Always on my mind....
As of Wednesday evening, Israeli attacks had killed at least 292 civilians in Lebanon, while Hizbullah rockets had killed 13 noncombatants in the Jewish state. Lebanon has approximately 3.5 million people. On a per-capita basis, that means that as of Wednesday, the rough equivalent of 9/11 has happened every day here for eight days.
Western media has dropped the ball by failing to tell the real story in Lebanon, from The Daily Star.
This is actually an issue at all times in the Middle East....when I moved to Jordan in 2001, the 2nd Intifada was just picking up steam and it wasn't pretty....however, talking to my parents in England who were watching the British news and reading the British papers...the Israeli's were portrayed as purely defending themselves...now, I am not defending in any shape or form the suicide bombings or the terrorist attacks on Israel by the Palestinians, however, the sheer 'extra' brutality of the Israeli's was never shown and my weekly conversations with my parents became a trading of information from the Arabic media vs the Western media....it made for some quite interesting comparisons...particularly with concern to the imagery used.
Western media has dropped the ball by failing to tell the real story in Lebanon, from The Daily Star.
This is actually an issue at all times in the Middle East....when I moved to Jordan in 2001, the 2nd Intifada was just picking up steam and it wasn't pretty....however, talking to my parents in England who were watching the British news and reading the British papers...the Israeli's were portrayed as purely defending themselves...now, I am not defending in any shape or form the suicide bombings or the terrorist attacks on Israel by the Palestinians, however, the sheer 'extra' brutality of the Israeli's was never shown and my weekly conversations with my parents became a trading of information from the Arabic media vs the Western media....it made for some quite interesting comparisons...particularly with concern to the imagery used.
posted by Madame Chiang at 11:40 pm
7 Comments:
" . . . now, I am defending in any shape or form the suicide bombings or the terrorist attacks on Israel by the Palestinians . . ."
Didn't you inadvertently omit the 'not'?
Fred Jacobsen
San Francisco
the 'not' is now there....thanks Fred, it was definitely an inadvertent omission!
Dear MC:
Events eclipse me, but I just saw this one coming over the wires: "Lebanon announces that it's army will join with Hebollah to repel Israeli invaders", or something like it. Now, I understand that southern Lebanon is controlled by Hizbollah. And I understand that Hizbollah's forces are stronger than the Lebanese national army. And I understand that United Nations Resolution 1559 (in which Lebanon promised to defang Hizbollah) was a joke from its inception. And I understand why Lebanon complains about the Israelis bombing the runways of Beirut airport. But when Israel proposes to kill the people responsible for killing her citizens, I don't get why Lebanon would throw her forces in aid of Hizbollah. I must be missin' something.
Fred Jacobsen
San Francisco
Fred,
My two pennies worth....I think the Lebanese forces are only preparing for battle if Israel invades Lebanon and joining forces with Hezbollah is more a necessity than a desire...the Lebanese army are not strong enough to defend Lebanon by themselves....however, they must be seen to be defending themselves against a land invasion...Hezbollah are the their only sign of help.
MC:
I agree with your premises (Lebanon's army being unable to defend Lebanon, etc.). You know far more about this than I. But if Lebanon, for whatever motive (your "they must be seen to be defending themselves against a land invasion" sounds plausible to me), must, by necessity (as you would have it) ally with Hezbollah, doesn't this put bombing the Beirut airport, for example, into a different context?
I don't have an answer; I just pose the question. And please excuse the excessive dependent clauses in the preceeding paragraph. I'm toddling off to watch an interview with Simon Schama, so I don't have time to edit myself.
Fred Jacobsen
San Francisco
Fred,
This issue in the ME is basically a Catch 22...all sides are damned if they do and damned if they don't....
Taking out the airport first was Israel's way of ensuring Hezbollah had no way of getting their kidnapped soldiers out of the country - allegedly.
I think the situation has now gone beyond any logical explanation and understanding which is why a ceasefire at this point is so critical...unfortunately that doesn't seem likely...Israeli is dead set on finishing the task it started (seize the day, he who hesitates is lost etc etc)..and the next generation of 'terrorists'/'freedom fighters' is watching, learning and gathering cause.
If you are off to watch Simon Schama, I can excuse anything...one of my favourite historians!
I have had lots to say about this. Esesentially, Isreal is damned if they do anything and dammed if they don't. Terrorists hide behind woman and children so when one retailiates, they get killed. Its what the terrorists want. They don't care about people on either side, just to promote their narrow agenda. Sometimes, one has to take distasteful medicine and unfortunately, the Lebanese are the vicitms. As long as there are terrorists, their wioll be visitims and all the deaths in Lebanon can be attributed to the their being a terrorist militia in their territory attacking Israel. If they were gone, then there would be no reason for Israel to attack.
Post a Comment
<< Home