Don't you breathe a sigh of relief and sleep easily knowing that the world has become very sensitive to civilian harm and even to military casualties. We read daily of horrific losses on the magnitude of 2 soldiers killed and several non-combatants wounded and how unacceptable these casualties are even in wartime. War today is something which only allows for the destruction of a few buildings, burning of a few fields, but once that gets out of hand, it is time to stop the war.
Compare that with the figures from the two world wars. During the Somme offensive in 1916, there were over 1 million casualties with about 300,000 killed from June to November and during the general conflict of those times figures are cited which range into the tens of millions of deaths as a result of the fighting. Not all of them soldiers by any means.
During the second world war, London was severely bombed by the Germans, twice in fact, once at the beginning and then towards the end, and Coventry was devastated by fire bombing. The US pounded Dresden to rubble, and the Russians did the same in the fighting for Berlin. No one called for a cease fire.
Only when Hiroshima and Nagasaki fell victim to the awesome power of the atom, which caused the deaths of over 200,000 civilians, was there a call for ending the fighting and that was for a surrender, not a cease fire. The war resulted in 55 million deaths.
Which makes things quite puzzling when we hear cries of outrage that a few civilians who were being used as human shields by the same sort of people who wantonly murdered, unprovoked, close to 3,000 civilians going about their daily business in New York's World Trade Center, are killed in the line of fire. Outrage at whom? At those fighting a fair war against a brutal, cynical, cowardly enemy who use women and children as cover for their nefarious activities. In previous wars, the populations of the warring countries were the enemy, civilian or uniformed combatant. They supported, for the most part, the aims of their leaders and were complicit in what they did. They deseved to be targeted and everyone understood that.
How much more so in Hamas controlled Gaza where the people voted these murderers in. There are no uniformed soldiers, just killers cast in the role of freedom fighters who blend in with the rest of the population who actively support and aid them. So now the world hides behind the most overused words in the global media: "Humanitarian Crisis." I guess that's what you get when you start a war. There are some legitimate crises in the world, natural disasters, planned genocides and the like. If I were Israel, I wouldn't be too concerned about world opinion. The world did nothing when 500,000 people were senselessly slaughtered in Rwanda and untold numbers have been deliberately targeted, killed and maimed in the Sudan. There was a lot of talk but very little action.
Both sides always come to the table with complaints about the other, but in the end there is always the understanding of who is right and who is wrong. It is usually quite clear. In the Hamas - Israel war, Hamas will never give up their fanatical devotion to murder and mayhem. The only solution is to pound them into surrender where they can join the ranks of their brutish German and Japanese predecessors.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
It is to some degree the balance of power that "humanitarians" consider unfair. Israel has better, sophisticated weaponry and while the Gazans may deserve what happens to their homes and their people, to some it simply doesn't seem like a fair fight. This despite the fact that it is not Israel's fault that they are stronger, and that what they do is justified to protect their people. Whether this feeling is caused by socialist tendencies, misplaced kindness, lack of data, or inability to recognize reality, I do not think the fact of Israel's superior power can be ignored when arguing with those against what they are doing.
Post a Comment