Let's start with "killed." A minimum of 350 Lebanese have been killed. Of these, the Israelis are claiming (??) 100 are Hezbollah. That is bullshit but lets let it lie, so at least 250 innocent Lebanese have been killed. This piece has the numbers on Israelis:
Already, 19 soldiers have been killed in the latest conflict. Another 15 civilians have been killed in Hizbollah rocket attacks since the fighting started.
The Telegraph estimate agrees.
So, of some 34 Israeli killed, 19 have been soldiers, not civilians. That leaves 15 Israeli civiiians killed, compared to at least 250 Lebanese.
From this story we can see the ratio:
At least 11 rockets hit Haifa, Israel's third-largest city, and five people were wounded, with 23 treated for shock.
Lebanese wounded are estimated at about 500. That makes sense, compared to the number killed. There is no reason to think that the real Israeli wounded number isn't also about twice the number of killed, or about 30.
Okay, by this calculus, adding killed and wounded, we have 45 total real Israeli civilian casualties, vs 750 Lebanese.The estimates of Lebanese displaced is estimated at 500,000. I don't see many Israelis moving, and if they are, its not because their homes are destroyed. The damage in Lebanon is estimated at 2 billion. Haven't seen any estimate re Israel...but it is not exactly in that order of magnitude, clearly.
Foreign Office minister Kim Howells has criticised Israel's bombardment of Lebanon, while on a visit to Beirut. He said Israel had not carried out "surgical strikes" and attacking the Lebanese nation was not the answer. Downing Street said the prime minister would stand by Mr Howell's comments, adding the British government had "always urged restraint on Israel". Meanwhile thousands of people across the UK have joined demonstrations against Israeli attacks on Lebanon.In fact, (and maybe its just a reaction to Biff's G-8 imitation of Bluto Blutarski at the Animal House), but the Brits appear to be calling bullshit on the idea that there is solid evidence of the neocons Iran/Syria/Hezollah connection:Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett told the `Financial Times`
. "I am sure that Israel would weigh very carefully any suggestion of a ground incursion because, after all, it took them a long time to get out of Lebanon the last time they went in," the daily quoted her as saying. "I think everyone understands the position in which Israel finds itself. We have been urging caution and restraint on Israel from the beginning and we continue to do so with ever greater concern as time goes on," she said. Beckett told the daily there was no concrete proof Iran and Syria were behind the Hizbollah`s attacks. "I`m not sure that any government anywhere in the world would tell you that they`ve got cast-iron proof (of Iranian and Syrian involvement)," she said. "What I can tell you is that almost every government in the world shares our view." The report said Beckett also backed UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, who has called for a halt to hostilities.Now, I realize that Alan ""torture is okay with me" Dershowitz has a new definition of "civilian", but, people, you can't FIND A FREAKING WAR WHERE IT CAN'T BE SAID THAT THE CIVILIANS GIVE SOME AID TO THE MILITARY. That is why the rules of war were written. Geez. Let's get fuckin real...Can we GET FUCKIN REAL ABOUT WHAT IS GOING ON THERE?????