Dawgs win! Unfortunately, because we lost to Stanford (of all teams) last week, we will not be bowl-eligible, at 5-6. But there is some reason for future optimism.
#1 Ohio State beat #2 Michigan--the second #2 they have beaten this year (the other one being Texas). Michigan is still the #2 team in the country, but they probably won't go to the national championship. But, of course, there should be a playoff. Right after they get the Big East out of the equation.
Where will undefeated Boise State go? Not to the BCS...
Saturday, November 18, 2006
A new strategy in Gaza
So, Palestinians are using human shields en masse to block IAF targeted bombings of houses (BBC, Ha'aretz). A couple quick reactions, both of which are actually negative for the Palestinians:
(1) Bad publicity. Supports those who say that Palestinians deserve the treatment they get because they are supportive of terror in their midst. Generally, this is rebutted by the assertion that Palestinians in places such as Beit Hanoun have no choice because they would be killed/hurt if they object to the launching of Qassam missiles (or suicide bombings or what have you).
(2) Paves the way to let Israel launch these attacks unannounced, based on the negative publicity of (1). Deliberately putting citizens in harm's way is a crime, regardless of who is doing it. Citizens who decide to put themselves in harm's way are becoming combatants.
I don't think this is a good way to go. As regards my point (1), I still don't agree with it--I just assert that a lot of people will invoke it. This is one way that the Palestinians in Beit Hanoun can show their opposition to Israel. I don't think it necessarily shows that they support Qassam launching, just that they can't do anything about it, and they may as well express their anger about the situation in some sort of manner that may help save some people or houses as well. It's like the Lebanese who were caught in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict: what are they supposed to do, side with Israel?
(1) Bad publicity. Supports those who say that Palestinians deserve the treatment they get because they are supportive of terror in their midst. Generally, this is rebutted by the assertion that Palestinians in places such as Beit Hanoun have no choice because they would be killed/hurt if they object to the launching of Qassam missiles (or suicide bombings or what have you).
(2) Paves the way to let Israel launch these attacks unannounced, based on the negative publicity of (1). Deliberately putting citizens in harm's way is a crime, regardless of who is doing it. Citizens who decide to put themselves in harm's way are becoming combatants.
I don't think this is a good way to go. As regards my point (1), I still don't agree with it--I just assert that a lot of people will invoke it. This is one way that the Palestinians in Beit Hanoun can show their opposition to Israel. I don't think it necessarily shows that they support Qassam launching, just that they can't do anything about it, and they may as well express their anger about the situation in some sort of manner that may help save some people or houses as well. It's like the Lebanese who were caught in the Israel-Hezbollah conflict: what are they supposed to do, side with Israel?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
