Denial of Israel’s Right to Self-Defense

Denying Israel the right to defeat adversaries that substantially attack her.
Denying Israel the right to defeat adversaries that repeatedly attack her.
Denying Israel the right to defeat adversaries that repeatedly target Israeli non-combatants.
Claiming that Israel’s right to self-defense is limited to military ping pong.
Claiming that any human collateral damage caused by Israel is illegal.
In principle denying Israel the right to procure weapons for self-defense.
Describing every defensive form of Israeli military action as “illegal”.
Describing every defensive form of Israeli military action as disproportionate.
Tacit denial of Israel’s obligation to defend its own civilians.
Claiming that protection of Israeli civilians has little to no military value.
Claiming that Israel is responsible for criminal perfidy committed by Israel’s adversaries.
Demanding that Israel turns the other cheek.
Demands that Jews be proscribed from carry arms.
Claiming that Israel deliberately seeks to kill the innocent as a matter of policy.
Claiming that Israeli genocide prevention is equivalent to genocide against Jews.
Claiming that Israel is disallowed to fight wars in urban areas.
The tacit assumption that any Israeli military action is illegal.
Denial of Israel’s right to impose a siege without causing starvation or medical shortage.
Effectively demanding that Israeli soldiers allow themselves to be lynched by stoning.
Effectively claiming that Israel is not entitled to fight terrorism.
Claiming that Israeli responses to military attacks constitute crimes against peace.
Claiming that equality requires that Israel be treated like a terrorist organization.
Effectively granting impunity to attackers of Israel.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to deploy rapid dominance (i.e. shock and awe).
Demanding that Israel alone adheres to the tenets of pacifism.
Claiming that Israel has no right to self-defence due to being an occupying power.
Claiming that Israel uses weapons for the purpose of collective punishment.
Claiming that Israeli use of rapid dominance constitutes collective punishment.
Claiming that Israeli military decision makers secretly seek to humiliate civilians.
Claiming that every Israeli military action that restricts enemy civilian life is illegal per se.
Claiming or assuming that Israel is legally disallowed to perform psychological warfare.
Claiming or assuming that Israel is disallowed to wage war in daylight.
Claiming that the timing in the day/night of Israeli counter-attacks must be proportional.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to destroy civilian enemy infrastructure in war.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to target civilian enemy infrastructure.
Claiming that the Gaza region has acquired legal impunity from war through overpopulation.
Assuming that the principle of proportionality voids Israel’s right to self-defence.
Assuming that protection of Jewish civilians has almost no military value.
Assuming that the principle of proportionality requires de jure Israeli pacifism.
Assuming that the principle of proportionality requires Israel to cease defending itself.
Assuming by default that Israeli military action has ulterior and/or exterior motives.
Claiming by default that any Israeli action is disproportionate.
Requiring statistical equality in casualties irrespective of the nature of those casualties.
Assuming that Israel lost its right to self-defense due to being quite well armed.
Assuming that Israel is legally disallowed to take advantage of its military superiority
Assuming that all collateral damage caused by Israel is designed to target innocents.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to engage in urban warfare.
Assuming that every Israeli military mistake is a deliberate war crime.
Assuming that international law prohibits causing collateral damage in urban warfare.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to cause any collateral damage whatsoever.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to cause collateral damage in urban areas.
Assuming that Israel is disallowed to cause collateral damage in inhabited areas.
Claiming that Israel’s enemies are entitled to fully uninterrupted civilian life in times of war.
Assuming by default that Israeli operational mistakes are always premeditated.
Assuming that international law requires Israeli pacifism.
Assuming that any military disruption of Palestinian civilian life is an Israeli war crime.
Requesting that Israel only adheres to the tenets of pacifism.
Claiming that any collateral damage caused by Israel is legally unacceptable.
Claiming that any collateral damage caused by Israel is morally unacceptable.
Claiming that any harm caused by the Israeli military is legally unacceptable.
Claiming that any harm caused by the Israeli military is morally unacceptable.
Claiming that uniformed police officers armed with AK 47 are legal civilians.
Claiming that Israel must not use live fire at stone-throwing invaders.
Claiming that attacks with low average HG collateral damage are disproportional.
Assuming that no collateral damage caused by Israel can be considered proportional.
Assuming that Israeli soldiers may not defend themselves against violent civilians.
Assuming that Israeli soldiers may not defend themselves against armed civilians.
Claiming that retaliation to armed attacks is now entirely prohibited to Israel.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from retaliating after rocket attacks against it.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from retaliating after missile attacks.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from using arms against public stoning.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from using arms against attackers using clubs.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from using arms against perfidious enemies.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from retaliating to illegal attacks.
Claiming that Israel is prohibited from taking initiatives in ongoing military conflict.
Claiming that enemy perfidy completely voids Israel’s right to self-defense.
Claiming that armed attacks against Israel are not war and that retaliation is thus illegal.
“Israel cannot claim self-defense because it is militarily strong.”
“Israel cannot claim self-defense because people die in Israeli retaliation.”
“Israel cannot claim self-defense because it exports arms.”
“Israel cannot claim self-defense because it is the fourth largest arms exporter.”
“Israel cannot claim self-defense because the Jews started the conflict 100 years ago.”
“Israel cannot claim self-defense because it uses the term collateral damage.”
“Israel is wealthy and can therefore not claim self-defense.”
Claiming that Israel must not kill adversaries who engage the IDF in armed battle.
Claiming that Israel must not harm adversaries who engage the IDF in armed battle.
Assuming á priori that every admitted Israeli military mistake has malign intentions.
Claiming that Israeli soldiers may not kill “civilians” seeking to kill them.
Assuming that Israeli soldiers are legally entitled to less self-defense than civilians.
Claiming that Israeli soldiers must not kill those who attempt to lynch them.
Claiming that Israeli soldiers must not shoot at those who attempt to lynch them.
Claiming that Israeli soldiers must not shoot at those who attempt to stone them.
Claiming that Israeli soldiers must not kill those who attempt to kill them.
Claiming that Israeli soldiers are not legally permitted to kill those who try to beat them.
Claiming that defense of Israeli soldiers has no military value.
Claiming that defending Israeli border communities against rocket attacks lacks military value
Claiming that Israel only is legally disallowed to cause any collateral damage whatsoever.
Claiming that Israel only is legally obliged to pacifist behavior while attacked.
Assuming that low average human collateral damage is an Israeli war crimes policy.
Assuming that low average human collateral damage is Israeli genocide policy.
Assuming that low average human collateral damage is Israeli recklessness policy.
Assuming that low average human collateral damage is an Israeli policy of disproportionality.
Assuming that low average human collateral damage is Israeli disproportionality policy.
Assuming that low average human collateral damage is Israeli policy of targeting of civilians.
Assuming that any level of human collateral damage is Israeli war crimes policy.
Assuming that any level of human collateral damage Israeli genocide policy.
Assuming that any level of human collateral damage is Israeli recklessness policy.
Assuming that any level of human collateral damage is an Israeli disproportionality policy.
Assuming that any level of human collateral damage is a policy of targeting of civilians.
Assuming that exceptions in HG collateral damage are policy of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that exceptions in human collateral damage are policy of Israeli genocide.
Assuming that exceptions in human collateral damage are policy of Israeli recklessness.
Assuming that exceptions in human collateral damage are policy of disproportionality.
Assuming that exceptions in human collateral damage are policy of targeting of civilians.
Assuming that minimized human collateral damage is a policy of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that minimized human collateral damage is a policy of Israeli genocide.
Assuming that minimized human collateral damage is a policy of Israeli recklessness.
Assuming that minimized human collateral damage is an Israeli policy of disproportionality.
Assuming that minimized human collateral damage is an Israeli policy of targeting civilians.
Assuming that military success is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that successful defense is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that military victory is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that military superiority per se is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that overwhelming force is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that presence of collateral damage is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that widespread infrastructural damage is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that exceptions in collateral damage is intrinsic evidence of Israel crimes.
Assuming that Palestinian deaths per se are intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that Lebanese deaths per se are intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that retaliatory acts of war are intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that low numbers of Israeli casualties is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that Israeli prioritizing of Israeli lives is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that defensive Israeli occupation is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that defensive Israeli warfare is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that aggressive defense is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that no deaths caused by the IDF are accidental.
Assuming that exceptional incidents are intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that atypical incidents are intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that second-guessing against IDF commanders is evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that low average deaths per attack is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that absence of Israeli fatalities is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that Israeli military activity per se is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that hearsay is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that widespread devastation per se is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that rumor is intrinsic evidence of Israeli crimes.
Assuming that errors in military judgment is intrinsic evidence of Israeli war crimes.
Assuming that all defensive Israeli military action is wrong because some is misguided.
Assuming that all defensive Israeli military action is illegal because some inevitably is.
Assuming that any defense of Israeli Jewish civilians is intrinsically disproportionate.
Speech acts to the effect of “forbidding” Jews from bearing and using arms.
Claiming that any Israeli use of force is intrinsically illegitimate per se.
External expressions of shock to effect that the Jewish state uses military force per se.
External shock to the effect that the Jewish state uses military force per se.
External loathing to the effect that the Jewish state uses military force per se.
Assuming that any use of military force on the part of Jews is intrinsically illegal.
Assuming that any use of military force on the part of Jews is intrinsically illegitimate.
Demanding that Israel apologize for defending against terrorist attacks against.
Demanding that Israel apologize for defending against declared, attempted genocide.
Demanding that Israel apologize for defending against declared military aggression.
Demanding that Israel apologize for defending against launched military aggression.
Assuming that Israeli Jewish demographic existence constitutes intrinsic aggression.

Return to Typology of Antivrism