Civilians?

One claim from the "disproportionate" crowd is that Israel has suffered "only" two four twelve civilian deaths from the rocket barrage this week (and over 500 wounded), while Lebanon has supposedly lost over fifty. Well, one reason might be that Israel is indeed hitting back with more firepower than it's receiving. Is that meant to be wrong?

Another point that needs to be made over and over again is that there is a fundamental difference: the Arab fire is deliberately aimed at civilians, and killing civilians is its goal. Israeli fire, on the other hand, is always aimed at legitimate military targets, and any civilian that is killed is unfortunate collateral damage, the inevitable result of war. That bears repeating: the number of civilians deliberately killed by Israel, this week or this year or this decade, is zero.

Still, if Israel is not aiming at civilians, how can it be that it has accidentally killed so many, while the Arabs, who are aiming at civilians, have killed so few? Well, the answer is that it hasn't. Those >50 people in Lebanon includes people killed because they were hiding rockets in their homes. No doubt others included in the count were doing things like driving terrorists, or providing other logistical support. In my book, that makes them legitimate targets.

"We have no intention of hitting civilians, but those who live by the sword are bound to get hurt." Too right.

(H/T: Meryl Yourish)