Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Thursday, July 20, 2006
Hugh Hewitt :: Townhall.com Columnist
Disproportionate?
by Hugh Hewitt
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


"'CNN's Hezbollah Bureau --Evidently the Statute of Limitations Has Run on the 1983 Murder of 241 in the Beirut Marines Barracks."

The mounting criticism directed at Israel's self-defense is centered on the charge that Israel's response to the shelling of its cities, the murder of eight of its soldiers and kidnapping of two others is somehow "disproportionate."

Anyone leveling that charge ought to be asked for the measure of "proportionality" being employed. And that question should begin with executives at CNN.

Michigan Congressman John Dingell declared on Tuesday night to Larry King that "I think Israel has overreacted."

Israel is a nation of 7 million people, with an active-duty military of approximately 200,000. America is home to approximately 300 million people, with a standing military of 1.4 million.

Thus, speaking proportionately, America's devastating loss of 3,000 on 9/11 would be the same as Israel's loss of approximately 70 of its civilians. Speaking proportionately, Hezbollah's ambush would have killed more than 470 and kidnapped 10. What would America do in response to such an attack in its civilian and military populations if mounted from Mexico or Canada?

And this comparison significantly understates what Israel is responding to.

Although there are many competing sets of data, I count more than 1,500 Israeli deaths due to terrorism attacks since 9/11.

In response to 9/11, America has invaded --justly, and in a great cause-- two sovereign nations since that awful day.

But Israel is acting "disproportionately" in responding to Hezbollah's ambush and killing of eight of its soldiers and murder of two others under the cover of hundreds of randomly aimed rocket attacks on its civilian population?

One fourth of Israel has been confined to bomb shelters since Hezbollah began this war. And Israel is supposed to go only so far but not far enough to stop the rockets that have killed dozens of civilians?

Hezbollah has sophisticated weaponry as well, lethal enough to cripple an Israeli ship and kill four of its sailors, but Israel is supposed to allow an enemy sworn to its utter destruction to enjoy a safe haven within a marathoner's distance of its third largest city?

Nowhere has the surreal rhetoric reached greater heights than on CNN, and not just in the mouths of guests, though incredibly CNN has been giving air time to Hezbollah terrorists. (Imagine CNN offering Osama or Mullah Omar access to its cameras for a walk about post-9/11 but pre-regime change Afghanistan.) Hezbollah spokesman Hussein Nablusi got lots of air time this week on the "most busted name in news." Keep in mind that Hezbollah murdered hundreds of Marines, but CNN's Nic Robertson couldn't get a question in about that attack.

Robertson got a "tour" of south Beirut Tuesday, courtesy of Hezbollah, and here was his summary report to Wolf Blitzer:

"In all that time we were there, which was a very, very brief period, we didn't see any evidence of military equipment, we didn't go into the buildings, we didn't search underneath the rubble, but some of the buildings were really torn up, there was a lot of debris hanging out of, hanging out of broken sides of buildings, a lot of debris strewn along the sides of roads, and in all of that we didn't see any evidence of a military infrastructure or anything like that. Again, though, Wolf, I have to say that it was a very brief and swift tour, escorted by Hezbollah."

That wasn't a "tour," it was a propaganda shoot.

Imagine something similar during WW 2, or Korea or even Vietnam.

The Robertson report is stunning even by CNN's "Eason Jordan standard" of news massaged for the sake of staying "in-country." Jordan has since left CNN, but after the invasion of Iraq, he admitted that CNN censored the news out of Saddam's nightmare to keep the cameras rolling in Baghdad.

What, we have to wonder, is the price being paid by CNN in Beirut?

Then there's the failure to even have the courage of the network's convictions.

Read Lou Dobbs' inane commentary from Tuesday. It is vague almost to the point of being a joke.

But the last graph uses the magic words:

"In the Middle East, where is our sense of proportion? Where is our sense of perspective? Where is our sense of decency? And, finally, just how smart are we?"

Wink, wink. Nod, nod.

CNN has lost its mind and its bearings if it can not distinguish between terrorists with massive amounts of American and Israeli blood on their hands and legitimate governments, and if the network's reporters and analysts cannot imagine the simple projection of what hundreds of rockets raining down on America might bring forth as an American response.

There is absolutely no lack of proportionality in Israel's response to the hundreds of terrorist attacks perpetrated upon it by Hezbollah, or even in response to just the events of last week or the rocket attacks of just one day since.

There is only a lack of common sense and minimum perspective among many observers, most obviously those employed by and appearing on CNN.

By the way, CNN cannot claim ignorance of the Hezbollah responsibility for the 1983 attack. From CNN's own files:

"WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American servicemen, a U.S. District Court judge ruled Friday. U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah with the approval and funding of Iran's senior government officials. Lamberth ordered that the plaintiffs in the case -- the servicemen wounded in that bombing and the families of those killed -- have a "right to obtain judicial relief" from Iran. The judge called the October 23, 1983 bombing "the most deadly state-sponsored terrorist attack made against United States citizens before September 11, 2001." "In the early morning hours of that day, 241 American servicemen were murdered in their sleep by a suicide bomber," he wrote. "On that day, an unspeakable horror invaded the lives of those who survived the attack and the family members whose loved ones had been stolen from them."

U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah with the approval and funding of Iran's senior government officials.

Lamberth ordered that the plaintiffs in the case -- the servicemen wounded in that bombing and the families of those killed -- have a "right to obtain judicial relief" from Iran. The judge called the October 23, 1983 bombing "the most deadly state-sponsored terrorist attack made against United States citizens before September 11, 2001."

"In the early morning hours of that day, 241 American servicemen were murdered in their sleep by a suicide bomber," he wrote. "On that day, an unspeakable horror invaded the lives of those who survived the attack and the family members whose loved ones had been stolen from them."

CNN must have concluded that the statute of limitations has run on the murder of hundreds of Marines and 21 other U.S. servicemen. I doubt very much if the American people agree.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author

Hugh Hewitt is host of a nationally syndicated radio talk show. Hugh Hewitt's new book is The War On The West.

Be the first to read Hugh Hewitt's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

CNN
CNN knows what it is doing. Nic Robertson's ego and his desire to be the star of this war pales only to that of Christiane Amanpour. CNN has gone to other side in their attempt to be international. Thank God we have more options now to get the news.

CNN is nothing short of a travesty
CNN reporting has been referring at times to Hezbullah's kidnapping of Israeli soldiers, which precipitated the response, as a "capturing of the soldiers" --- as if the Israelis were wanted criminals rather than simple border control. That's a very revealing choice of words.

Thank God for Townhall, KRLA, Hugh Hewitt and the Internet.

Israel has suffered long
And the Hezbollah agitators are gluttons for punishment. Why can't they busy themselves doing something constructive for the world rather than studying and making war? What keeps them so focused on their narrow ideology?

Death of Dinosaur News
When my nephew went to Iraq as an MP last year,

His first message home was not to believe CNN.

I assured him that I never watch old media.

Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice, I must be listening to the MSM.

Facts or Fiction--You Judge
1. We give Israel far more than their Arab neighbors in Foreign Aid.
2. We provide Israel with weapons and weapon technology far beyond our weapons support for the Arab nations.
3. Foreign Military Sales (FMS) to Israel is a joke--they rarely pay for our weapons transfers to them.
4.We either gave Israel nuclear weapons or closed our eyes as nuclear weapons technology was transferred to them. This has been ongoing and violates the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.
5.Israel has had technicians observe and participate in US nuclear test firings. Israel has not tested their nuclear weapons, yet they have a rather large arsenal of them. Some estimates say 400.
6. We saved Israel during the 1973 war but we have never tried to save any Arab state.
7. We constantly protect Israel in the UN--they have a de facto seat on the Security Council--because of our support.
8. Most Israeli's have dual citizenship with the US--they even vote in our elections. How outrageous is that? Dual citizenship Israelis even contribute money to our politicians. They have a loud voice in our policy decisions. There was a time when no American could hold a dual citizenship, that rule was changed specifically to accommodate the Jews of Israel.
There is much more but this is long enough for you to develop this picture. BTW I support Israel killing terrorist--in fact, I support anyone killing terrorist.

Just like Jane Fonda
Reminds me of Jane Fonda, only now the one sitting with the enemy is not a marginalized actress, but a reporter for a major news outlet.

Warrior, I'm not sure what your point is
... Israel has never stated that they intend to eliminate Islam and remove Arabs from the middle east.

Some might argue that the Mossad or other Israelis are terrorists, but at least they don't go around intentionally blowing up innocent muslims without provocation.

The UN created Israel, but now they won't support it, let alone ensure its existence. If there was no Israel or if Israel were located somehwere else, some of the problems would go away. But I doubt the "religion of peace" would be content to limit themselves to the confines of their borders.

America may arguably be providing disproportionate support for Israel. But looking globally, I don't think Israel is receiving disproportionate support from the world community. And all for a stinking piece of desert without oil or any redeeming value other than historical monuments.

SO what was your point?

Communist News Network
We provide disproportionate support for Israel? Isn't Israel our ally? Are we supposed to also provide support to our enemies? Am I missing something here?

Warrior
Most of your comments seemed to revolve around our military support of Israel, so I'll start there.

I ask you, "what kind of tanks did Syria, Jordan, and Egypt drive in 1973 (and today)?" Abrams? Challenger?....no, that would be the T-series.

What kind of planes? - MIGS

What kind of small arms - Kalashnikovs

Contrary to popular belief, these were not poor, impoverished nations going against Israel. They were well equipped and trained in Soviet weapons and doctrine.

A lot of people (myself included) believe that at least one part of our support for Israel was to measure our equipment/tactics versus the Soviet equipment/tactics in the Cold War. As it happened in dozens of conflicts throughout the 20th century, we'd support one side while the Soviets supported the other.

Regarding payment for said equipment, yeah we probably gave them a deal as we do with all of our allies. But, it was hardly free....Israel spends double what any of the others do on equipment (source: "How to Make War" - Dunningan)..and since they are buying it from us, guess who gets that cash?

"Never tried to save any Arab State" - that is correct...as long as you don't include WWI, WWII, our support for Pakistan versus India, our support fof the Bosnians (not Arabs, but Muslims), our support for Iraq versus Iran, etc.

UN support / their "de facto" seat on the Security Council - hmm...not unlike North Korea's de facto seat (China), Pre Iraq War Iraq's seat (France), anyone who opposes the US's de facto seat (France, Russia, China)....you would have a point if the US was pushing UN troops into supporting Israel. The US's support has at best given Israel an opportunity to defend itself with no support from the UN. Also, the US support has not kept Israel from being condemned by the UN on about 9 different occasions while the terrorists are never condemned

Dual citizenship – “In this regard, Israel is really treated no differently than Canada, the UK, France, or other countries which permit people to become citizens without giving up their old status.” (http://www.richw.org/dualcit/faq.html)..and the earliest cases happened in 1939 (before Israel was founded).

Foreign Aid – Not if you discount the military aid we give to Israel (which is included in the numbers) and done for the reasons I have stated above. And, for odd reason, we are hesitant to send military aid to Iran, Syria, and Lebanon. Also, we just forgave 4 billion in Iraqi debt…so you are incorrect anyway.

So, you are partly right about some of the “facts”, but without the context it is pretty much useless.

Thanks for playing.

Where to start?
In war, "disproportionate" is the name of the game. 19 Islamic males hijack four airplanes and crash three of them into buildings causing nearly 3,000 deaths in a single morning. That is disproportionate. It was also a spectacularly effective single operation. We invade two countries and topple their governments in return with the loss of less than 3,000 battle deaths. Two spectacularly effective operations.

Fairness is for the Olympics. Armed combat is all about winning at the least cost.

In this instance, the small, bearded, turbaned fanatics have overestimated their ability to drag the rest of the Moslem world into their battle. If the Israelis beat the crap out of Hamas and Hezbollah, killing them in large numbers and the vaunted Arab Street does not come to their rescue (as it appears they are staying on the sidelines) it will have a chilling effect on other Islamofascists.

The UN is ineffectual. The Communist News Network is alienating their viewer base in America. The forces of freedom are prevailing over the Seventh Century Death Cult. I am happy with this trend.

Hamilcar Barca

Epsilon Dao
Your points are well taken but outside the context of my comments. I did not attempt to justify what we do as a balancing act against what others do. Russia provides materiel to the Arabs because there is a market there that we will not fill. We used to provide weapons to the Shau of Iran and to Saudi Arabia. When we stopped, the Russians, French, etc. moved in to fill the void in the market. This has effectively isolated us from the Arabs. We did support Iraq in the war with Iran but our motive was not love for Arabic Iraq and we certainly did not press for a cease fire. Israel counts FMS as a part of their budget but they do not pay .10c on the dollar. When this current shooting war is over and Israel will have to rearm and up load new munitions. The American tax payer will pay that bill.
For you to suggest we were saving Arab states by fighting WW2--that is a reach. We were defeating Fascist, not saving Arabs. Any Arab states we saved was just a collateral benefit to those Arab states. Compare that to our effort and intent in the '73 Israeli War. As for Kosovo it was not an Arab state, still isn't.
FMS is not a part of Foreign Aid. In Israel's case it should be because our relationship with them is convoluted to the point of being shielded from scrutiny. Let me give you a short down and dirty about our program with Israel. We give Israel military aid, with the proviso, they spend that money buying US equipment(in effect we buy it for them). That does not complete the picture; Israel will then require an "offset" in the same amount they spent buying our equipment. That "offset" must be used to buy Israeli products. So here is how it works. I'll use a small figure to make my point--We give Israel $1,000 with the proviso they spend that money buying $1,000 worth of US fighting equipment. Israel agrees, with the caveat that we, the US, must buy $1,000 worth of Israeli products. Resultant effect: We buy them $1,000 worth of US equipment and pump another $1,000 (the "off-set")worth of US dollars into their economy. Convoluted but that is what we do. Since these programs are constantly ongoing and overlap, it is almost impossible to track all of this dollar for dollar, hence the "shield from scrutiny".

EpsilonDao
Dual Citizenship: This is an issue that is almost too complicated to address and it in recent years has been under constant flux. Most of the changes have been implemented to protect the dual citizenship of Israelis. You can now be a US citizen in good standing while serving in a foreign army, and having a citizenship in another country. Name another country in the world where being in a foreign army is mandatory and your parent or grand parent , one or both may be a US citizen. These rules were mostly enacted as a result of court cases by "run away" Judges and they were not enacted for the citizens of Bolivia, or France (sarcasm intended).Additionally, those rules do not have any roots as far back as 1939.

Warrior
You are mistaken on a few points, I will attempt to clarify.

I do not justify the support for Israel in the context of the Cold War, I merely point out the timeline and the events. And, I hate to disagree with you but Russian support for Arab states was not merely a salesperson/customer relationship. As with most relationships during the Cold War, the ties that bind often went deeper than simply a new market for weapons.

We still provide weapons to Saudi Arabia, as well as military units. This is primarily one of the points that irks Osama Bin Laden, "Infidel troops in the Holy Land". The Saudis buy Russian and French equipment, but even those items were sold to them by the US. They also have a few squadrons of F-16's that the certainly didn't buy at K-Mart.
Those troops were moved in after the first Gulf War, a War in which we "saved" one Arab nation (Saudi who would've been slaughtered) and liberated Kuwait.

We used to support the Shah of Iran until Carter decided it wasn't a good idea. After the Shah was deposed, we rightly decided future weapon sales would be a bad idea which was why the Iranians took hostages in the 80's to force weapon sales from the Reagan administration.

We stoked the war between Iran and Iraq and supported the lesser of the two evils.

As I said, Isreal gets a deal on their weapons (as do MOST US allies). They still spend billions a year on our equipment.

As far as my comments on WWII and WWI, I have never stated that I believed that we did anything for any reason other than self-interest. That being said, under the same logic, we did not "save" any European or Asian nation either despite the numerous we liberated.

Kosovo - I believe I stated in my post that Bosnians were not Arabs, but they ARE Muslim.

FMS and Foriegn Aid are counted in the same till. So when you see "Foreign Aid to Isreal" you see the money discounted from the weapon sales as well as actual dollar amounts.

And I understand how they work, thanks for asking.


Epsilon Dao
I am not trying to bore you to death but I thought you might have an interest in reading these two sites which discuss "FMS" and "off sets":

http://www.fas.org/asmp/fast_facts.htm

http://fas.org/asmp/campaigns/offset.html

Warrior
Dual Citizenship - the earliest court cases regarding dual-citizenship were from 1939, and almost all of the revolve around the 14th amendment which allowed all people born the US to be US citizens.

The Supreme Court has ruled that you do not automatically lose your citizenship in any case. You have to renounce it or perform an act with the intention of giving it up. Serving in a foreign military does not even count unless you serve as an officer OR that country is engaged in hostilities against the US.

So, if you are born in the US and if the country you migrate to does not make you automatically renounce your citizenship, you are a dual-citizen. So, Israel UK, and France all count.

Why we support Isreal?
Which group of people were dancing in the streets on 9/11? Was it Isrealis or was it Palestians? So which side should we support?

Who was it that killed 240+ US soldiers in 1983? Was it Isrealis or Hezbollah? So which side should we support?

It isn't that hard people! Either you support our enemy who kills us and/or celebrates our deaths or you support Isreal. It is a no-brainer!

Proportionality
The trouble is that proportionality has to take into account the nature of one's opponent in a war. Back in the Cold War, we would expel a half dozen Soviet diplomat/spies and they would expel a like number. A spy plane would be shot down and the military would send letters of regret about a training "accident" to the survivors. But Hezbollah wants to wipe out Israel and is indiscriminantly targeting civilians with their weapons on a daily basis. It is a fair conclusion that all Israeli's are at risk to an unchecked Hezbollah.

The Israeli government is responsible for and to the millions who live in Israel. The safety and security of those millions are on one side of the balance when it comes time to weigh the proportionality. To simply measure the dead without a considering both the intent of the two sides and the fact that some number of the Lebanese dead are human shield who should rightly be counted alongside the Israeli dead as victims of Hezbollah altogether misses the point.

Proportionality in War
Proportionality is one aspect of just war theory, but it usually gets mangled in media presentations.

War will inevitably cause devastation, destruction, and the loss of life, even innocent life. If the "good" that comes from winning the war is not greater than the devastation caused by war, then the proportionality criterion is not met, and the war cannot be considered just. This is obviously a judgement call, and in many cases people of good conscience will disagree. Most people would agreee that the Union was justified in going to war against the Confederacy because preserving the union and abolishing slavery were worth the cost of war. Since Hezbollah has repeatedly declared its intent to destroy Israel and has carried out various attacks on Israeli troops and communities since Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000, it is reasonable to see Hezbollah as a threat to Israel and to peace in the region, and to conclude that war against Hezbollah is worth it to establish a lasting peace between Israel and Lebanon.

The second aspect of proportionality in just war is to use only as much force as is necessary to achieve your goals. Again, this is a judgement call, because it is impossible to know for certain if success could have been obtained with less force. Israel's stated goals are release of the kidnapped soldiers, deployment of Lebanon's army along the border, and disarming of Hezbollah. Since Hezbollah has not yet surrendered and agree to these terms, it is reasonable to conclude that Israel has not used excessive force. In fact, Israel may need to use even more force in order to achieve its objectives.

As Hamilcar Barca pointed out earlier, war is not about being fair. If war is the only way to defeat the enemies of peace, then it is best to win decisively.


Hamilcar:
Exactly.

No wonder you were known as Alexander the Great!

LOL

You are right. What's with this "proportionate" nonsense? If I have an enemy, I'm going to overwhelm him if it's in my power to do so.

I had a drill sergeant once who told me: "If you find yourself in a fair fight, you didn't plan properly".

Words to live by.

Epsilon Dao:
I've read your posts. Very verbose, interesting facts....

but just what the bloody hell's your POINT?

For the life of me, and I'm not a dummy, I can't figure out what you're getting at. Are you Phylo under a new screen name?

Jeeeez, Louise. Get to your point!

Hey Brian
All of my posts here are in response to Warrior. If you read them in that context, that are a bit more coherent. I make no promises.

My overall point is that the US support for Israel has had a long and checkered past, but is influenced by a lot more than the presence of a Zionist lobby here in the US. That and to point out several inconsistencies or incorrect facts made by Warrior.

As to your assertion that I’m Phylo, I can assure that I am not. I support Israel’s right to defend itself in the most effective way (i.e. grinding Hezbollah in their tank treads) and I do not think that radical Islam can be defeated by engaging in century long philosophical debate.

I ramble, so sue me. Thanks for reading.

Epsilon:
Thanks! That was your best post yet. Clear, concise, and to the point. Easy to understand, and agree with.

And I had to laugh in agreement with the grinding into the tank treads metaphor.

Brian

Re-visit, "Tough Talk"
Russia lurks and smirks and loves the evil puppets works, and China wines and dines as the puppets lie as others die, the silken asian lines of the puppets are ever so soft and the sighs and lies so easy to hear,"the rockets in their pockets are not ours" its the one in North Korea, why can we not dance this evil puppet dance, well its only for evil puppets not for
real boys not made of wood.

DEAR AMERICAN LEADERSHIP.

TEAR DOWN THIS PUPPET AND ROCKET FACTORY THAT IS IRAN.

Marine revenge
Turn the US Marines loose on Hezbolla. Let them get revenge for the killing of the Marines in the barracks in 1983. Goodbye Hezbollah!

CNN
Very enlightening article. I bookmarked the link provided regarding journalism in the Middle-East. Much is ommitted.

Yes, Warrior, we do help Israel a great deal, but we also send more combined foreign aide to many Middle-Eastern oil rich countries for strategic purposes.

Go to Greenbook.gov for insight.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.