[cvq3842]

In war, a “proportional response” would seem generally to be exactly what one does NOT want to make.

Conflicts end when one side “wins,” by crushing the other, by degrading the enemy’s ability and/or will to fight.

[MrB]

A father wouldn’t be much of a man if someone kept shooting at his house where his children lived and didn’t do something about it for fear of what the neighbors would say.

[ArrogantBustard]

I think that there is widespread confusion as to the meaning of "proportionality"

3. Proportionality. Soldiers may only use force proportional to the end they seek. They must restrain their force to that amount appropriate to achieving their aim or target. Weapons of mass destruction, for example, are usually seen as being out of proportion to legitimate military ends.

In the present case, the "military end" which Israel seeks is putting an end to the barrage of Qassam rockets. "Proportionality" DOES NOT mean, as some folks on this forum seem to think, that Israel is limited to launching the equivalent of Qassam rockets. Indeed, doing so would violate the principle of "Discrimination". Rather, "Proportionality" means that Israel must use force appropriate to destroying the Qassam rocket launch sites and the associated communications, command, control, and intelligence infrstructure. This is, in fact, what Israel appears to be doing. Nuking Gaza into oblivion, as some of the more bellicose on this forum suggest, would violate both Proportionality and Discrimination, and would be a hideous crime.

[chesley]

A “proportional” response would be to do to the enemy exactly what he is trying to do to you. Do it first, do it fastest, and do it more often, until he cries uncle and quits.

[Polarik]

Conflicts end when one side “wins,” by crushing the other, by degrading the enemy’s ability and/or will to fight.

Ditto...and they do NOT return land to the aggressor.

What this war is all about: