The article to which C. Ham links is printed in the Wall Street Journal, pillar of balance. Note to Americans, this is sarcasm.

It quite simply does not withstand critical reading. There can be no doubt at all (and the evidence piles up, like the corpses, day by day) that Israel is intentionally inflicting damage on the non-combatant Lebanese and Lebanese (not Hezbollah) infrastructure. I even heard an effective admission of it by an Israeli airforce spokesman.

The war crimes record of Russia, Hezbollah, or others is wholly off the point. There have been no war crimes by the Lebanon or the Lebanese (as distinct from Hezbollah), and even if there had been, that would not justify retaliatory war crimes.

As time wears on it is clear that the issue of Israel's conduct against the Lebanon is no longer a matter of opinion. It is beyond doubt or effective argument (as here tested) damnable. We had the debate. Israel has no valid defence against the accusation.

I don't really see any point in prolonging this debate: the world against Israel, some of America, and Blair.   It has however given me a fresh perspective on the debate about Israel on the one hand and Hezbollah and Hamas on the other, and I fear as a result that I am tending to see Israel as invaders and displacers far worse than the English ever were in Ireland. I am not yet concluded, but that is my feeling, a far cry from what I thought in 1967. Let us have that debate at another time in another place.