Concern Over "Fierce Fighting"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/world/middleeast/12mideast.html?hp

With the increasing conflict taking place in Gaza, it seems only obvious that increased media converage would be taking place over in the Middle East as the eyes of the world are now upon them. What has come to my surprise though is the "One sided coverage," I continue to see over the conflict. All throughout the television discussions taking place a week and a half ago, no where was any one criticizing Israels military actions in Gaza. The news was all one sided, saying how "Israel sticking up for themselves," and was "No longer going to pushed around." Yet the irony of it all is that Israel has answered violence with violence. Maybe it's just me, but one of the first rules of conflict we all learned was " Two wrongs do not make a right." The analysis of the fighting has been all a see-saw towards Israel. No one has really taken into account why they the fighting is really taking place, accounting for the mistreatment of Palestine people, also with the religion factor that is taking place. Everything has been looked over and just seen as "Hamas is firing missiles into Israel, so Israel is stopping them and invading Gaza." The whole topic is so much more cumbersome than that to throw a label so easily on it. Thankfully, this article done by STEVEN ERLANGER and ETHAN BRONNER, helps let in some light on the conflict. I found it interesting how the civilians there are the highest casualties so far in comparison to the amount of fighters. Also, it opens an eye to what could be Israels secondary plan of going into Egypt territory to stop the smuggling of weapons for Hamas. This quote:
“People are terrified, hungry, thirsty and traumatized,” he said. “The civilian population is caught in the middle of this conflict,” he said, and added: “This is a conflict where the civilian population has nowhere to flee.” Helps paint a better picture of what is going on, showing that this conflict is effecting everyone, not just fighters, but civilians too who are not receiving the same coverage. I admire the article for its seriousness on a serious topic, and for not just leaving it as one side protecting itself. It took the correct stance by not saying who is right and who is wrong because in war, there truly is no right or wrong. To label it so would be foolish, and I admire these gentelmen for truth behind their reporting.