Notice the classification of levels of violence given today in the NYTimes’ editorial, The Arithmetic of War:
It is hard to appreciate at a time of war in Iraq, genocide in Sudan, terrorism in Russia and other places, and the endless cycle of violence in Israel.
Funny how Israel is quickly omitted from the “other places” where terrorism strikes–but that’s just the classic NYTimes bias talking. What is more interesting is how Russia has moved out of the “cycle of violence” explanation–which explains that, so to speak, the two sides are doing the tango–and into the terrorism column.
My guess is that the Times is reacting to Putin’s steps to increase his power by, well, getting on his good side. By differentiating Russia from Israel, by saying that both Russia and the US are being faced by terrorism while Israel is facing a cycle of violence caused by a legitimate militant movement (which just happens to target civilians), the NYTimes is pulling an Eason Jordan. I wish someone would have the patience to look through their Russia coverage to see if this indeed will be the case.
Oh–and calling Sudan a genocide was a brave step. Just to be clear, the Times isn’t all bad. Just frequently misled by its politics.