rest of the world sees it, but for some reason Netanyahu can’t see it. Here’s a hint. Hamas knows exactly what it’s doing, and that kind of disproportionate kill ratio is exactly what Hamas wanted. Netanyahu may say, but we were attacked and we had no alternative but to make them pay a “heavy price”. Normally, I am a large fan of Netanyahu, but his logic is faulty in this instance. Israel did have an alternative, and that was to confiscate Gazan land under the doctrine of defensive forfeiture. The forfeiture of a small strip of land coupled with the expulsion of all hostile or potentially hostile forces from the forfeited land is all that would have been required to send a very large message to Hamas, i.e. if you keep attacking us, we will keep taking your land away from you until, (a) the attacks cease altogether, or (b) you have no more land to attack us from If Israel has to take heat from the world media, it is much better to take it for confiscating land than killing people. Why Israel can’t see this, I have no idea.

    • Daniel_Greenfield

      The same governments and people upset about 4 Hamas terrorists dying to 1 Israeli soldier would lose their minds with rage if Israel began confiscating land and annexing it.

      While Israel should annex land, the idea that there is something wrong with larger enemy casualties or that the diplomatic and worldview consequences would be the same either way are both wrong.

      • Texas Patriot

        DG: The same governments and people upset about 4 Hamas terrorists dying to 1 Israeli soldier would lose their minds with rage if Israel began confiscating land and annexing it.

        I thought we had already established that caring about whether Muslims lose their minds with rage is not a viable planning tool. They will lose their minds with rage no matter what Israel does. What does matter is how the rest of the world sees the situation, and as long as Israel’s kill ratio is much larger than Hamas’, the world will have an easy time of it saying that it is disproportional and inappropriate. Therefore, a key focus should be keeping human casualties to a minimum and trying to keep the ratio proportional if at all possible. If Israel loses a soldier, Hamas should lose one of its leaders. Otherwise, just keep on confiscating land until the attacks stop or Hamas is pushed into the sea. That is really the only viable strategy available to Israel going forward at this point in time.

        • Daniel_Greenfield

          I’m not talking about Muslims. I’m talking about Western governments losing their minds with rage.

          • Texas Patriot

            Most Western governments today are still running scared of Muslim rage, and that’s not a new phenomenon. From the time of the Munich Olympics until now, most Western governments, and indeed probably most Westerners, have assumed that Muslims are filled with rage arising from causes like “Israel stole their land”, “Israel committed genocide”, or “Israel is guilty of ethnic cleansing”.

            However, I think the automatic supposition that Muslims are justified in their rage is gradually giving way to a more realistic assessment of the situation. We now know that there are many other reasons why Muslims have a tendency to “lose their minds with rage”, including “being non=Muslim on Muslim lands without an invitation”, “non-Muslims proselytizing Muslims away from Islam”, “cartoons depicting Muhammad”, “any imagined insult to Islam or Muhammad”, or as Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller have discovered, even telling the truth about the teachings and life example of Muhammad and telling the truth about the history of Muslim conquests throughout the world.

            Therefore, at a time when Western governments, and indeed most Westerners, are beginning to wake up to the reality of Islamic teachings and Islamic history, I think it is important for Israel to make absolutely clear that it does not hate Muslims individually, that Muslims are human beings with human rights just like everyone else in the world, but that Israel has a right to exist, that Israel has a right to stand up for Western values of individual freedom, human rights, and constitutional democracy, and that Israel will not tolerate attacks from those who seek its destruction, whether those attacks may come from within the State of Israel or from outside its borders, and that any aggression by the forces of Islamic Jihad will be met with immediate and forcible and ejection and expulsion of those responsible.

            In other words, if Israel can find a way to stand up for the human rights of all people, including Muslims, but at the same time adopt a zero-tolerance policy toward the ideology of Islamic Jihad and all those who adhere to it and practice it, I think that most Western governments, and indeed most Westerners, will begin to have a much better understanding and appreciation of the hellish situation in which Israel finds itself as well as the hellish situation we all face as a result of permitting Islamic Jihadists to come into our midst and remain in our midst.

            Even if Muslim rage never subsides, the unthinking and reflexive rage of Western governments will begin to subside if it is clear beyond all doubt that Israel is a true champion of the Western values of individual freedom, human rights, and constitutional democracy in the midst of those who have no respect for those values.

          • Edd2013

            Excellent communicator.

  • fmobler

    Q: Why is no one interviewing Dennis Rodman for his expert opinion on this? A: Racism.

  • BMS

    President Obama’s proportional response will be to do NOTHING!. That’s how this President deals with real threats. Besides, he’s not going to do anything that interferes with his Hawaiian vacation…or based on recent events will he be vacationing in Cuba with his friend Castro.