Israel Strikes Lebanon, Citing 'Self-Defense' (Again)
Israel’s continued bombardment of Lebanon, justified as 'self-defense' against alleged Hezbollah targets, is a familiar refrain. One might recall similar justifications for the 2006 Lebanon War, or the numerous incursions and bombings throughout the 1980s and 90s, often escalating regional tensions and resulting in civilian casualties. The narrative consistently presents Israel as reacting to
threats, never as expanding its sphere of influence or consolidating power through aggressive military action, a pattern supported by billions in annual U.S. aid, often approved by politicians after substantial lobbying from groups like AIPAC. The media faithfully reports the 'tit-for-tat' exchange, implicitly validating the idea of two equal actors in a fair fight. What's often omitted is the
sheer asymmetry of military might (thanks, U.S. taxpayers) and the historical context of repeated Israeli violations of Lebanese sovereignty. How many times can a country 'threaten to escalate' before it's simply an ongoing state of aggression, conveniently packaged for international consumption?