| Submit your comments on this article |
| Middle East |
| Airstrike kills Hamas military leader, 14 others |
| 2002-07-23 |
| Israeli forces Tuesday launched an F-16 airstrike in the heart of Gaza City, killing a top Hamas military commander and at least 14 other people. Several of the dead were children. The death of Salah Shehade -- the leader in Gaza of the Izzedine al Qassam, the military wing of the militant Islamic group Hamas -- was confirmed by Hamas. Dead. Doorknob, pushing up daisies, waitin' for the Last Trumpet dead. Gone. Kaput. Nothing but a sweet memory and a lingering odor. No longer with us. Busy decomposing... The killing sparked vows of revenge from Hamas, and sent thousands of angry Gaza residents into the streets. Where they are probably at this very moment hooting, hollering, rolling their eyes, shaking their fists, and Israel expressed regret at the loss of civilians but characterized the strike on Shehade as an act of self-defense. You might say that, since he was the commander of the Bad Guy forces... U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a statement saying, "The government of Israel must halt such actions and it must conduct itself in a manner which does not allow for the killing of innocent civilians." Kofi is predictable. We'll know in a couple days how successful the Paleos are at firing up the Hang-Wringing Brigades over the dead babies. Since the IDF managed to turn Shehade into a corpse and he was the target, not the innocent bystanders, it might not go far. He was a very legitimate and desirable military target. |
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #2 There's no moral high ground involved. Killing women and children is a bad thing, no matter who does it. Sometimes it happens by accident and sometimes it's intentional. When it's by accident it's regrettable; when it's intentional it's a crime. All things not being black or white, there's a murky area in the middle, where you're not targeting non-combatants, but if they're in the way that's tough luck. The willingness of a commander to take the chance depends on the value of the target he's hitting - does it justify the risk to innocent bystanders? In this case, the target was the enemy commander, not even just a high-ranking official. I don't know where the part about saving fetuses came in. Nobody involved is having an abortion, and nobody expressed an opinion on the subject. Only a monster kills kids - kills anyone, for that matter - with no remorse; that doesn't mean people, to include kids, never get killed. Killing this one Hamas commander isn't going to make everything okay, but killing this one Hamas commander goes further toward weakening Hamas militarily than capturing or bumping off dozens of the local bigwigs who're usually rounded up or zapped. It's not a path to peace - it's an engagement in a war. Nice troll, though. |
| Posted by: Fred 2002-07-23 21:19:34 |
| #1 Sorry, I almost forgot that the moral high ground in the war on terror requires killing little kids with no remorse and saving fetuses instead. I'm really looking forward to more self-righeous Israeli lectures about what scumbags we are over here for not spending our every waking hour denouncing suicide bombing. Killing this one Hamas commander is going to make everything suddenly OK? If this operation is supposed to turn into some sort of path to peace, I'd suggest passing out a few roadmaps ASAP. |
| Posted by: Medusa 2002-07-23 20:22:12 |