Tacitus on the death of children

T: "Israel does not seek the death of civilians for their own sake."

You know, that talking point is wearing a little thin, a week and 500 civilian deaths into this mess.

I consider myself very pro-Israel. I like democracy. I support its right to defend itself. I despise Hezbollah and hope Israel can wipe them off the map.

But there is no evidence that Israel's current approach is actually working.

Someone who wrote to urge Israel to continue its campaign in Lebanon wrote last week-- before Qana-- that, "It looks like a tale of Israel bombing civilian targets as an end in itself. It looks like the sort of collective punishment that Israel s critics routinely decry. It looks like an attack on a struggling democratic government in a beleaguered yet heroic Lebanon in order to punish terrorists only nominally under the Lebanese government s control."
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Jonah+Goldberg%3A+A+cease-fire+makes+no+sense+for+Israel&articleId=0749c15f-1119-4cb0-9296-8eb1b97c0a11

This writer allows his (well-warranted) hatred for Hezbollah to blind himself to the fact that Israel's actions (1) are not cutting off Hezbollah's capabilities and (2) are enhancing their political support. Remember, President Bush's approval ratings went up, not down, after 9/11. People being attacked rally around the state, or paramilitary or whatever Hezbollah is. People being attacked are not wont to engage in soul-searching.

Of course Israel doesn't target civilians, and of course Israel is On Our Side and Hezbollah is emphatically not.

But it's no longer a big surprise when Israel's actions result in civilian deaths.

I know that Israel is fighting at a disadvantage against terrorists who do not care about civilian deaths.

That is why Israel is good and Hezbollah is evil.

It's harder to be good sometimes.

I submit that Tacitus, and the writer quoted above, are urging Israel to get out of this hole by digging faster.>

the problem was that nothing ever works. Doing something doesn't work. Not doing something doesn't work.

It's clear that Israel isn't moving through this with a lot of visible success. Of course on the Lebanese side it is difficult to see if Israel is making a dent into Hezbollah, as Hezbollah is even more a master of spin than they are in warfare.

Sometimes, though, when there is major blocks in moving forward it has to move backwards first. Get stuck in a cave and you have to backtrack to find another route. Fall back to try to find a new way forward.

Clearly, there is tragedy everywhere in this, on and from both sides. But the Arab nations acted a bit differently this time around. Things are not exactly how they've always been. My prayer is that when this all settles there will be seen the reality that in war there can be only sorrow, with both sides willing to do what it takes to find other paths forward.

My fear is that those who seek death will continue to seek it for all their neighbors. They glory in death, and will never care about anyone wanting otherwise.

Of course, the IRA was like this, and even if it took a few decades, patterns of hate can change, even after awful acts on all sides.>

Messers Tomberg and Eubanks, I assume you understand that any cease fire that does not include Iran renouncing support for Hezbollah would be pointless. I also assume you understand that Israel's previous land-for-peace overtures (with the exception of the Camp David Accords of 1977) have been rejected.

So what do you advocate, short of mass suicide for Israelis?>

joseph d'h:
I assume you know that the 2002 Arab Initiative offered recognition of Israel, peace, and normal relations in exchange for Israel moving its settlements behind the 1967 line - which, incidentally, is called for by the 2nd Geneva Convention and UN Resolution 242. ALL Arab nations signed on to it; Israel rejected it by acting as though it hadn't been offered.
If you acknowledge it, of course, you can't carry on with the "mass suicide" nonsense that is just a pretext for smashing those calling for adherence to 242 into submission.
I assume you know this.>

There are reports out now which state it appears the building collapse in Qana may have staged by Hezbollah.
CNN journalist Wedeman noted there was little blood and all the victims appeared to have died while sleeping. Which the question was raised, sleeping thru a thunderous air attack?
Wedeman also noted a large crater beside the building but observed the building appeared not to have collapsed as a result of an airstrike.
It was also noted the roof of the building was intact.
The Lebanese rescue teams didnt start evacuating the building until morning and only after the camera crews came.There is a 7 hour unexplained time lapse from when the airstrike occured to when the building was first reported collapsed. The airstrike was around 1 am and the building was reported collapsed around 8 am.
Israelis noted the bodies appeared to have been dead for a few days and there were no effects on the bodies which are the results of an airstrike.>

I remember reading an interview with Ken Burns around the time his Civil War miniseries came out (in 1990, I think -- ye gods, has it been that long?)

The interviewer asked him whether he thought that, if television had been around during the Civil War and had been able to bring things like the carnage at Antietam into living rooms across America, it might have produced a popular outcry and revulsion that would have led to a negotiated settlement ending the war much earlier.

Burns' answer was interesting, and has always stayed with me. He said, in effect, Yes, if TV had been around then, the images of carnage might have shortened the war -- and that that would have been unfortunate. Some wars, he said, need to be fought, and the Civil War was one of them.

World War II was another one. So, I submit, is this one.

This is why the U.S. military kept such a lid on things like images of dead GIs from Iwo Jima. Some wars need to be fought, no matter how terrible they are or, God help me, how many photogenic children get killed.>

Bingo, Ralph.
Remove the settlements, create a coherent Palestian state, and you've cut the Arab extremism off at its roots.
This Israeli episode could be a chapter in a future version of Barbara Tuchman's "March of Folly" -- when nations or institutions act in a way contrary to their own self-interest.
Israel wants security.
So, it works hard at creating the next generation of angry jihadists.
Not smart, IMHO.>

The large, intricate, multi-colored, professionally produced banner that appeared shortly after the building collapsed (in which Condoliza Rice is blamed for "Qana massacres") is certainly suspicious

Not quite the same thing, but this reminds me of the incident during the first Gulf War (BTW, what are we going to end up calling the current war in Iraq? The Second Gulf War?) when the US bombed a building thought to be housing munitions, but which the Iraqis claimed was a baby milk factory. I particularly remember the TV footage of the site after the bombing, which prominently featured a sign saying "Baby Milk Factory".

In English.

Only in English.

What made it an even more blatant attempt to pander to Western news coverage was that the sign was crude and hand-lettered. Obviously, they've learned since then. And, of course, there have been 15 years' worth of advances in computer graphics and quick-printing technology.>

You know, that talking point is wearing a little thin, a week and 500 civilian deaths into this mess.

Yep.

Diane>