Madam, - When stripped of its concern over the people of Lebanon, Monday night's protest outside the US Embassy in Dublin was an exercise in blatant anti-Americanism, attended by the usual people including Senator David Norris, Michael D. Higgins, and members of Sinn Féin. I note no such concern for the people of Israel being subjected to daily, indiscriminate missile attack.
The role of the American government is one of trying to find a long-term solution to this problem and not a "quick fix" ceasefire that does not address the fundamental issues and will benefit only Hizbullah.
If these people were really interested in a long-term resolution of the problems in the Middle East they would be better off protesting outside the embassy of Iran, whose Hizbullah proxies caused the escalation of this conflict. - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN McMAHON, Elmwood, Naas, Co Kildare.
Madam, - If the Israeli massacre of 60 innocent people, most of them small children, in Qana does not bring the world to its senses and make us wake up to exactly what Israel is doing, then absolutely nothing will. In spite of a plea from Kofi Annan, the UN Security Council has not expressed outright condemnation of Israel's actions in Lebanon. President Bush continues to support Israel unconditionally. While the carnage continues unabated, Tony Blair rambles around California being feted as a superstar. It is simply disgusting.
What has the Irish Government done to express our outrage at what is happening in Lebanon and Gaza? This assault on Lebanon and its people has been a real eye-opener. It proves conclusively that Israel and its paymasters, the US, can do precisely what they like and the world just stands back and does nothing. The people of Palestine have no rights whatsoever, it seems. It's no wonder there are organisations like Hizbullah and Hamas. And, of course, the Western media do not show the full horror and reality of the suffering of the Lebanese people.
There will never be a lasting peace in the Middle East while the US administration continues to give unconditional support to Israel and its depraved, barbaric behaviour. Prime Minister Olmert should be taken to The Hague and tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity. - Yours, etc,
ANTHONY REDMOND, North Great George's Street, Dublin 1.
Madam, - Readers should be warned that Charles Krauthammer has advocated war against Syria and Iran long before the current crisis. So his argument that the world "has lost its moral bearings" should be taken with a grain of salt (Opinion, July 31st). His definition of proportionality is suspect. Proportionality is well defined by the American political philosopher Michael Walzer as "economy of force". Hence, the question to be asked is: "Are the forces deployed and the tactics chosen appropriate for the military purpose, with due regard to the preservation of innocent life?"
Given the air attacks outside the zone of Hizbullah rocket sites, air attacks on roads and bridges and the probable destruction of Lebanon's fragile economy and peaceful polity, the chosen means of this offensive do not have the appropriate economy of force. However, they do suit Mr Krauthammer's purpose of a wider war in the Middle East.
His invocation of Pearl Harbour is quite inapposite. To overthrow a ruthless totalitarian dictatorship is a task of a far, far higher magnitude than the return of two captured soldiers. Besides an appropriate level of response, a state may also choose a moderate course that ties in with its longer-term objectives. For example, two months before the attack on Pearl Harbour, President Roosevelt accepted German apologies for the sinking of the destroyer USS Reuben James by a U-boat. Roosevelt chose negotiation because he knew that the US was not ready to go to war at that time.
Anyone with humanitarian concerns must also condemn the bombardment of Israel towns by rockets intended to kill civilians. The tragedy is that the Lebanese people are being driven into the arms of those firing the rockets. As someone who believes in the right of Israel to exist within secure borders, I wish Ehud Olmert had chosen a more prudent response than the current offensive, backed by an erratic president, a lame-duck prime minister, an increasingly harassed secretary of state, and discredited ideologues such as Charles Krauthammer. - Yours, etc,
TOBY JOYCE, Balreask Manor, Navan, Co Meath.
Madam, - Amid all the cries that Israel's response to Hizbullah's terrorist invasion and rocket attacks has been "disproportionate", no one has come up with a formula that is "proportionate", including your Editorial of August 1st.
It seems to me that Israel's "proportionate" response would be either to turn the other cheek to Hizbullah's unprovoked attacks (and thus invite more), or to lob a few desultory missiles much as President Clinton did in 1998 after al-Qaeda, without provocation, bombed American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. (And by now we all know how well this deterred al-Qaeda from further attacks on America).
The issue in Lebanon is that you are forced to back either Israel or Hizbullah in their quests for victory over the other; there is no middle ground. - Yours, etc,
TONY ALLWRIGHT, Killiney, Co Dublin.
Madam, - The Irish Catholic Bishops' Commission for Justice and Social Affairs singles out Hizbullah and its allies - who are not named - as "the aggressors" and calls their actions "terrorist", while describing the Israeli actions as a "military response which could not be justified" (The Irish Times, July 31st).
Not to describe the Israeli actions in Gaza, and especially its indiscriminate and deliberate killings of UN personnel and innocent civilians in Lebanon as "terrorist", beggars belief. This is a very one-sided response to the awful carnage being inflicted on the Lebanese people.
While Hizbullah's indiscriminate launching of rockets into Israel is to be condemned, the loss of Israeli civilian life bears no resemblance to the methodical killings carried out by the Israeli Defence Forces in its illegal attack against a country and its people, who are being scapegoated for actions not of their doing .
Besides proportionality being required in military responses it is also required when it comes to condemnations. - Yours, etc,
BRENDAN BUTLER, The Moorings, Malahide, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Your newspaper recently reported on Scotland's Prestwick airport being used as a refuelling stop for arms shipments destined for use in Lebanon.
This has happened without the support of people in Scotland, who are appalled at being unwittingly dragged into this disproportionate conflict. Public statements from across the political spectrum underline real domestic disquiet about this issue.
Scotland does not yet have the political independence of Ireland, whose Government has just blocked similar transportation flights of weapons. Nevertheless we have a devolved government which will hopefully soon give moral leadership so that our country can act as a force for peace.
Although we are far from the conflict in Lebanon and Israel these unacceptable arms shipments through Scotland vividly bring home the reality of civilian and UN casualties.
We are angry and embarrassed and we dissociate ourselves completely from these weapons flights and the from the policies of Prime Minister Tony Blair and his UK government. - Yours, etc,
ANGUS ROBERTSON MP, Shadow Scottish Minister for Foreign Affairs and Defence (SNP),House of Commons, Westminster, London.
A Chara, - Your edition of July 31st reported that Israel had agreed to a 48-hour suspension of aerial activity in south Lebanon to investigate the tragic incident in Qana, according to Adam Ereli, a US state department official.
Consider: Why was an American spokesman speaking to the world on behalf of Israel? What's the message? - Yours, etc,
PAUL KINSELLA, Lorcan Grove, Santry, Dublin 9.