- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
>Whatever Sharon is, monster or hero, at least when he went out to fight, he wore a uniform.
Does wearing a uniform justify massacring a village?
>Funny thing about Palestinian terrorists, Hamas sheep and other Islamic thugs: when they fight, they don't go out in uniforms. They get their children to throw rocks and Molotovs in their school clothes....
>I just don't buy that all the "innocent civilians" and "helpless women and children" supposedly slaughtered by Sharon or any other Israeli commander were innocent. This is an ancient terrorist trick -- taught to the rest of the world by Arabs and Palestinians -- striking under the cover of peasant's garb, and later mugging for sympathy on Al Jazeera after they've had their asses most deservedly kicked.
Egyptian POW's were in uniform. They were murdered. How do you justify that.
In 1953, inside the borders of Jordan, 69 people were murdered in the massacre of a village. Half of them were women and children. Are you okay with that?
The victims in Sabra and Shattillah were noncombatants. The military or paramilitary wing, the Palestinian Fedayeen had left the country. The people left behind *really were* noncombatants, really were women and children. How do you justify that?
You take a fairly complex and tragic situation on both sides, and in my view, you simplify it to reduce Palestinians to subhuman moral degenerates. I think the situation is not so clear as you believe. On the other hand, I'm unwilling to get into the big issue.
The issue is really only Sharon. Did he murder innocent people? Did he commit atrocities?
If you think its okay to simply wipe out a village or enable the slaughter of refugee camps, feel free to come right out and say it.
