Israel had complied with the UN to withdraw from Gaza and was within her own recognised and accepted borders. Israel had complied with the UN in staying south of the blue line recognising the border with Lebanon.

Since the Gaza withdrawal last August over 1000 Kassam rockets have been fired from there into Israel. Katyushas have also been fired from Lebanon into northern Israel. The final straw, after an incredible degree of restraint by Israel, was the murder of 8 soldiers and kidnapping of 2 more from internationally recognised Israeli territory.

What was the purpose of this? Israel had done what was asked but still it was not enough. The only thing that will ever be enough for Hamas and Hezbollah and their sponsors in Tehran is the complete annhilation of the Israeli people and destruction of the country.

The Israelis have tried to prevent their kidnapped men from being moved out of Lebanon by cutting transportation links. They have also tried to degrade the ability of Hezbollah to operate by denying them electricity and oil supplies and the ability to move freely.

It is terrible that Lebanese civilians have been caught up in this action. But their Government has failed to control Hezbollah and the ongoing attacks on Israel from their soil.

If Israel was targeting civilians then thousands would have died this week. The response has been incredibly proportionate and even officials in Egypt and Saudi Arabia grudgingly accept this. It seems only you cannot because of your hatred of Israel.

Hezbollah is targeting civilians with the continuing rocket attacks. None of this would have happened if they had not launched a premeditated attack on Israel simply for existing.

Your arguments are wrong, nonsensical, devoid of logic and completely crass. Apportion the blame and indignation where it belongs, with Hamas and Hezbollah and that dangerous meglomaniac in Tehran.

What on earth are you trying to say? Unless you are trying to say something quite repulsive, it would have been better not to say it like this: “Acting against the interests of the country in which you reside (Jewish lobby) ends in tears. Witness Germany between the Wars.”

Yes, a lot of Germans acted in ways that harmed their country during 1918-1939. I don’t see what that has to do with the original topic of this thread (proportionality), or even the topic with which the trolls have replaced it (who is to blame).

All it says is that the Israeli government declared that it had a casus belli. This is totally irrelevant. It also says that Germany declared a casus belli for invading Czechoslovakia – does it mean that Czechoslovakia started that war?

Ummm, by “Jewish lobby” I’m assuming you mean the Israel lobby? And what about Germany between the Wars?

Your assertion in #217 is incorrect. While it would be true to say that Isreal started shooting first, the first act of war was undertaken by Egypt. So really Egypt started the war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casus_belli#Historic_uses

If you think of the cost of munitions, the impact on oil price, the cost of infrastructure that needs to be repaired – just from dollars-and-cents there must be a better way.
(Human cost is huge but harder to quantify)

You’re the one who brought up the Palestinian vote for Hamas as evidence that Palestinians are idiots who deserve no rights. Now you’re bringing up Fatah atrocities. But I brought up the example of Ariel Sharon only to point out that Palestinians do not have a monopoly on electing leaders who employ ruthless violence.

And, for the record, can you back up your claim that “the Palestinians killed more Lebanese civilians in 1 artillery barrage than Ariel Sharon’s whole career.” According to the Lebanese newspaper An Nahar, more than 18,000 Palestinians and Lebanese were killed in the first 4 months of Operation Peace for Galilee alone. And that was before Sabra and Shatila.

Not to mention that the six-day war was started by Israel.

The Palestinians killed more Lebanese civilians in 1 artillery barrage than Ariel Sharon’s whole career. Don’t get me wrong, he’s still a criminal who needs to find a court. But everything by degrees or we have no way of measuring/judging.

The rule in international law is that you cannot gain territory in war. Period. The prohibition of the acquisition of territory by war applies equally to “defensive” wars as well as offensive wars. Nobody ever claims to be the aggressor in war.

140: Agree with 142. And I’m sorry, but I’m finding it really hard to believe that either you or Beryl actually think that Israel is the only country ever to have been criticized from a strictly pacifist position or philosophy. (Something which I don’t see much of in this thread and certainly not from Chris.)

141: Arab armies have traditionally been a bit crap, but I think expecting that to always be the case smacks of cultural determinism, maybe even racism.

Nifty trick, this: anyone who doesn’t paint the Arabs as a Dread Menace just might be a racist! Nicely heads off speculation about the potential racism in, say, a persistent determination to exaggerate the Arab Threat.

However, we needn’t play games like that, right? A more serious analysis would look at the structure of Arab states (in most cases still a ramshackle post-imperial/ post-colonial legacy not known for fielding high-quality conventional troops) and assess their likely military effectiveness on that basis. “Cultural determinism” and “racism” need not apply.

204: The Palestinians will stop being lectured about Martin Luther King and Ghandi when they actually give those methods a try.

Mmm-hmm. Think I’ll let Jonathan Cook speak to that one.