It isn't Islamophobia when they really ARE trying to kill you
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here:
Cookie Policy
DOUGLAS MURRAY denounces “proportionality in conflict,” a concept always directed at Israelis when they retaliate for a terrorist attack, yet are expected to restrain their military response so it is “proportionate”
Douglas Murray has furiously slammed “proportionality a joke” and has labeled the concept in war as “some deep perversion in Britain.”
In other words, when Israel is attacked by its hostile neighbors as it was on Oct. 7th, its retaliatory response should include killing precisely the same number of young people and families, raping the same number of women, and beheading/burning the same number of children as Hamas did.
Reader Interactions
Comments
Daniel Erbstoessersays
No way, allways give what you get and that double so get ready to recieve. What they give we saw 12 days ago and now its time to give it back double.
Even the Geneva Convention does not demand proportionality in warfare. The concept of proportionality in defence only applies in civil law against criminal attacks on the person. None of that has the slightest application or relevance here. This is not a boxing match under Queensbury Rules, but a bare knuckle fight to the end.
This present situation does not in any event fall under those Geneva Convention rules, set many years ago incidentally and which do not address acts of terror such as are common today carried out by those who apply no rules except to kill and terrorise. This is because there is no “war” having been officially declared by one state upon another. Not can there be such a scenario in the so-called “assymetric warfare” we are seeing now.
Thus the Israelis have no obligation to moderate their conduct in any way. They do however have the deepest obligation to their own people to bring to justice the perpetrators of these atrocities and since that is impossible on any individual basis, then the strikes we have seen in recent days are the only method at their disposal to destroy Hamas collectively and all supporters and infrastructure of Hamas. This is imperative and the Israelis have finally understood that this has to be the end game, or more attacks will continue ad infinitum!
This is why I forecast that Israel is not going to stop their defensive strikes until that task is accomplished. They will not heed peace proposals, cease fires and so on as they have in the past on many occasions as they finally face the facts of the nature of Hamas and other neigbouring Islamic territories. Cessation of the strikes only afford Hamas the opportunity to regroup and rearm. No, No a thousand times NO!
Bonnie even if If the American/European leaders were aware they would refuse to publicly acknowledge it, because their hatred of Israel is is stronger than their integrity. The fact that we have been suffering in the West the consequences of having Muslims around as we need to fight them to survive their hatred towards us in our own f-Ing countries makes impossible for me to understand WHY those very same American/European leaders can’t empathize with Israel’s fight for survival.
Because our politics have sold us out or why do they import millions of the enemy into our nations. Think about this and you will see that there is something on this.
If we are to assume, as all “right-thinking wokists” insist, that ‘Palestine’ is an independent nation state then … yes, there ‘is’ a war (openly, explicitly and repeatedly ‘declared’ against Israel for decades).
However, as Stewart says, the Geneva Convention (specifically the 4th Convention – by which point the leftists had not just infiltrated, but taken over the whole thing) does ‘not’ cover ‘any’ of the actions of Hamas, and in fact explicitly cites ‘specifically’ everything Hamas has wrought as a ‘crime’ and ‘allows’ Israel to (even states it ‘should’) do anything and everything in its power against ‘the terrorists, the terrorists organisations, backing and … supporters’ (so, that ‘includes’ all those ‘innocent’ civilians who voted for, support, finance and … dance in celebration of Hamas).
That so many politicians, NGO’s, “journalists” (spit) and (I’m not one but I play one on TV) ‘lawyers’ are all lining up to claim the ‘implied’ (if it’s dark, if you squint, twist it into a pretzel and then … just lie) protection of the Geneva Conventions for the ‘Palestinians’, whilst completely ignoring the ‘explicit’ protections and ‘permissions’ it offers the Israelis, shows … their complicity in this atrocity and barbarism.
By a strict reading of (both the letter ‘and’ intent) of all the Conventions, Israel isn’t just ‘allowed’ to ‘retaliate’ but is encouraged to … raise the whole cess-pit, and salt the earth on which it stood (i.e. they are allowed to “kill them all, and let god sort them out”. I favour a … [insert Ripley/Aliens/orbit quote here] response myself).
But … don’t expect the same people who see imaginary “rights” in the ‘penumbra’ of The Constitution, whilst ignoring explicit, clearly delineated others, to ever tell you the truth. In fact, Gell-Mann amnesia should tell you by now that … whatever they claim, it’s the opposite that’s closer to the truth.
Daniel Erbstoesser says
No way, allways give what you get and that double so get ready to recieve. What they give we saw 12 days ago and now its time to give it back double.
Jack says
Peace through superior firepower. The only thing animals understand.
Stewart - South Africa says
Even the Geneva Convention does not demand proportionality in warfare. The concept of proportionality in defence only applies in civil law against criminal attacks on the person. None of that has the slightest application or relevance here. This is not a boxing match under Queensbury Rules, but a bare knuckle fight to the end.
This present situation does not in any event fall under those Geneva Convention rules, set many years ago incidentally and which do not address acts of terror such as are common today carried out by those who apply no rules except to kill and terrorise. This is because there is no “war” having been officially declared by one state upon another. Not can there be such a scenario in the so-called “assymetric warfare” we are seeing now.
Thus the Israelis have no obligation to moderate their conduct in any way. They do however have the deepest obligation to their own people to bring to justice the perpetrators of these atrocities and since that is impossible on any individual basis, then the strikes we have seen in recent days are the only method at their disposal to destroy Hamas collectively and all supporters and infrastructure of Hamas. This is imperative and the Israelis have finally understood that this has to be the end game, or more attacks will continue ad infinitum!
This is why I forecast that Israel is not going to stop their defensive strikes until that task is accomplished. They will not heed peace proposals, cease fires and so on as they have in the past on many occasions as they finally face the facts of the nature of Hamas and other neigbouring Islamic territories. Cessation of the strikes only afford Hamas the opportunity to regroup and rearm. No, No a thousand times NO!
BareNakedIslam says
Thanks for the explanation, Stewart. I wasn’t aware of that. Apparently, a lot of European/American leaders aren’t aware of that either.
Scaredofislam says
Bonnie even if If the American/European leaders were aware they would refuse to publicly acknowledge it, because their hatred of Israel is is stronger than their integrity. The fact that we have been suffering in the West the consequences of having Muslims around as we need to fight them to survive their hatred towards us in our own f-Ing countries makes impossible for me to understand WHY those very same American/European leaders can’t empathize with Israel’s fight for survival.
Daniel Erbstoesser says
Because our politics have sold us out or why do they import millions of the enemy into our nations. Think about this and you will see that there is something on this.
Jerven says
If we are to assume, as all “right-thinking wokists” insist, that ‘Palestine’ is an independent nation state then … yes, there ‘is’ a war (openly, explicitly and repeatedly ‘declared’ against Israel for decades).
However, as Stewart says, the Geneva Convention (specifically the 4th Convention – by which point the leftists had not just infiltrated, but taken over the whole thing) does ‘not’ cover ‘any’ of the actions of Hamas, and in fact explicitly cites ‘specifically’ everything Hamas has wrought as a ‘crime’ and ‘allows’ Israel to (even states it ‘should’) do anything and everything in its power against ‘the terrorists, the terrorists organisations, backing and … supporters’ (so, that ‘includes’ all those ‘innocent’ civilians who voted for, support, finance and … dance in celebration of Hamas).
That so many politicians, NGO’s, “journalists” (spit) and (I’m not one but I play one on TV) ‘lawyers’ are all lining up to claim the ‘implied’ (if it’s dark, if you squint, twist it into a pretzel and then … just lie) protection of the Geneva Conventions for the ‘Palestinians’, whilst completely ignoring the ‘explicit’ protections and ‘permissions’ it offers the Israelis, shows … their complicity in this atrocity and barbarism.
By a strict reading of (both the letter ‘and’ intent) of all the Conventions, Israel isn’t just ‘allowed’ to ‘retaliate’ but is encouraged to … raise the whole cess-pit, and salt the earth on which it stood (i.e. they are allowed to “kill them all, and let god sort them out”. I favour a … [insert Ripley/Aliens/orbit quote here] response myself).
But … don’t expect the same people who see imaginary “rights” in the ‘penumbra’ of The Constitution, whilst ignoring explicit, clearly delineated others, to ever tell you the truth. In fact, Gell-Mann amnesia should tell you by now that … whatever they claim, it’s the opposite that’s closer to the truth.
Reader says
But the Koran wants death for all nonbelievers who won’t convert to Islam, so isn’t proportionality… ?
Lynda H says
I like your thinking, “Reader”…