Losers and Winners and Losers
Ken Hughes
August 14, 2006
Don’t you just love it when there’s a war and there are no losers? Well maybe there were some losers after all. How about the Israeli citizens who set in bomb shelters days on end? How about the Lebanese citizens who didn’t have and didn’t think they needed bomb shelters? How about those people on both sides who lost everything they owned? How about the merchants who lost everything they had? Who’s going to give these innocent victims their lives back? There are victims on both sides but not according to the combatants; they’re proclaiming victory on both sides. The UN hails this as a great victory for peace. Tonight, even though the guns are silent, thousands will disagree that this is in anyway a victory or a lasting peace.
The innocent persons in war zones are all too frequently the real victims; they lose every personal position they’ve spent a lifetime accumulation. All too often when the dust settles and the smoke clears these are the people who must rebuild what governments destroyed. Governments have recourse. They can go to the public and demand compensation to rebuild. Often the victors step forward and assist the vanquished governments rebuilding. Who helps those innocent civilian victims?
The civilized world sees Israel as both the victim and the victor. The less civilizes Muslim world sees Israel as the aggressor and the vanquished. If there are no winners and no losers what have they accomplished?
I hate being a pessimist but I see this lull in the conflict simply as an intermission. They’ll send in the housekeeping UN to clean up the debris and drag away the dead bodies. Then after catching their breath both sides will be back at it sooner than we expect.
The UN wasn’t configured to resolve hostilities. They simply offer proposals to curtail hostilities temporarily. The UN can’t be credited with ever winning a peace. They have on occasion slowed the conflicts. Any organization where every member has equal authority and equal say is destined to fail from sheer stagnation. The UN Security Council must have unanimous agreement for any decision to be implemented.
The best description I’ve heard for the UN is it’s a bottomless pit in the New York skyline that we pour money into and never to be accounted for.
Today the New York Times published a lengthy article by Warren Hoge describing how officials having discussions in capitals around the world were bickering over the proposals in the UN resolution to be submitted to the Security Counsel.
The resolution was going nowhere. Dr. Condoleezza Rice put away her crystal ball, saddled her horse, and rode off to New York and the UN headquarters to knock some sense into those self-aggrandized incompetents supposedly guiding the world to a peaceful coexistence. In one of the most brilliant accomplishments of the Bush Administration's history, Dr. Rice spoke and the guns went deaf. Our hats are off to Dr. Rice and George Bush for recognizing her brilliance at negotiating difficult situations.
I doubt there’ll be a UN diplomat who doesn’t take credit for bringing a halt even though it will undoubtedly be temporary to the conflict in Lebanon.
An interesting point in the New York Times article: it didn’t mention Kofi Annon once. It gave a glowing assessment of Dr. Rice's performance and it mentioned John Bolton several times. Other diplomats from other countries were given some credit but no Kofi Annon. Is it possible the New York Times has shown one of their many faces we haven’t seen before?
Everyone involved in the Lebanese War is claiming victory. How can there be victory when there are no losers?
ken-hughes@comcast.net
The innocent persons in war zones are all too frequently the real victims; they lose every personal position they’ve spent a lifetime accumulation. All too often when the dust settles and the smoke clears these are the people who must rebuild what governments destroyed. Governments have recourse. They can go to the public and demand compensation to rebuild. Often the victors step forward and assist the vanquished governments rebuilding. Who helps those innocent civilian victims?
The civilized world sees Israel as both the victim and the victor. The less civilizes Muslim world sees Israel as the aggressor and the vanquished. If there are no winners and no losers what have they accomplished?
I hate being a pessimist but I see this lull in the conflict simply as an intermission. They’ll send in the housekeeping UN to clean up the debris and drag away the dead bodies. Then after catching their breath both sides will be back at it sooner than we expect.
The UN wasn’t configured to resolve hostilities. They simply offer proposals to curtail hostilities temporarily. The UN can’t be credited with ever winning a peace. They have on occasion slowed the conflicts. Any organization where every member has equal authority and equal say is destined to fail from sheer stagnation. The UN Security Council must have unanimous agreement for any decision to be implemented.
The best description I’ve heard for the UN is it’s a bottomless pit in the New York skyline that we pour money into and never to be accounted for.
Today the New York Times published a lengthy article by Warren Hoge describing how officials having discussions in capitals around the world were bickering over the proposals in the UN resolution to be submitted to the Security Counsel.
The resolution was going nowhere. Dr. Condoleezza Rice put away her crystal ball, saddled her horse, and rode off to New York and the UN headquarters to knock some sense into those self-aggrandized incompetents supposedly guiding the world to a peaceful coexistence. In one of the most brilliant accomplishments of the Bush Administration's history, Dr. Rice spoke and the guns went deaf. Our hats are off to Dr. Rice and George Bush for recognizing her brilliance at negotiating difficult situations.
I doubt there’ll be a UN diplomat who doesn’t take credit for bringing a halt even though it will undoubtedly be temporary to the conflict in Lebanon.
An interesting point in the New York Times article: it didn’t mention Kofi Annon once. It gave a glowing assessment of Dr. Rice's performance and it mentioned John Bolton several times. Other diplomats from other countries were given some credit but no Kofi Annon. Is it possible the New York Times has shown one of their many faces we haven’t seen before?
Everyone involved in the Lebanese War is claiming victory. How can there be victory when there are no losers?
ken-hughes@comcast.net
Print
Email
