Adam Horowitz writes:
At left is a Reuters photo of a Gaza man grieving over the killing of his son. From the Times:
"Dr. Muawiya Hassanein, the head of emergency services at the Gaza Ministry of Health, said at least 140 Palestinians were killed in the raid.
"Most
were members of the security forces of Hamas, but a few civilians were also among the dead, including
children. Scores more Palestinians were wounded."
The AP also parrots the "security forces" claim, but it does add that:
The strikes caused widespread panic and confusion in Gaza,
as black clouds of smoke rose above the territory, ruled by Hamas for
the past 18 months. Some of the Israeli missiles struck in densely
populated areas as children were leaving school, and women rushed into
the streets frantically looking for their children.
Although the press in the US uses "security forces" as a justification for the casualities, Mohammed over at Kabobfest
has a description of who these police forces are: Palestinians
who were just doing their jobs. They were not affiliated with Hamas,
they were not shooting missiles into Israel. They were celebrating a graduation and they were slaughtered.
The US media would like to paint a picture of precise surgical strikes aimed only at Hamas. This is impossible in Gaza, the most densely populated place on Earth. Even the IDF concedes as much: "The IDF emphasized that civilians located in areas
whence Palestinians launch rockets and who quarter Hamas operatives in
their homes are liable to be hurt. The targets that were hit included training camps and installations
as well as police stations, some of whom were located in civilian
buildings." Writing in Ha'aretz, Amos Harel also presents an alternative view: "However the Israeli opening salvo is not merely
another "surgical" operation or pinpoint strike. This is the harshest
IDF assault on Gaza since the territory was captured during the Six-Day
War in 1967."
And
remember that gracious decision by the Israeli government to open the
Gaza borders to let in the food and humanitarian goods on Christmas?
Looks like it had a bit of an ulterior motive (again, per Haaretz): "Prior to the operation, Israel sought to catch Hamas
off guard by luring it into a false sense of security through certain
measures, including the opening of Gaza border crossings on Friday."
All
of this was carried out with US approval, with US weapons, and now the
US's initial response is to condemn the Palestinians. From Ha'aretz: ""Hamas' continued rocket attacks into Israel must
cease if the violence is to stop. Hamas must end its terrorist
activities if it wishes to play a role in the future of the Palestinian
people," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said." Amos Harel offers the best summary of the connections between
Israeli and US policy as well as how this attack is being viewed by the
decision makers in Jerusalem and Washington:
Like the U.S. assault on Iraq and the Israeli
response to the abduction of IDF reservists Eldad Regev and Ehud
Goldwasser at the outset of the Second Lebanon War (the "night of the
Fajr missiles," a reference to the IAF destruction of Hezbollah's
arsenal of medium-range Fajr missiles), little to no weight was
apparently devoted to the question of harming innocent civilians. From
Israel's standpoint, Hamas, which persistently fires rockets while
using the civilian population as cover, had plenty of opportunities to
save face and lower their demands. In stubbornly continuing to launch
rockets during the course of recent weeks, it brought this assault on
itself.
Tell that to the father in the photo.
