Does anyone else see something of a trend in the media covering almost anything to do with Israeli military conflicts?

It's a repeated trend that the various terrorist or nationalistic organizations and forces have a pencant for using civilian transportation and locations as hiding places for their soldiers, etc, and yet every time Israel strikes on, the international outcry is almost invariably directed at Israel for being so callous and horrible as to strike at civilian areas.

This latest Qana incident is a perfect example. Now, if Israel is lying about having issued statements warning civilians to flee areas that Hezbolla is using at launching points for rocket attacks against Israel, then that's another story. However, no-one seems to be talking about that. The issue seems to never stray from the idea that Israel should have just left that entire area alone, despite the fact that dozens of rockets were fired into Israel from that point. No investigation is being screamed for demanding that Hezbolla (who has all along seemed to want to be portrayed as a legitimate political entity that just happens to have a militant aspect, rather than a terrorist organization that happens to have a political aspect) prove that they weren't using that civilian area as a launching point for attacks.

I vaguely remember hearing about a similar situation from ages ago when the fighting with Palestinians was heaviest before the formation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. As far as I remember, Israel faced incredible international criticism for attacking a Palestinian hospital convoy, and it later came to light that the Palestinian militias would frequently disguise themselves as medical aid convoys to avoid detection and attack.

It just seems weird that the coverage and international reaction should be so one-sided.

Thoughts?

Listen up, Troll;

There are so many things wrong with your response that I won't go into depth with the ones that involve you being an insufferable troll who will not last long around here (or other internet forum populated by rational, normal people for that matter).

What I will go into is your persistant attempts at feigning literacy by responding to posts (which carries the implication that you've at least made an effort to read them), but then proving by the content of the reply itself that you lack even the most basic of communication skills.

Israel is a country, not a religion, twit. Lebanon likewise.

Learn to read or go away.

wisdom lives on a better planet than intelligence

I want to start off by saying that I am generally pro-israel, I certainly think that israel has the right to exist and defend their borders. But, having said that...

Hezbolla is a terrorist organisation, israel is a modern democracy, so we naturally hold Israel to a higher standard than hezbolla. Its like if iriaqi militants kidnap and behead some random innocent, well, thats what we EXPECT them to do, they're terrorist nutters. If the US military started kidnapping and beheading random innocents there would be more of a ruckus, no? Plus, what with them NOT BEING AN ARMY, its not so much that hezbolla is "hiding" amongst civilians as "living" amongst civilians. If you stand in your back garden and launch a rocket at a federal building, would it give the government the right to kill everyone on your block with carpet bombing?

What israel is doing is approximately the equivalent of Britain fighting the IRA by randomly dropping rockets into irish towns. Yes, its hard to tell a civilian from a terrorist, no, that does not give you the right to kill civilians on the off-chance they were terrorists. And you know what? Its the most STUPID and counter-productive way of fighting a terrorist organisation I can think of. If Israel kills someones entire family, do you think that person is a) going to be understanding, shrug and say "well, accidents happen, and casualties are inevitible in war", or b) join the terrorist organisation who are striking back at the people who killed his family to get his vengeance on? That is NOT an effective way to fight a terrorist threat. In fact, I cant think of one occasion where a terrorist group was destroyed by brute force. Most of the examples I can think of, the terrorist group melted away due to either involving them in the political process, or by eliminating their popular support by engaging the community they come from in dialogue.

What israel is doing is despicable. They are punishing a country, and the ordinary people within it, for the crimes of a terrorist group. Even if they did warn people to clear out of an area, a lot of people will either not have the means to leave, or be too frail or ill to travel, or simply not want to abandon all their worldly belongings on the say-so of a foreign threat. Hell, people refused to leave New Orleans, and that was a city being bitch-slapped by nature, not just men with rockets.

Not to mention that if they DID flee, there was an even chance that the refugee column would be attacked (was watching the news the other night where a column accompanied by a reporter was attacked. Hell, UN stations with the capability to send messages to israel such as "We're the UN, stop fucking shooting us" arent safe, why would a refugee column be any different?). Israel have consistantly refused to consider a cease-fire to allow civilians the chance to leave unmolested, and the US backs this claiming that a cease-fire wouldnt help anyone. Personally I rather think that a cease fire over the weekend would have helped the people of Qana, but that could just be me.

Israel has the capability to target the terrorists with surgical strikes (both air strikes and ground attacks by special forces units), but for whatever reason have decided to ignore that option. About the only country who back this play are the US, and thats because it plays to the notion that you can actually fight a "War on Terror" with tanks and rockets rather than by attacking the CAUSES of terrorism. Its like trying to fight a war on fire with napalm.

As for the media reports, I dont know about the US news, but the BBC certainly havent been hesitant about reporting on Hezbolla making rocket attacks into Israel, but the flat fact is that right now Israel is killing more Lebanese people than Hezbolla is killing Israeli people, so thats what gets reported. They also reported on finding hand grenades cached in the office of a hospital, and other evidence of hezbolla around a certain town (forget which, sorry). But I would argue that, as an example, if hezbolla are using a (working) hospital as a base you should send in special forces troops to kill the terrorists, rather than bombing the place flat from the air and killing everyone in the hospital whether terrorist, doctor or patient.

Anyway, thats just my viewpoint. I know that Israel/Lebanon/Palestine is an emotive issue, and that you may have other ideas, and thats fine, but I just feel that a modern democracy has a moral imperative to avoid civilian casualties as much as humanly possible, and it doesnt seem to me that Israel is even paying lip service to that idea at the moment. Oh, I also think that Israel have been badly mishandling the situation in palestine for years, but thats a seperate (but related) issue.

What gets me is that Israel seems to have inherited the USA's collossal arrogance (ok, this US administration's collossal arrogance), and believes they can do no wrong and do whatever the hell they like in the face of the pressure of every nation on Earth to form a ceasefire.

They also have inherited the USA's heavy-handed approach to doing things. In revenge for the kidnap, not even the killing, of two soldiers, Israel has killed over seven hundred and fifty people; men, women *and* children, in the process, may I add, destroying a United Nations observer station, a hospital and two schools. They even bombed a convoy of journalists, for goodness' sake.

They don't seem to realise that for every Hezbollah fighter they kill, at least 5 civilians are killed in the crossfire, and for every civilian killed, a brother, father, son or uncle joins Hezbollah for revenge. It's the same foolishness employed by America in Iraq.

And, of course, with Syria and Iran backing these brothers, fathers, sons and uncles as a coherent fighting force, Israel will soon have far too much on their plate, and the USA will be forced to support them more and more, again making the USA seem the meddling force in the Middle-East, at exactly the time *you* guys want to be seen as the *good* guys.

I suppose what I'm really driving at is that just because a country is democratically elected doesn't necessarily mean they are automatically good, and especially doesn't mean they know how to go about this kind of military action. Mugabe was democratically elected, and has been oppressing his people for years. I'm not going to invoke Godwin's Law in the conversation but yes, they were too. However laudable Israel's aims may be (and that's up for debate) they have gone about this in completely the wrong way, totally over the top, and are enduring the condemnation they deserve for it.

~Capreolus

I'm a little concerned over the fact that Israel is taking these kind of "forceful measures" (or whatever) at this point it time - with America occupying Iraq, is THIS really the best time to be stirring up more trouble in the region? Also, I highly doubt that Israel would have taken these steps if the American military weren't right next door.....

The way I see it is: The Hezbollah attacked and kidnapped SOLDIERS - that's what happens to SOLDIERS sometimes, but Isreal in return is attacking a civilian population.

As for the original post: Yes, I do see a trend in the media coverage - and we're quite simply, I'm afraid, being informed of and eased into the idea that much more trouble is just around the corner so we may as well start accepting (or at the very least expecting) it.