Promoting ‘Proportionality’ in the Service of Genocide

propOnce again, in warfare between Israel and its neighbors, Israel’s critics note the many more dead and wounded among the Jewish state’s adversaries than among Israelis and attack Israel for disproportionate use of force. While photos of dead and wounded civilians, or of non-combatants desperately fleeing fighting around their homes, should elicit everyone’s sympathy, the translating of that sympathy into a “proportionality” argument with which to beat Israel is less an expression of humane sensitivity to the plight of innocent victims than a display of sanctimonious depravity.

International law includes a concept of proportionality as it applies to warfare. Intentionally targeting civilians constitutes not simply a criminal act but a crime against humanity. It is also considered a crime to attack a military target when it is clear that the likely incidental civilian injuries and deaths will be disproportionate to any likely military advantage to be gained as a result of the attack.

Consider the nature of the conflict between Hamas and Israel. Hamas is explicit in its genocidal intent, stating in its charter and in myriad declarations by its representatives that its goal is not only the annihilation of Israel but the slaughter of all Jews. It makes clear that it has zero interest in the establishment of a Palestinian state living peacefully alongside Israel.

Apologists for Hamas’s Gaza regime claim that Israel, by blocking open access to Gaza, has, in effect, created an open-air prison in which Gazans suffer constant deprivation and so the organization has the right to try to break the Israeli siege. But from the time that Israel pulled all its citizens and troops out of Gaza, in 2005, the Palestinian leadership in the territory has pursued rocket attacks into Israel, and those attacks only escalated after Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007. To the degree that Israel has limited access to Gaza, it has done so in response to these incessant bombardments and other assaults. In addition, its doing so is consistent with international law regarding states of belligerency and, for example, the United Nations has upheld the legitimacy of Israel’s naval blockade of Gaza.

Moreover, the Israeli “siege” is typically overstated as totally cutting off Gaza from the wider world. In fact, one of Gaza’s borders is controlled by Egypt, not Israel. Further, huge amounts of goods enter Gaza on an almost daily basis from Israel and many Gazans cross back and forth between Gaza and Israel. Even during the current war, Israel continues to supply electricity and water to Gaza and continues to allow the daily passage of tons of goods, including food and medicine, into Hamas-controlled territory.

Also noteworthy is that Israel not only fully withdrew from the territory but left behind assets that could have contributed to Gaza establishing itself on a sound economic foundation. With the extensive financial support poured into Gaza by the international community, it could have become a Middle East Hong Kong or Singapore.

But Hamas has chosen to pursue its war of annihilation against Israel rather than create a prospering polity. It destroyed many of the economic assets left behind by Israel and devoted the huge influx of money provided by the Arab world and others in the international community to killing Israelis and trying to expunge the Jewish state instead of seeking to improve the lives and welfare of its people.

A major element of the current fighting is Israel’s effort to dismantle the extensive and highly sophisticated tunnel system built by Hamas to infiltrate and attack Israelis and to protect rocket launch sites and command and control centers. Israel had for a time, in the wake of earlier hostilities with Hamas, withheld deliveries of cement out of concern that it would be used to build underground military installations rather than houses and public facilities such as schools and hospitals. It subsequently bowed to international pressure and allowed extensive transfer of cement and related construction materials from Israel to Gaza, and its worst fears proved prescient. For Hamas, the well-being of Gaza’s civilians counts for nothing when measured against the murder of Israelis and extermination of their state.

Hamas initiated the recent conflict with indiscriminate rocket fire into Israel, targeting towns and villages and aiming – consistent with its broad genocidal objective – to kill as many Israelis as possible. It pursued its attacks with its leaders, its fighters, its caches of rockets, its launchers and its command and control centers, imbedded in heavily populated areas of Gaza, amid civilian houses and often within or in close proximity to hospitals, mosques and schools.

Hamas is thus doubly guilty of crimes against humanity as conceived in international law, guilty both in its targeting of civilian populations and in its use of civilian populations as human shields. (Regarding the former, even the Palestinian representative at the UN Human Rights Council acknowledged earlier this month that “[t]he missiles that are now being launched against Israel – each and every missile constitutes a crime against humanity whether it hits or misses, because it is directed at a civilian target.”

Israel, in turn, is faced with the choice of simply tolerating the onslaught, resigning itself to a large majority of its population living under the threat of recurrent rocket attack and forced repeatedly to flee to shelter or to spend hours in safe rooms, or of responding and attacking Hamas in an effort to end the threat. No nation would choose the former.

Any honest observer would acknowledge that Israel, unlike its enemies, does not intentionally target civilians. Moreover, in its targeting of Hamas operatives and assets, it goes to unique levels to avoid civilian casualties. This includes telephoning and leafleting civilians, and taking other measures as well, warning them to leave areas about to be struck. Israel does so despite the fact that it is thereby giving advanced notice to those it is targeting. Commonly, Hamas urges their human shields not to act on the warnings but to stay where they are, and the civilians, either out of devotion to Hamas or out of greater fear of Hamas than of the Israelis, do not leave. Israel also frequently aborts attacks, even on high-level Hamas military personnel, when civilians are nearby. Hamas sees itself as winning whatever Israel does: If Israel aborts attacks or gives sufficient warning so that operatives can escape and assets be moved, Hamas gains by maintaining its war machine. If Israel attacks despite the presence of civilians, Hamas can cynically use the death of innocents as propaganda tools against Israel and will have willing accomplices among the world’s political leaders and media outlets to promote its propaganda message.

At times, of course, Israel does err in a military strike, as is inevitable in warfare. It may have faulty intelligence about who is at a location. It may, rarely, mistake innocents for combatants (and Hamas combatants do not wear uniforms, largely to be able to blend into the civilian population and make it more difficult for Israel to distinguish them). Its ordinance may misfire and land somewhere other than the intended target. It may hit depots that contain much more explosives than anticipated and set off extensive secondary explosions that engulf innocents.

But while Israel’s critics may at times latch onto errors of this sort, particularly if their tragic consequences provide, for Hamas propaganda, good photo opportunities, their accusations of disproportionality against Israel rest more broadly on the point of Palestinian casualties far exceeding in number Israeli victims.

Again, however, the issue of proportionality in terms of international law refers not to numbers but to the obligation not to take military action when the likelihood of civilian casualties outweighs the military significance of the target.

Yet, since Hamas so thoroughly imbeds its personnel and materiel within civilian populations, it is inevitable that – in situations where Israel is able to defend its own population despite intense and indiscriminate attack, as in the current conflict with use of the Iron Dome system – Palestinian casualties will be much higher than Israeli casualties. The accusation of disproportionality based on numbers of dead and injured routinely leveled against Israel, despite its efforts to minimize the harming of civilians, becomes then essentially an argument that there is no Hamas military asset Israel can target that justifies the endangerment of civilian lives.

It becomes, in effect, an argument that Hamas should be free to pursue its genocidal campaign against Israel without Israel being allowed to defend itself.

The disproportionality accusation is ultimately an argument in support of the destruction of Israel. This is the ultimate thrust of, for example, British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg’s accusing Israel of “a disproportionate form of collective punishment,” and complaints of Israel’s use of disproportionate force by the prime ministers of Belgium and Finland, and the declaration issued by the EU that Israel “must act proportionately,” with its implication that Israel has not been doing so, and the promotion of such indictments by myriad voices in the world’s media.

To be sure, many such accusations are accompanied, at least in the political arena, by criticism of Hamas for its rocket attacks. Nick Clegg’s statement is certainly different in tone from that of his fellow Liberal Democrat MP, David Ward, who wrote that if he lived in Gaza he would likely join in Hamas’s crimes against humanity by firing rockets targeting Israeli civilians. But any accompanying criticism of Hamas is little more than pro forma when Israel is, in effect, being taken to task for any effort to strike back at her attackers and end the onslaught against her. The thrust of the disproportionality argument is to deprive Israel of effective self-defense and is a display of moral perversion on the part of its purveyors.

Kenneth Levin is a psychiatrist and historian and author of The Oslo Syndrome: Delusions of a People under Siege.

*

Don’t miss Dr. Anna Geifman on The Glazov Gang this week discussing “Life in Israel Under Siege,” “Who is Killing Palestinian Children?”, and much more:

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • EvaKJones

    my classmate’s ex-wife makes $79 every hour on the
    computer . She has been laid off for 9 months but last month her check was $21770
    just working on the computer for a few hours. check here J­a­m­2­0­.­C­O­M­

    • DaCoachK

      Quit pimping your crap on here.

      • Gee

        She changes her name daily so just flag and move on

  • http://libertyandculture.blogspot.com/ Jason P

    An excellent review of the context and nature of Israel’s self-defense, Hamas’ goals, and the role of useful idiots around the world. Israel’s critics are indeed implying “that Hamas should be free to pursue its genocidal campaign against Israel without Israel being allowed to defend itself.” They should be condemned as enablers of Hamas’ behavior.

    By the way, I recommend the author’s book, “The Oslo Syndrome”.

    • johngvanvliet

      You right Jason I like what Levin wrote and if you see what the media is doing, it is unbelievable !!! Hamas and muslims in general are very skilled as how to deceive people and nations and we see ample of examples in the Muslim world of that…. Kerry and Obama are traitors and I think the the Israeli PM is fed up with them… So destroy Hamas!!!!!

  • swemson

    I’ve never understood the virtue of proportionality….

    If the neighborhood bully throws rocks at weaker kids, you don’t teach him a lesson by throwing rocks back at him… you start by beating the crap out of him and maybe breaking his throwing arm. If that doesn’t teach him a lesson, then it’s clear that all he understands is superior force.

    Since your primary objective is to protect the weaker kids, then at that point you’ve got to do whatever you have to, because as Ed Koch once said, when speaking of muslim teenagers throwing rocks at old Jewish men praying at the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem: “Rocks can be deadly weapons!”

    fs

  • Sharmake Yusuf

    ISRAEL FITS THE BILL OF WAR CRIMES IN GAZA ACCORDING TO THIS LEGAL DEFINITION OF THE WRITER: “It is also considered a crime to attack a military target when it is clear that the likely incidental civilian injuries and deaths will be disproportionate to any likely military advantage to be gained as a result of the attack.”

    • Hard Little Machine

      Nuke Gaza, then napalm the rubble. Scrape everything down to the bedrock, spray liberally with Sarin. Wash off the residue and start over with humans this time.

      • Sharmake Yusuf

        From whence does such raw hatred spring from?

        • Harry_the_Horrible

          Do you ever ask that question of Hamas and its supporters, which openly supports genocide of the Jews, that question?

        • Webb

          Waaaaaaah! Cry louder, O Shwarmi! We enjoy such pitiful moaning from you.

        • Drakken

          You effing inbred ragheads and your God forsaken Devil worshiping false pedophile prophet, any more dumb questions.

    • Gee

      Stopping attacks on 7 million people – means that leveling all of Gaza is not disproportional. Logic and facts are not your log suit

    • Webb

      Sez Shwarmi as he rubs his hole with his left hand. Yum yum.

    • Habbgun

      You meet the definition of a bhazi boy. A man bending over for any propagandist anywhere. What kind of slob are you? Every leftist uses your so called religion as a dumping ground. You haven’t denied it. I’ve noticed that.

    • nyesq1

      Article 27 of the Hague Convention:

      ” In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps should be taken to
      spare as far as possible edifices devoted to religion, art, science, and
      charity, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are
      collected, provided they are not used at the same time for MILITARY
      PURPOSES.”

      • IslamDownpressesHumanity

        Excellent observation.

  • Harry_the_Horrible

    Proportionality is idiotic. When someone hits you, you hit back as hard as you can and keep hammering until the matter is settled.
    Israel’s problem is that they are never allowed to settle the matter.

    • lettersquash

      I wish people wouldn’t quote Jesus to settle arguments.

  • Ken Kelso

    Very good article Ken

  • Gee

    Proportionality is an addition protocol added to the Geneva Convention – which almost none of the countries involved in actual combat have signed. That includes the United States, China, and Russia. Israel has not signed it either.

    So the reality is that Israel can use as much force and they deem necessary to end the conflict and not be in violation of any real international laws

    • Taylor Burton

      Yes use the international laws that support your actions and disregard the ones that you don’t agree with. Maybe Israel should consider leaving the international community and come an island that do not abide by any laws at all. Israel also wants Iran to stop her nuclear program but has a nuclear program of her own with an arsenal of nuclear weapons and chemical. But again she has of course not signed the NPT so its ok i guess!.
      People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones!!

      • No Surrender

        …and mice would be wise not to pick fights with lions

        • Taylor Burton

          yes you are right, Israel is the real aggressor in the middle east and the cause of much of the trouble in the region. The ‘Lion’ would be a mouse without the support of the USA. Wonder how long time this will continue!!

          • No Surrender

            You and your friend Sharmake (Somali for “see no evil”) no doubt are in agreement on this point. The root of the problem, as always, is islum.

          • Gee

            Israel has never EVER been the aggressor. We have only responded after hundreds usually thousands of attacks.

            Name a single conflict that Israel has ever started. Bet you can’t

      • Gee

        Name one that we are disregarding. Bet you can’t. But you ignore international laws that don’t support your asinine point of view.

        Iran is in direct violation of a treaty that they freely signed and got benefit from. They have also stated their goal of our genocide. So just a couple of minor war crimes. And we want it stop it – so because we have not violated any treaties and we have not called for their genocide that is a glass house.

        That has to be among the most moronic logic in the world

        • Taylor Burton

          for starters:
          United Nations Resolutions AGAINST Israel.
          In “Deliberate Deceptions: Facing the Facts About US-Israeli
          Relationship” (Lawrence Hill Books, 1995) author, former Congressman
          Paul Findley, makes the point that Israel, with the collusion of the
          power elite of the United States, has been successful over the decades
          in keeping the United Nations on the sidelines in efforts to find a
          solution to the Middle East problem and to create real peace:

          Since the United States vetoes the strongest UN statements against
          Israel, the vetoed resolutions are more relevant, than those actually
          passed. The threat of a US veto, stops many serious resolutions against
          Israel from even getting to a vote, and causes those resolutions that do
          get to a vote, to be significantly watering down (in the hope that the
          US might not veto them).

          The following are the resolutions vetoed by the United States during the
          period of September, 1972, to May, 1990, to protect Israel from
          Security Council resolutions or criticism:

          US Vetoes of Resolutions Against Israel, 1972-1990.

          “…condemned Israel’s attack against Southern against southern Lebanon and Syria…”

          “…affirmed the rights of the Palestinian people to self-determination, statehood and equal protections…”

          “…condemned Israel’s air strikes and attacks in southern Lebanon and its murder of innocent civilians…”

          “…called for self-determination of Palestinian people…”

          “…deplored Israel’s altering of the status of Jerusalem, which is recognized as an international city by most world nations and the
          United Nations…”

          “…affirmed the inalienable rights of the Palestinian people…”

          “…endorsed self-determination for the Palestinian people…”

          “…demanded Israel’s withdrawal from the Golan Heights…”

          “…condemned Israel’s mistreatment of Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip and its refusal to abide by the Geneva
          convention protocols of civilized nations…”

          “…condemned an Israeli soldier
          who shot eleven Moslem worshippers at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
          near Al-Aqsa Mosque in the Old City of Jerusalem…”

          “…urged sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from its invasion of Lebanon…”

          “…urged sanctions against Israel if it did not withdraw from its invasion of Beirut…”

          “…urged cutoff of economic aid to Israel if it refused to withdraw from its occupation of Lebanon…”

          “…condemned continued Israeli
          settlements in occupied territories in the West Bank and Gaza Strip,
          denouncing them as an obstacle to peace…”

          “…deplores Israel’s brutal massacre of Arabs in Lebanon and urges its withdrawal…”

          “…condemned Israeli brutality in southern Lebanon and denounced the Israeli ‘Iron Fist’ policy of repression…”

          “…denounced Israel’s violation of human rights in the occupied territories…”

          “…deplored Israel’s violence in southern Lebanon…”

          “…deplored Israel’s activities in occupied Arab East Jerusalem that threatened the sanctity of Muslim holy sites…”

          “…condemned Israel’s hijacking of a Libyan passenger airplane…”

          “…deplored Israel’s attacks against Lebanon and its measures and practices against the civilian population of Lebanon…”

          “…called on Israel to abandon its policies against the
          Palestinian intifada that violated the rights of occupied Palestinians,
          to abide by the Fourth Geneva Conventions, and to formalize a leading
          role for the United Nations in future peace negotiations…”

          “…urged Israel to accept back deported Palestinians, condemned
          Israel’s shooting of civilians, called on Israel to uphold the Fourth
          Geneva Convention, and called for a peace settlement under UN
          auspices…”

          “…condemned Israel’s… incursion into Lebanon…”

          “…deplored Israel’s… commando raids on Lebanon…”

          “…deplored Israel’s repression of the Palestinian intifada and called on Israel to respect the human rights of the Palestinians…”

          “…deplored Israel’s violation of the human rights of the Palestinians…”

          “…demanded that Israel
          return property confiscated from Palestinians during a tax protest and
          allow a fact-finding mission to observe Israel’s crackdown on the
          Palestinian intifada…”

          “…called for a fact-finding mission on abuses against Palestinians in Israeli-occupied lands…”

          (From Findley’s Deliberate Deceptions, pages 192 – 194)

          UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992.

          Note that Israel is in VIOLATION of many of these Resolutions.

          Resolution 106: “…condemns Israel for Gaza raid”

          Resolution 111: “…condemns Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people”

          Resolution 127: “…recommends Israel suspend its ‘no-man’s zone’ in Jerusalem”

          Resolution 162: “…urges Israel to comply with UN decisions”

          Resolution 171: “…determines flagrant violations by Israel in its attack on Syria”

          Resolution 228: “…censures Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control”

          Resolution 237: “…urges Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees”

          Resolution 248: “…condemns Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan”

          Resolution 250: “…calls on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem”

          Resolution 251: “…deeply deplores Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250″

          Resolution 252: “…declares invalid Israel’s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital”

          Resolution 256: “…condemns Israeli raids on Jordan as flagrant violation”

          Resolution 259: “…deplores Israel’s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation”

          Resolution 262: “…condemns Israel for attack on Beirut airport”

          Resolution 265: “…condemns Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan”

          Resolution 267: “…censures Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem”

          Resolution 270: “…condemns Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon”

          Resolution 271: “…condemns Israel’s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem”

          Resolution 279: “…demands withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon”

          Resolution 280: “…condemns Israeli’s attacks against Lebanon”

          Resolution 285: “…demands immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon”

          Resolution 298: “…deplores Israel’s changing of the status of Jerusalem”

          Resolution 313: “…demands that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon”

          Resolution 316: “…condemns Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon”

          Resolution 317: “…deplores Israel’s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon”

          Resolution 332: “…condemns Israel’s repeated attacks against Lebanon”

          Resolution 337: “…condemns Israel for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty”

          Resolution 347: “…condemns Israeli attacks on Lebanon”

          Resolution 425: “…calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon”

          Resolution 427: “…calls on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon”

          Resolution 444: “…deplores Israel’s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces”

          Resolution 446: “…determines that Israeli
          settlements are a serious obstruction to peace and calls on Israel to
          abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”

          Resolution 450: “…calls on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon”

          Resolution 452: “…calls on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories”

          Resolution 465: “…deplores Israel’s settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel’s settlements program”

          Resolution 467: “…strongly deplores Israel’s military intervention in Lebanon”

          Resolution 468: “…calls on Israel to rescind illegal
          expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their
          return”

          Resolution 469: “…strongly deplores Israel’s failure to observe the council’s order not to deport Palestinians”

          Resolution 471: “…expresses deep concern at Israel’s failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”

          Resolution 476: “…reiterates that Israel’s claims to Jerusalem are null and void”

          Resolution 478: “…censures (Israel) in the strongest terms for its claim to Jerusalem in its ‘Basic Law’”

          Resolution 484: “…declares it imperative that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors”

          Resolution 487: “…strongly condemns Israel for its attack on Iraq’s nuclear facility”

          Resolution 497: “…decides that Israel’s annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights is null and void and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith”

          Resolution 498: “…calls on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon”

          Resolution 501: “…calls on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops”

          Resolution 509: “…demands that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon”

          Resolution 515: “…demands that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in”

          Resolution 517: “…censures Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon”

          Resolution 518: “…demands that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon”

          Resolution 520: “…condemns Israel’s attack into West Beirut”

          Resolution 573: “…condemns Israel vigorously for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters”

          Resolution 587: “…takes note of previous calls on Israel to
          withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw”

          Resolution 592: “…strongly deplores the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops”

          Resolution 605: “…strongly deplores Israel’s policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians”

          Resolution 607: “…calls on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention”

          Resolution 608: “…deeply regrets that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians”

          Resolution 636: “…deeply regrets Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians”

          Resolution 641: “…deplores Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinians”

          Resolution 672: “…condemns Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount”

          Resolution 673: “…deplores Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations”

          Resolution 681: “…deplores Israel’s resumption of the deportation of Palestinians”

          Resolution 694: “…deplores Israel’s deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return”

          Resolution 726: “…strongly condemns Israel’s deportation of Palestinians”

          Resolution 799: “…strongly condemns Israel’s deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.”

          What is your reaction to this?

          • Drakken

            Why don’t you put your leftist azz in Gaza and really show those mean Israeli’s how it is done, I can hear Rachel Corrie screaming from here for more company. So called international law has no meaning because a sovereign nation has a right to defend itself from harm, period. So your empathy, sympathy and collaboration with Islamic jihad is really touching.

        • Taylor Burton

          Let’s try to be concrete and factual. How can you equate
          Iranian rhetoric as genocide? Have they killed any Israelis’? If you want to talk about genocide it’s much more factual to talk about the hundreds of civilians/children Israel have killed during this conflict alone!

          So why don’t you sign the NPT if you don’t have anything to hide? Why don’t you allow inceptions to your nuclear facilities if you are peace-loving country and a so called ‘democracy’?

          • Drakken

            Hey dumbazz, it is not genocide, it is warfare and all the crying about from you less than useless leftist isn’t going to change that fact.
            Those effing ragheads in Iran blew up my barracks in Beirut in 83 right in front of my face, so if you support these ragheads in Gaza, you are as much of an enemy as the ragheads are.

          • Taylor Burton

            Maybe you can let a lesson from that. whats your business in Lebanon? But apparently that is what it took to kick the Americans out of that country!

      • IslamDownpressesHumanity

        People who live by jihad should die by jihad.

  • sendtheclunkerbacktochicago

    No one person has dared talk about how many innocent Israeli men, women and children would have been slaughtered if it were not for the Iron Dome. The liberal mindset has gone beyond a point of just being stupid. I really think they are possessed by demons, what else could cause such stupidity. I am waiting for that day when demons are cast out of them in pursuit of college professors.

  • Matamoros63

    Proportionality? Let’s do the math! The population of Israel in 2014 is ~8.2 MM. The populations of the “front line” mohammedan-controlled states/entities (bordering Israel and including Egypt, Syria, Gaza, West Bank, Jordan,
    Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia) totals 146.9 MM. Simple division gives the
    population ratio (Front Line mohammedan states/Israel) as 17.9. Therefore, in the “zero sum” instance, if Israel is suicidal (would allow its entire population to be annihilated in exchange for the annihilation of the entire populations of the “front line” mohammedan states), it would have to kill 17.9 mohammedans for the loss of every Israeli. Since Israel is demonstrably NOT suicidal (and for the sake of argument) it would have to assure the survival of 80% of its population in order to continue as a viable state. That would entail the sacrifice of 1.64 MM Israelis in exchange for 146.9 MM mohammedans. Again, doing the math, Israel would have to kill 89.6 mohammedans for the loss of every Israeli.

    We can extend this calculation to the mohammedan “neighborhood” states/entities (in the vicinity of/with the capability and desire to annihilate Israel) but not bordering it (and including Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iran, Iraq,
    Libya, Yemen, and Turkey). The total populations of these states/entities is 408 MM. Therefore, the grand total populations of mohammedan states/entities with the desire and capability to annihilate Israel
    is 554.9 MM. Their annihilation in exchange for the 20% of the Israeli population gives us a ratio of 338.4:1.

    The latest casualty figures for Gaza is ~1200/54 or approximately 22:1. Clearly, the Israelis are being overly protective of their mohammedan enemies.