Letters/Discussion Forums
It’s all about force and ‘disproportionate’ force
As stated by a young Israeli (by the name of Kanani) on BBC, this week, “Israel in its effort to destroy Hammas’ armaments stores and manufacturing facilities, attempts to minimise ‘collateral damage’ (a euphemism for killing innocent bystanders), whereas Hammas’ intentions are to terrorise and kill Israeli civilians.”
JOHN BRENNER
In retaliation for Hammas’ attempts to terrorise Israeli citizens (partly successful, particularly with children) and/or to kill or maim them, Israel uses force. The problem, as far as the international community is concerned, is that Israel uses too much force – “disproportionate force”.
A colleague informed me that Michael Bloomberg, former mayor of New York, said: “If a single hostage taker has taken a group of hostages, the police won’t send one policeman to neutralise the hostage taker. The police will use disproportionate force.”
If my TV programme is anything to go by, they’ll send a group of about 30 heavily armed anti-terror specialists. If they sight the hostage taker, they’ll shoot him.
There is a precedent in our modern, highly competitive lifestyle for penalising contestants who are better than their opponents, such as giving them golden handshakes etc.
If the Israeli Cabinet and its general staff and/or Mossad and/or Shin Bet on the one side and Hammas leaders and their fanatical ideologues on the other, were to sit down and attempt to determine how much force the Israelis are permitted to use, the conference could go on for generations. In the meantime we could have peace and quiet in Gaza.
On a more cynical note: An English-speaking Israeli colonel was interviewed on BBC TV and was asked: “How come so many Palestinians have been killed in relation to the number of Israeli casualties?”
Israeli colonel: “I apologise for the death of the Palestinians and the absence of deaths among Israelis.”
Johannesburg