All this is justified by rooting out 2 or 3 thousand Hizbullah fighters?
This is typical even of US mainstream press coming out Lebanon.
WaPo
The nine ambulances were parked outside the Lebanese Red Cross. They couldn't leave -- neither by the road north, which was bombed, nor the road south, which was shelled Monday. Blasts thundered across the Tyre sky, and rumors flew with almost equal vigor: No one could walk outside after 10 p.m., no one should stand in the street in groups bigger than three.
That left Qasim Chaalan, a gentle Red Cross volunteer, with a problem: He had promised to take Khadija Tajj al-Din, a 74-year-old woman, in an ambulance from the Jabal Amel Hospital to a school where her relatives had sought refuge, a trip of a couple of miles.
Juan Cole has increasingly harsh words for the Bush Administration, along with many others.
Informed Comment
Human Rights Watch investigations do not bear out the excuse that the high civilian casualty rate is because of Hizbullah hiding among civilians:Human Rights Watch researchers found numerous cases in which the IDF launched artillery and air attacks with limited or dubious military objectives but excessive civilian cost. In many cases, Israeli forces struck an area with no apparent military target. In some instances, Israeli forces appear to have deliberately targeted civilians.
[...]Just from observing eyewitness news accounts from Lebanon, I had come to the same conclusion. The Arab American Institute condemned the Bush administration for its insouciance over the Qana massacre. The Israelis have done $2 billion worth of damage to Lebanon. I guess that is fair, one billion for each soldier captured by Hizbullah.
Worse yet, other formerly moderate Muslim voices, such as here, have become increasingly radicalized and shrill about the civilian casualties.
3 comments:
There is going to be hell to pay. Literally.
This whole situation makes me sick. To think they can bomb civilians and we do nothing except defend Israel's right to exist. Existing does not mean removing another person from the planet.
I call that murder.
Human Rights Watch's recent report on civilian deaths in Lebanon are based on unverifiable claims and cannot be considered credible. The statement quotes "witnesses" from Qana, as well as the local rescue workers who reportedly did not see "any evidence of Hezbollah military presence in or around the home." This testimony comes from biased sources and cannot serve as the conclusion that "the IDF has blurred the distinction between civilians and combatants."
HRW's statement fails to note that this area is controlled by the Hizbollah terror group, and HRW also ignores the photos and other evidence presented by other sources. As clearly demonstrated by NGO Monitor, previous HRW reports and condemnations targeting Israel, routinely based on unverifiable and unreliable "evidence", and ignoring the other information, demonstrate a pattern of bias and lack of credibility. In addition, the failure to condemn the pervasive use of human shields by Hizbollah, which is a basic violation of human rights norms, highlights the bias in HRW reports.
I'm not too concerned about "verifiable" witnesses. Given there is a 24 hour curfew for any vehicle in south Lebanon, just how can anything be known for sure?
The amount of damage in Lebanon cannot to be attributed to "Hizbullah controlled areas." There aren't enough Hizbullah fighters to control much more than a few border towns.
Both sides routinely use human shields. Both sides are targetting civilians. Both sides are out of control. The difference between the two is about a classic David and Goliath battle. Goliath pulverizing David's families homes and killing their wives and children not to mention their neighbors and relatives. David is lobbing rocks into Israel killing about roughly one for every ten Lebanese dead.
Bias isn't difficult to see through clearly, even from the US.
Post a Comment