Collateral Damage
| By ctpvandy07 - Jul 25th, 2006 at 9:52 pm EDT |
Collateral damage is unintentional damage or incidental damage affecting facilities, equipment or personnel occurring as a result of military actions directed against targeted enemy forces or facilities. Such damage can occur to friendly, neutral, and even enemy forces. In a fight against forces that are rooted in civilian life, it is hard to draw the line between Israel's recent attacks. What is apparent today is the unintentional UN casualties in Israel's lastest attack in Lebanon.
I am aware of the years of history that has finally come to a head and pushed Israel into this aggressive offensive, however, I still cannot say I approve of the magnitude in which Israel is responding. They are attacking evrywhere they can in Lebanon in an attempt to eliminate every Hezbollah operative, without targeting or attempting to find a specific perpetrator of these recent crimes against them. This last attack has hit a UN post in Khiam, and now I wonder, will this provoke the UN into action against Israel? It is one thing to attend to your own agenda and handle the situation as you feel your country needs to; however, having affected the lives of everyday Lebanese citizens and then causing the deaths of UN observers seems to be only souring the situation and destroying any possibility of resolution.
The UN has been slow to intervene or exercise a definitive role in the Middle East. Now this is a consequence of Israeli aggression and unfocused military campaigning. The Israelis are by no means a country with poor military experience or weak diplomacy tactics. I am just disappointed in the general lash out into the Lebanese community without identifying prime Hezbollah targets to attack. The UN should take this opportunity to really intervene and try to mediate this as a third party. Because now, the implications of the Middle East conflict are causing more than just Israeli/hezbollah/Lebanese casualties, but it is expanding and affecting ANYONE who has even a slight interest in Middle Eastern affairs.
I am aware of the years of history that has finally come to a head and pushed Israel into this aggressive offensive, however, I still cannot say I approve of the magnitude in which Israel is responding. They are attacking evrywhere they can in Lebanon in an attempt to eliminate every Hezbollah operative, without targeting or attempting to find a specific perpetrator of these recent crimes against them. This last attack has hit a UN post in Khiam, and now I wonder, will this provoke the UN into action against Israel? It is one thing to attend to your own agenda and handle the situation as you feel your country needs to; however, having affected the lives of everyday Lebanese citizens and then causing the deaths of UN observers seems to be only souring the situation and destroying any possibility of resolution.
The UN has been slow to intervene or exercise a definitive role in the Middle East. Now this is a consequence of Israeli aggression and unfocused military campaigning. The Israelis are by no means a country with poor military experience or weak diplomacy tactics. I am just disappointed in the general lash out into the Lebanese community without identifying prime Hezbollah targets to attack. The UN should take this opportunity to really intervene and try to mediate this as a third party. Because now, the implications of the Middle East conflict are causing more than just Israeli/hezbollah/Lebanese casualties, but it is expanding and affecting ANYONE who has even a slight interest in Middle Eastern affairs.
!
Comments are closed for this post.
The specific perpetrator is Hezbollah. Or were those thousands of rockets launched at Israel all shot off by one guy?
Lebanon is harboring Hezbollah in much the same way that Afghanistan once harbored the Taliban - by the standard of the Afghan War (Which most progressives support), Israel's response is comparatively restrained.
While collateral damage is always a terrible thing - I've seen the pictures up close, the really gory ones the media doesn't print, and they're enough to make you think twice about even the most noble war - I feel more sympathy for the victims of the Taliban than I do the civilians caught up in the assualt on Hezbollah, though I do feel sympathy for both. Unlike the Taliban, Hezbollah was democratically elected. It's one thing to have terrorists forced into your midst - it's another to vote for them.
The impoverished voters in south Lebanon, who are regularly ignored by Beirut elites, vote into power people who will provide crucial public services to them. For south Lebanon, it's unfortunately Hezbollah. Hezbollah isn't just some amalgamation of angry fundamentalists waving their guns and hiding out in other people's homes. They're an integrated part of south Lebanese society, and have to be dealt with as the quasi-state they are.
The fact that they have demands is not meaningful; Al-Qaeda had demands, too - such as that we withdraw from Saudi Arabia.
Oh, and they didn't just "capture two Israeli soldiers". They've murdered dozens more, and attacked Israeli civilians relentlessly with rocket fire.
Also, Israel already did several prisoner swaps, the most recent in 2004 where they gave back hundreds of prisoners for only a few Israelis.
If the Hezbollah response to that is to kidnap even more Israelis, there can be no more prisoner swaps - it only encourages further kidnappings, not peace.
If the end result of that is that it brings on an attack that destroys those public services, that was a pretty stupid move on their part, now wasn't it?
I'm well aware of that - which is why it's the Lebanese people's responsibility to exile them from their midst if they want to be treated as free people who can make legitimate claims for justice.