David Brooks No End to Death in Lebanon (E&P)

As dozens more civilians die in Lebanon, and much of that nation lies in ruins, The New York Times columnist calls for more of the same, while admitting the policy probably won't work -- partly because of the war in Iraq, which he strongly supported.

By Greg Mitchell

(July 30, 2006) -- The juxtaposition could not have been more humiliating (assuming a capacity for same): A New York Times news story about an Israeli air strike killing dozens of civilians in Qana, Lebanon, most of them children, and a Sunday column by David Brooks coming out against a ceasefire in the conflict and praising the Bush administration’s adroit handling of the situation.

This is Brooks’ right, as a Republican apologist, of course, but what is truly bankrupt about his stance is his admission that the current U.S. policy has little chance for success—beyond the certain slaughtering of hundreds if not thousands more — but he endorses it anyway. And why can’t it succeed? Because, he admits, America’s standing and influence has been fatally crippled by its Iraq debacle—which Brooks strongly backed and still supports.

What Brooks doesn’t mention, among other things, is that it is not just Iraq but the accurate perception by those in the Middle East, and around the globe, that the death Israel is raining down from the sky comes in the form of U.S.-made or donated missiles unleashed by U.S. jets or artillery (as I noted in my previous column).

Most editorial pages in U.S. newspapers have failed to condemn the level of Israeli air strikes on civilian areas, and the infrastructure, in Lebanon, and in fact, cheered it on until recently. Leading liberal bloggers have also failed to take a stand against it. Now what will they do?

More: http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/columns/pressingissues_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002914839

to condemn innocent people to death?

and inhuman institution if there ever was one.

He's freakin insane. Fortunately, I missed Tom Friedman this morning; I can just imagine what HE had to say about how great this was in forming a democratic middle east.

It's going to be interesting to see what the apologists have to say over the next few days. Killing a bunch of little kids with a missile strike that has no apparent justification, even as our Secretary of State is drinking tea with the Prime Minister of Israel, who was assuring her they would show restraint if they got two more weeks of mayhem...there's no way to justify this, and it will be amusing to watch the right wing tying itself in knots trying to excuse these actions.

The MSM clearly seems to be turning against Israel. Reports on NBC and CBS this morning, live reporters from Israel and Lebanon, indicted Israel and totted up the scorecard on the overwhelming international outrage and the use of the words WAR CRIMES concerning the last week or two. Even Israeli politicians admitted this would turn even more of the world against Israel than was already anti-Israeli, and bring up the question, forgotten for ages, of whether it even has a right to exist. That latter has always been a given, even among people who opposed Likud and other far-right parties and their policies, but no more. It's a question that is now back on the table, and Israel put it there, not Hezbollah.