It's two days later, or after the "fact," and yet this editorial, "More Than a Cease-Fire Needed," from Friday's New York Times, is still bothering me.

The editors write, in relevant and ridiculous part:

Israeli officials, with strong backing from Washington, are saying privately that it could take days or even weeks more of pounding to destroy Hezbollah’s huge missile stocks, cut off its supply lines from Syria and Iran, and prove to the Lebanese people the high cost of sheltering the terrorist group. [Emphasis added.]

What the hell is that? "The Lebanese people" are, what, to blame? They -- including, encompassing, the proverbial man and woman on the street just trying to feed the family in a country battered about like a volleyball for the past 30 years -- deserve everything they've been getting at the end of American-supplied arms essentially donated to the Israeli army? This is like blaming protestants of Ulster for "sheltering" the Irish Republican Army. Incredible.

Later in the same editorial, the Times team offers this:

The resolution should mandate the return of Israel’s kidnapped soldiers and, finally, pledge major international contributions to help Lebanon rebuild from the destruction of the last week and bolster its weak democratic government.

Glad to hear that, I guess, since I -- naively -- hadn't thought that we, meaning Americans, would be picking up the tab for this obscene, grotesque, criminal, and seemingly endless series of Bush-administration endorsed attacks in which the distinctions between Hezbollah terrorists and innocent civilians seem to matter almost nothing whatsoever.

| HOME |