Rockets and the media
Jackson Diehl, a columnist at the Washington Post writes today a piece entitled “War of Rockets“, in which he draws a comparison between what the Israelis are facing in Gaza and the US in Sadr City;
Last Tuesday, Israel faced the fallout from a Palestinian family of five perishing in the Gaza Strip during an Israeli strike against militants firing rockets at an Israeli town. On Wednesday, the Bush administration woke to a front-page picture in The Post of a 2-year-old Iraqi boy killed in a U.S. airstrike in Baghdad aimed at Shiite militiamen launching rockets at the city’s Green Zone. The similarity of these tragic and politically costly episodes was anything but a coincidence.
First, I’d point out to Mr. Deihl that on Saturday the New York Times reported that incident in Gaza was not the fault of the Israeli Army, but rather the fault of exploding Hamas terrorists;
Palestinian witnesses had said they believed that an Israeli tank shell or a missile from a drone had struck the family’s house in Beit Hanoun, killing the five.
The military said it had fired two missiles from the air that hit their target — two Palestinian gunmen operating near the house. The gunmen were carrying backpacks loaded with ammunition, the army said, leading to secondary, bigger explosions.
The military concluded the family was hit “during the explosion of the second missile that ignited the secondary explosions” or by “objects that had flown towards them from the strength of the explosion.” It ruled out a direct Israeli hit on the house.
The backstory on the US incident as reported by ABC News;
Stover said 28 militiamen were killed when U.S. forces hit back with rockets.
Officials at two local hospitals said about 25 people had died and several dozen were wounded — most civilians. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to release the information.
Associated Press photos showed men pulling the dust-covered body of a 2-year-old boy, Ali Hussein, from the rubble of one building.
U.S. officials said all precautions are taken to prevent civilian casualties, but blamed the militiamen for taking cover among their neighbors and families.
“The enemy continues to show little regard for innocent civilians, as they fire their weapons from within houses, alleyways and rooftops upon our soldiers,” said Col. Allen Batschelet, chief of staff for the 4th Infantry Division in Baghdad.
Funny how AP always gets these pictures of two-year-olds pulled from the wreckage. But that’s what the Iranians want – dead children turn the Arab world against the US and Israel. It’s funny how AP can never find any dead children after terrorist attacks against the US and Israel. But this all covered in Michael Yon’s book “Moment of Truth in Iraq” – it’s not just a war of rockets and bullets, but also a war of cameras.
Like I said, whenever an Israeli child is killed by a Hamas rocket, or an Iraqi child is murdered by an al Sadr-inspired attack or an al-Qeada attack, there never seems to be any of the mainstream photographers near. But let someone pull a body out of the wreckage after a US or Israeli attack, it’s like a Paris Hilton traffic stop. That’s why ya’all need to go to Amazon and buy Michael Yon‘s book – if for no other reason than to keep him over there and taking the pictures no one else will take.
Are we saying it’s a conspiracy to portray the US and Israel in the worst light possible? Have to confess I haven’t read Yon’s book.
Here is a solution- comply with Bin Laden’s and al qaeda’s demands:
1. He wants foreign troops out of Islamic countries.
2. He wants foreign powers to stop propping up dictators in Islamic countries.
3. He wants foreign powers to cease their support of Israel, which he views as the usurper of Palestinian lands
Seems pretty reasonable to me in my opinion.
Jonn wrote: And then what demands would you have us comply with after we got done complying with those? And when do we stop complying with their demands – when you feel safe again?
…exploding Hamas terrorists
Call me a sick demented human being, but for some reason, that was a great mental image. 🙂
Jonn wrote: Demented? Not you, Kate.
“Seems pretty reasonable to me in my opinion.”
Yeah… blow up a few buildings, kill a bunch of Americans and you can get whatever you want. We’ll bend over and let you drive if you’re scary enough. THAT will make it a safer world. Rooney, I bet you lost a LOT of lunch money in school with that attitude. What a Putz.
Ray,
The attacks were in response to our refusal to comply with the demands. Even terrorists know you don’t shoot someone then ask them to negotiate.
Resorting to name calling with those who share opinions different from yours isn’t conducive to fully examining the discussion either. I’d kindly ask you to please keep this discussion civil.
You see, we have to keep an open mind when discussing issues with such grave importance as war. War is not a sporting event where we blindly cheer our team to victory no matter what the cost. Sometimes is helps to take a step back to look at the big picture every now and then.
“The attacks were in response to our refusal to comply with the demands.”
FWIW, PLEASE tell me that this doesn’t equate to “we got what we had coming to us” ????
Of course not. Nobody deserves that. And there is no way we could have taken them seriously as such a huge threat at that time. But now we live in a new paradigm where such atrocities are a reality. In my opinion, the best way to avoid another attack is to look at what led to it in the first place.
So since it “sounds pretty reasonable” and “now we live in a new paradigm”, we should comply just so the bad mans don’t hurt us?????
Ya’ know, in the interest of “avoid(ing) another attack” ???
And then we can have “peace in our time”…..
Well now that we have been at this for years I think it is wise to look back and re-examin our policy with the benefit of some hindsight. Clearly he should be persued by the law and brought to justice if possible. But to wage a war on an idea (terror) is just not worth it to me considering the risks and costs. Being able to admit we made mistakes is the first step in correcting them. I was for the war. I was there when the COLE was bombed. When I deployed I wanted to fight terrorists. It has taken years for me to change my mind.
Given the track record of islam in terms of expansion and their codified treatment of “us vs them”, at what point do YOU determine thus far and no more?
Do we close our borders and send sympathy cards to the countries in Europe, Asia and other regions which will fall?
As Jonn asked above, “And then what demands would you have us comply with after we got done complying with those? And when do we stop complying with their demands….?”
Rooney
Suppose a street gang decides to demand you pay them money every week. Now, they won’t break up the store and hurt your customers if you comply, but yow decide to not pay. Is it your fault now that the store is a shambles and your best customer is laying dead on the floor or the street gangs? Do you let it go and just pay them now, or call the cops and procecute them?
Your answer that we should have just ceded to their demands is like telling a woman that she brought the rape on herself. “If you had just worn something less sexy he would have left you alone… you were encouraging him”.
Thugs come in all shape and sizes. Extortion is extortion the worst thing you can do is give in, and the best way to deal with it is through a position of strength. I still say giving in to Osama’s demands will only create a confidence in him to make further demands until we are simply chickens on a hot plate, dancing whenever he decides to turn up the heat. Sorry, but I’ve never learned to dance.
Ray,
We have to let go of the pride and cut our losses. I’m not saying that we, the US, are to blame. Until the 9/11 attacks we were not fully able to comprehend how much our Mid East policies offended the would be terrorists. Nor did we have a full comprehension of what they were capable of or how hard it would be to defeat them in a guerilla war. Now with hindsight some things are clearer. Bush’s relentless pursuit of a Pyrrhic victory, or McCain’s possible desire to escalate just smacks of pride.
Its like when your broker tells you not to make investment decisions based on emotion. You don’t hold on to a stock that has plummeted because you are holding out hope that it will magically rebound someday. There comes a time when you make a quantitative decision to cut your losses and move into another more promising investment.
Removing troops from the region and pledging to stop meddling in their affairs seems a small price to pay for peace. Especially when its estimated that the total cost of the war will comes in at $1 Trillion (best case scenario), and possibly much more depending on how much longer it goes on. Not to mention the thousands of US casualties, or the many many more Iraqi casualties, or the complete destruction of a nation.
Try not to think of it as giving into extortion. Think of it as diagnosing the cause and treating it in order to prevent further attacks. They didn’t attack us because they “hate our freedom” (as propaganda machine would have us believe) but because we are infringing or theirs.
Sorry,
Give in now and we’ll get hit again. That’s what will happen in your scenario. Don’t tell me these fanatics will stop with those demands. They have also stated that the United States is a Godless country that has to be brought to Allah. Once we start to backpedal they will see that we can be cowed. When they demand we convert to Islam what do we do, put our daughters in burkas? And you are advocating disavowing the best Democratically elected government in the Middle East, one who has been a staunch ally to the U.S. I know, I know, the evil Jews… they’ve been so nasty to those lovely Palestinians. Ohhh Bovine Scatology. I bet if the Palestinians would just stop blowing themselves up on buses , or launching rockets into cities for a while they could integrate with the rest of the population of Israel. Every time we give those murdering thugs what they want, they demand more. They don’t want peace, their stated goal is to destroy Israel and that is not acceptable. Oh, and for the record, no I’m not Jewish.
Fighting them on both fronts over there is keeping them off balance and interfering with their ability to mount another major attack and increasing our Intel on their activities. Most of the troops with feet on the ground over there tell me we’re making real progress. Stop now and you open the door to more attacks on US soil. How much did 9/11 cost us? Not only in lives and lost property, but economically and emotionally. War costs money sure, but I think your peace would come with a much higher price tag.
I’m going to agree (sort-of) with Rooney here, Ray…mostly because you haven’t provided any evidence to back up your claims. In fact, you just repeat yourself.
“Give in now and we’ll get hit again” is not proof, it’s conjecture…and your association of our mideast policy with gang violence is (at best) a confusing analogy.
The reason I agree with Rooney’s assessment is because there’s historical precedent to consider. Ronald Reagan sent Marines into Lebanon in the 80’s, promising never to “turn tail and run.” However, after 241 Marines were killed in a terrorist act, Reagan pulled the troops out, admitting, “I didn’t understand the irrationality of middle eastern politics.” Moreover, carbombings and overall terrorist activity declined almost immediately after the Americans departed Lebanon.
Has the United States been attacked by Lebanese terrorists since?
A little introspection and a large slice of humble pie can save lives. At what point does it start to sink in that American presence is neither wanted nor needed in the Middle East?
Jonn wrote: Evidence that future events will happen? Grow up. Provide evidence they’ll leave us alone if we withdraw, for Pete’s sake.
Um, the Lebanese example? Did you read my comment?
The same argument gets played over and over: If the United States doesn’t invade [insert country hell-bent on world domination] then every US citizen will soon have to learn [insert country’s native tongue or culture]
I’m tired of hearing that argument, especially when it is backed up with hollow rhetoric such as Ray’s. I’m not asking for evidence of future events–how about a historical precedent to back up your claim, Ray?
Jonn wrote: Where have you been the last decade and a half? We’re involved in a humanitarian mission in Somalia, the situation escalates, we withdraw. We get barracks and emabassies bombed and a ship in a neutral port gets bombed. Our response (to do nearly nothing) gets our own country attacked. Jeez. Why did I have to explain that? So what you’re suggesting is that we close our embassies and let our Navy rust in home port?
Jonn, examine the common denominator in all the scenarios you named: overseas American presence.
I can’t speak for Rooney, but I think what he was trying to say was that American presence is not wanted nor needed in the Middle East. I’d extend that ideology to cover Africa as well. Our presence overseas has done nothing but tarnish our reputation and has provided the catalyst for extremist governments to develop.
Any chance Ray will weigh in on this or is Jonn acting as his spokesman today?
Jonn wrote: You may have noticed that I own this place, so I reserve the right to jump in anytime I feel the need. Ray probably has a job that doesn’t allow him to hang out here every moment. If he has something to say, I’m sure he will.
Gee, sorry you had to wait so long Allen… As John said, some of us actually work for a living. If you note the times of my posts you can get a better feeling when I may be online. Also, I hate to break it to you, but debating with you is not number one on my “to do” list. Unlike you, I have a life.
I think John summed it up rather well. Your suggestion that we withdraw to the United States to avoid offending someone is ludicrous. Isolationism is never the answer. Like it or not, the United States has vested interests overseas and the responsibility to protect those interests. You would have us crawl back into our shell and rely on the nonexistent protection of oceanic distances from those who would hurt us. That didn’t even work in the days of sail, and it seems woefully ignorant in light of modern transportation. My analogy about street gangs is spot on as these thugs act just as every cheap hood does, “do as we say or we will hurt you” sorry you don’t like it. Closing your eyes and wishing the bad guys away won’t work. If you want to lock yourself in your basement and cower from them, go ahead.
Ray,
I appreciate your thoughts but I fail to see any convincing commentary or original insight.
Do you believe in simply continuing our present course or do you have any ideas on how it can be improved? The reason I ask is because I think most people would agree that it is not working. I have presented my ideas, as unpopular as they may be with the majority of the traffic at this site. I would like to hear your original ideas in return. I believe that open exchange of opposing ideas leads to greater insight and that is why I visit this website. I could easily visit an anti-war or Ron Paul website and hideout among like-minded individuals exchanging one liner platitudes but that would benefit me in no way.
So please, I kindly ask you to give me your plan on how the whole war situation should be handled or improved. Or better yet- how it could have been avoided?
“I appreciate your thoughts but I fail to see any convincing commentary or original insight.”
Fortunately I have already graduated college and, since you were not my sociology prof. nor are you my employer, I have no need to impress or convince you of anything. Nor do I have the time to ceaselessly bang my head against the brick wall of your preconceptions. I’m sorry, but I have a life and have no intention writing a dissertation on Foreign Relations on John’s blog to make you happy. It would be boring to the others, and to me as well.
Avoiding or changing the course of the war is a non-issue now unless you have a time machine in your back pocket. Monday morning Quarterbacking has never been my cup of tea. Would I have done things differently? Looking back, probably, but I was not on the ground in Iraq and I won’t judge those who were. Just because you think that we know everything that happened does not mean that the public has gotten the entire story yet. It was years after WWII that we found out about the Magic program that allowed us to listen to the Japanese coded messages and the extent of the Manhattan Project.
Alright Ray, fair enough. I guess we’ll just leave that one alone. I was really hoping to hear if you had any ideas though…