Wednesday, June 19, 2013

MJ Rosenberg Leaves His Comfort Zone, But Not that Much

We'll finish today by remarking briefly on MJ Rosenberg's latest article in which he dares to actually criticize Obama and tell him that he is wrong for arming the Syrian rebels! Yes, you read that correct: Rosenberg is standing against his own government to defend the interests of another country. But don't call him a "Syria firster."

Anyway, you might be surprised that he isn't bashing Israel or "the lobby" in this one but don't assume anything! Just because the article isn't about Israel doesn't mean he can't work it in somehow. Check this out:
"The [Israeli] invasion [of Lebanon] led to a series of humanitarian disasters, most notably the slaughter by Christian forces allied with Israel of 800 civilians (almost all women, children and the elderly) in the Palestinian refugee camps called Sabra and Shatila. When the Israelis insisted that they would not stop the war until the Palestinians left the country, President Ronald Reagan dispatched 1,800 Marines to serve as peacekeepers...[and we all know what happened to them.]"
The rewrite of history is pretty incredible here. First of all, it's not like the Lebanese Civil War was free of humanitarian disasters before Rosenberg's archenemies got involved. One of them, the Darmour Massacre, was what prompted the same in Sabra and Shatila. Secondly, I doubt that the Israelis refused to "stop the war" even if they could. I think what Rosenberg meant was that the Israelis refused to leave until the Palestinians did the same. Either way, it's pretty amazing how he is trying to blame Israel for the deaths of US Marines over the people who actually killed them.

He isn't finished though, check this out:
"He said that his goal was freeing Lebanon from domination by Palestinians and Syrians and enabling Israel to get out. (Not surprisingly, he described Israel as more the victim of the Lebanon war than as its instigator)."
Really, Rosenberg? You're saying that Israel "instigated" the "Lebanon war?" I don't even know what you mean by that! Do you mean the Lebanese Civil War? In which case you are wrong because it was raging for three years before the first Israeli soldier set foot across the border. If you mean the "First Lebanon War" from Israel's perspective, i.e. the first war fought by Israel in Lebanon, then you are contradicting yourself because here is what you wrote earlier about it:
"In June 1982, the Israeli government invaded Lebanon to drive the Palestine Liberation Organization and its fighters out of the country it had been using as a base for operations against Israel."
Wow, stopping a terrorist organization from launching attacks on your people?! That is definitely instigating a war and I am so glad that Rosenberg is here to let us know who is responsible for it. Now let's check out his final parting shot against Israel:
"Obama's proposal to take sides in the Syrian war is wrong. It is arrogant. It ignores our destructive history in the Middle East and the perception by all parties in the region that everything we do there is motivated by our blatant bias toward Israel."
Really? How is that? In classic anti-Zionist tactical form, he makes a statement that sounds correct but doesn't say anything to back it up. How does taking sides in the civil war translate to a bias towards Israel? Does Israel want us to take sides? If so there is a complete lack of evidence that this is true. But who cares! This is the Huffington Post: say whatever you want as long as it is anti-Israel!

No comments:

Post a Comment

Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.