Be sure to follow me on Twitter @leftiblog

Monday, August 14, 2006


Who "won" the war in Lebanon?

It's pretty clear who the losers are - they're the ones in boxes in the ground, the ones whose houses and shops and entire villages have been obliterated, not to mention the Israeli cannon fodder who paid with their lives for the immorality of the Israeli government. But who was the winner? Most rational observers say it's Hizbollah, but last night I watched the Israeli Ambassador to the U.N. Dan Gillerman claiming that Israel was the "winner."

And on what grounds did he make that claim? He said there were three reasons - because Hizbollah is to be disarmed, Hizbollah will not be able to be rearmed, and Hizbollah will no longer function south of the Litani River. Note the connection between those "achievements." None of them has actually been achieved, and, when and if they are, they will have been achieved not by the Israeli military, but by its patrons in the U.S. throwing their weight around in the U.N. and amongst their allies.

Gillerman and his ilk don't even have the chutzpah to repeat the nonsense, heard from the very first days of the assault, that half of Hizbollah's military might has been destroyed, or that hundreds of Hizbollah fighters have been killed, or anything of that nature, since those claims were laughable from the start. And claiming that they are the "winners" by reciting a list of power plants, roads, apartment buildings, day care centers, bridges, and so on that were destroyed might not sound like the achievements of a "winner," just those of a terrorist.

Reading the rather visible words between the lines, according to Gillerman the "winner" in this war was the U.S. Dream on, Dan.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours? Weblog Commenting by HaloScan.com High Class Blogs: News and Media