This has got to be one of the most morally vile things I’ve read … in at least a week.
A Question of Proportionality [Michael Rubin]
A lot of the criticism surrounding Israel’s actions against the Free Gaza flotilla center on proportionality. Did Israel apply disproportionate force? The same charges form the basis of the criticism leveled by the Goldstone Report and, indeed, also were leveled against Israel following the 2006 Hezbollah War and, before that, Operation Defensive Shield in 2002.
But why should any democratic government empowered to defend its citizenry accept Europe’s idea of proportion? When attacked, why should not a stronger nation or its representatives try to both protects its own personnel at all costs and, in the wider scheme of things, defeat its adversaries?
Likewise, when terrorists seek to strike at the United States, why should we find ourselves constrained by an artificial notion of proportionality when responding to those terrorists or their state sponsors?
Ultimately, it may be time to recognize that, in the face of growing threats to Western liberalism, strength and disproportionality matter more to security and the protection of democracy than the approval of the chattering class of Europe or the U.N. secretary general, a man whose conciliatory policies as foreign minister of South Korea proved to be a strategic disaster.
One final note on proportionality: Fifteen “peace” activists dead is a tragedy, but they represent only one one-thousandth of the death toll of a French heatwave.
Apparently it’s perfectly ok to slaughter a dozen or so unarmed civilians in the name of, well, whatever. Because you can, that’s why. Only weak Commies like Europe or the UN could possibly think what Israel did was unjustified.
The degeneracy of the far right wing doesn’t seem to have a bottom.
[Edited June 3, 2010: Though the quoted text put the dead at 15, only 9 were killed. The post title is edited to reflect that.]