Not unlike Hitler's Germany, the current Israeli government continues to commit massacres against its neighbors with impunity, and not unlike Hitler's Germany, the people of Israel for the most part, stand behind their government's crimes against humanity. By continually targeting civilian areas, and by its refusal to end the crisis, Israel is only adding to the list of war crimes it has already committed. By stating that Israel is "in no rush for a cease-fire", the Israeli leadership has made it ever more likely for Hezbollah to emerge victorious from the current crisis, and to subject Israel to nothing but further hatred and humiliation in the eyes of many. If Hezbollah is the culprit, then why are the innocent people of Lebanon being punished? Isn't this close to Hitler's racist ideology, which stated that people of other than the "Aryan" race are below human and deserve no mercy or dignified treatment?
What justifies Israel's action in spreading out leaflets among the poverty-stricken villagers of southern Lebanon urging them to leave the area, then targeting those of them who had the means to leave? And what justifies Israel's assertion than those who choose to stay behind in villages are deemed to be Hezbollah supporters, and therefore constitute legitimate targets? Why did Israel reject the plea of one UN official for a three-day cease-fire, under the pre-text that there are humanitarian corridors already opened up, and there's no need for a cease-fire? Wouldn't this have given the awe-stricken people holed up in Qana and other southern villages the chance to leave the area, without fear of an Israeli strike- hence preventing a massacre? And what justifies the US administration's complicity in every step of the way, first by giving a green light to Israel, then by blocking any meaningful process to end the crisis, and finally to quote one senior US official, to call the crimes being committed by Israel the "birth pangs of a new middle east"? If the US has in mind to change the middle east for the better, then any plan to achieve this end should include Israel as a major player in the region.
By surrounding a hungry tiger with doves, which seems to be the plan drawn out for the middle east, you are subjecting the doves to illegitimate and indiscriminate attacks by the tiger. What the region calls for is not only dovish Arab states, but a dovish Israeli government which poses no threat to its neighbors. Indeed, with the impunity and madness shown by Israel today, what guarantee exists that given a larger adversary, such as Iran, Israel would not choose to make use of nuclear weapons in order to teach the Iranians a lesson?
The more fundamental question that should be asked is why does Israel refuse to recede to the borders of 1964? The latter's over 8,000 square miles, would make Israel about as large as the state of Michigan, with a population to match. If it's possible to house millions of people in Michigan, why couldn't it be done in Israel? Doesn't Israel's continuous refusal to end the occupation of Arab lands hint at a plan to extend its borders further still, as some hardliners within its administration have called for? And doesn't this intransigent attitude by a nuclear-armed government pose a greater threat to world peace than all other elements combined?
... Payvand News - 8/2/06 ... --