Monday, August 07, 2006

We'll Chuck A Few Of Our Insects Into The Fire For Moral Equivalence

U.S. Resolution Would Allow Israel to Stay in Lebanon

On the diplomatic front, efforts by the United Nations Security Council to secure a ceasefire appear to be faltering. On Saturday the United States and France announced they had agreed on a draft resolution. But Lebanon and other Arab states rejected the proposal. This is Lebanon's special envoy to the United Nations Nouhad Mahmoud.

Nouhad Mahmoud: "We appreciate all the efforts made to come up with this draft but unfortunately it lacked for instance a call for withdrawal of Israeli forces which are now in Lebanon, and that's recipe for more confrontation."


Lebanon's envoy Nouhad Mahmoud also said the resolution must order the Israeli withdrawal from the occupied Shebaa Farms. Lebanon accused the U.S. of drafting a resolution slanted toward Israel. Meanwhile Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice urged the Security Council to quickly approve the resolution. She said its passage will determine "who's for peace and who isn't."

Report: Israel Allowing Rocket Attacks to Give It "A Sort of Moral Equivalency"

On the military front, Thomas Ricks, a top reporter for the Washington Post, has said that Israel is purposely not bombing all of Hezbollah's rocket launchers. Sources have told him that the Israeli military feels that if Hezbollah continues to fire rockets at Israel it gives Israel a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon.


democracynow

2 comments:

  1. warszawa11:23 AM

    "Condoleeza Rice urged the Security Council to quickly approve the resolution. She said its passage will determine "who's for peace and who isn't.""

    Ah yes. We can anticipate the headlines: "Lebanon rejects UN calls for peace."

    "Sources have told him that the Israeli military feels that if Hezbollah continues to fire rockets at Israel it gives Israel a sort of moral equivalency in their operations in Lebanon."

    If that's in the WP, presumably no-one can call it a "conspiracy theory". Provoke an official enemy beyond endurance, carefully allow the respondee to attack expendable members of your own civilian population, and then use that response as an ongoing casus belli.

    I'm trying to think what it reminds me of.

    ReplyDelete
  2. well i think it isn't in the WAPO, just something reported by a reporter with WAPO imprimatur, thus presumed reliable. i will keep looking to see where it appeared...

    ReplyDelete