The leader in today's Independent on Sunday claimed that the paper was "pro-Israeli". I laughed (bitterly).
What made it exceptionally ironic was that it then went on to blame Israel for the current conflict.
What I don't get is this: All the British papers acknowledge (if grudgingly) that Hizbullah is in the wrong and that Israel has a right to respond. They then go on to slam "collective punishment". How, precisely, is Israel meant to attack Hizbullah without affecting any Lebanese civilians? (I grant that particular actions may not be acceptable, but they're stating this as a blanket rule.)
Worse, the Indy then conflated Gaza and Lebanon, which are entirely different cases!!
What made it exceptionally ironic was that it then went on to blame Israel for the current conflict.
What I don't get is this: All the British papers acknowledge (if grudgingly) that Hizbullah is in the wrong and that Israel has a right to respond. They then go on to slam "collective punishment". How, precisely, is Israel meant to attack Hizbullah without affecting any Lebanese civilians? (I grant that particular actions may not be acceptable, but they're stating this as a blanket rule.)
Worse, the Indy then conflated Gaza and Lebanon, which are entirely different cases!!
There are no comments on this entry. (Reply.)