There are no winners or losers in a war. The latest Middle Esat war has clearly shown the death and destruction any military battles can inflict - mosty on innocent civilians.
As those in the Arab world claim a victory in the Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah war, George Bush says the self-same opposite and Israel assesses its "victory" in the harsh light of day [see here], Robert Fisk, writing in The Independent puts the position thus:
"In the sparse Baathist drawing rooms of Damascus, reality often seems a long way away. But it was a sign of the times that President Bashar al-Assad was able to bring the great and the good of Damascus to their feet by the simple token of telling the truth - which no other Arab leader has chosen to do these past five weeks: that the Lebanese Hizbollah guerrilla army has, in effect, won this round of their war with Israel.
There was plenty of hyperbole in the Assad speech. A conflict that has cost 1,000 Lebanese civilian lives can hardly be called a "glorious battle" but he did at least reflect more reality than his opposite number in Washington who, driven by self-delusion or his love of Israel, claimed that Hizbollah had been defeated in Lebanon."
Read Fisk's rather sober, yet robust, assessment here.
The Hartford Courant, here, puts the position this way:
"Those who claim that their side won the 34-day war between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah militia are touched by self-delusion. Most people who read and watched accounts of the conflict know that there were no winners and losers - only victims in a region afflicted with seemingly everlasting wars."
"A debate over winners and losers in the immediate aftermath of this mayhem would be offensive. Everyone lost."
"Arguing which side came out on top would waste precious time. Revving up U.S. diplomacy to repair the damage would make excellent use of precious time."
As those in the Arab world claim a victory in the Israel-Lebanon-Hezbollah war, George Bush says the self-same opposite and Israel assesses its "victory" in the harsh light of day [see here], Robert Fisk, writing in The Independent puts the position thus:
"In the sparse Baathist drawing rooms of Damascus, reality often seems a long way away. But it was a sign of the times that President Bashar al-Assad was able to bring the great and the good of Damascus to their feet by the simple token of telling the truth - which no other Arab leader has chosen to do these past five weeks: that the Lebanese Hizbollah guerrilla army has, in effect, won this round of their war with Israel.
There was plenty of hyperbole in the Assad speech. A conflict that has cost 1,000 Lebanese civilian lives can hardly be called a "glorious battle" but he did at least reflect more reality than his opposite number in Washington who, driven by self-delusion or his love of Israel, claimed that Hizbollah had been defeated in Lebanon."
Read Fisk's rather sober, yet robust, assessment here.
The Hartford Courant, here, puts the position this way:
"Those who claim that their side won the 34-day war between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah militia are touched by self-delusion. Most people who read and watched accounts of the conflict know that there were no winners and losers - only victims in a region afflicted with seemingly everlasting wars."
"A debate over winners and losers in the immediate aftermath of this mayhem would be offensive. Everyone lost."
"Arguing which side came out on top would waste precious time. Revving up U.S. diplomacy to repair the damage would make excellent use of precious time."
Comments