Ettinger: U.S. Knows Why It Issued Only A Weak Condemnation (of the Israeli strike)

Arutz 7 ^ | July 23 2002

[iav2]

Ettinger: U.S. Knows Why It Issued Only A Weak Condemnation

In response to American and international criticism of the Israeli assassination of arch-terrorist Salah Shehada that led to the deaths of nine Arab children, analyst Yoram Ettinger, Israel's former liaison to the U.S. Congress, has prepared a list of United States attacks in which civilian lives were not taken into consideration.

"The list actually goes beyond Afghanistan," Ettinger told Arutz-7 today. "For instance, in 1989, the US invaded Panama City in order to free [the ruling strongman] Noriega, using jets and helicopters. Six hundred civilians were killed in that raid, according to American estimates, and thousands were wounded. Then U.S-Chief of Staff, whose name was Colin Powell, said at the time that the appropriate amount of force was used 'and we have no need to apologize.' The Attorney General at the time, Dick Thornburg, said that the U.S. was operating according to the UN's clause 51 allowing self-defense…

"In 1993, in response to the killing and mutilation of 15 US soldiers, the USAF bombed Somalia, turning an entire area basically into a parking lot, killing over 1,000 citizens. Again the U.S. said that it was self-defense.

"In this current war against Al-Qaeda [in which sources say 400-800 civilians have been killed - ed. note], when Rumsfeld was asked about the American attack on Red Cross offices and on other civilian areas in Afghanistan, he said, and I agree with him, 'This is a war that has been forced upon us by terrorists… We are making great efforts not to hurt civilians, but if civilians are hurt, the entire responsibility for such is upon the terrorists who use them as cover…'"

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said that the Israeli raid against Shehada was "heavy-handed" and "not consistent with dedication to peace." Ettinger was not upset, however, saying that the U.S. response was only a "weak condemnation." He noted that Congress yesterday approved an extra $200 million in aid to Israel, and "Bush has not threatened to withhold it."

[iav2]

bump

[aShepard]

We'd best use caution in condemning civilian casualities.

If we take on Saddam, who's got all his military and attack assets hidden in mosques, palaces and populated neighborhoods, we're going to inadvertently take out thousands or hundreds of thousands of "women and children"

The world will be looking at us and pointing to the US butchers.

[SJackson]

He should have let Rumsfeld make the "condemnation". It's a "condemnation" that could easily come back to haunt the US.

[alex]

As I said in another thread, when member of "military" branch of anything is hiding among civilians - it is he who is responsible for their deaths.

[goldstategop]

The condemnation reminds me of Edward Luttwak's memorable observation the only way to avoid outright civilian casualties would be to conduct military operations in Antarctica.

[MoJo2001]

Rummy wouldn't have condemned it. He would have been giving thumbs up. Of course, he like everyone else feels bad for the innocent lives. However, the Palestinians seem to breed little terrorists. So? How many future attacks were saved because of the operation??

[SJackson]

Rummy wouldn't have condemned it. He would have been giving thumbs up.

You're right, he wouldn't.

'This is a war that has been forced upon us by terrorists… We are making great efforts not to hurt civilians, but if civilians are hurt, the entire responsibility for such is upon the terrorists who use them as cover…'"
Donald Rumsfeld

[American Preservative]

BTTT

[PhilDragoo]

Palestinians seem to breed little terrorists. So? How many future attacks were saved because of the operation??

Palestinians breed terrorists. There are no noncombatant Palestinians.