“Disproportionate force” explained

Sometimes, a picture is worth way more than a thousand words. Michael Ramirez gets it.
This goes to the point I’ve been trying to make, which is that the anti-American/anti-Israel groups are willing to countenance a war only if they can assure that there is no possibility that the USA or Israel can win.  Indeed, in their weird world view, the possibility in any war that one side might have an advantage that could lead to victory is anathema.  It’s always better on the Left for wars to be endless affairs, with no possibility of resolution, simply decades of increasing barbarity.  The “rip of the band-aid” school of warfare — go in, achieve your objective, get out — which is what George Bush tried to do in Iraq and Israel is currently attempting in Lebanon, just doesn’t exist in their universe, despite the obvious fact that, in the long run, it’s less damaging to all concerned.

I remember in the early 1980s, when Israel first invaded Lebanon, some bizarrely fair news editor allowed footage of an interview with an Israeli soldier.  What he said has stayed with me for more than 20 years:  “When you have a cancer, you have to cut it out, even if you damage healthy flesh, because that is less damaging in the long run than letting the cancer remain.