Coming soon!

Coming soon!

Tuesday, August 29, 2006

What's the Difference?

Ivan Eland has a column worth reading on why Israel's war crimes in Lebanon and Gaza don't get the attention that other crimes and acts of terrorism get, such as those committed by Saddam Hussein.
In fact, the main difference between Saddam's war crimes and Israel's is that while Saddam denies them, Israeli officials indirectly admit them. Amnesty cites a comment by Israel's top uniformed military official that implied that Israel was trying to punish the Lebanese population and government to get them to oppose Hezbollah. The group noted that Israeli military chief of staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz called Hezbollah a "cancer" that Lebanon must expunge "because if they don't, their country will pay a very high price."
Eland concludes:
To justify its ill-advised invasion of Iraq, the Bush administration regularly gripes about Saddam Hussein's war crimes, while cheering on Israel as it does the same thing in Lebanon and Gaza, just using different weapons.
Read the rest here.

Hat tip: Anthony Gregory


Anonymous said...

Ivan Eland's pieces have become increasingly tougher and uncompromising as the war drags on.

Joe said...

After reading Eland's first paragraph, which ends "Yet Saddam Hussein is on trial for war crimes and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is still in office," I was reminded of a president popularly known by his middle initial who also caused "collateral damage" in Iraq, although his "defense" secretary called it "shock and awe" instead.

After reading Eland's second paragraph I'm also reminded of another president who in August 1945 ordered the first WMDs be dropped on two Japanese cities, yet he didn't have to stand on trial at Nurnberg.