Middle East conflict

[LowerCaseRepublican]

It is difficul to use the term "war crime" here when the instigator is a terrorist organization that doesn't play by the rules of war. Does blowing up a bus full of Israeli civilians in Tel Aviv fall under the "war crimes" definition as well? At least the Israelis told the Lebanese to get out of the region before they attacked.

 

And if you're going to accuse Israel of "ethnic cleansing"... wow... I can't imagine what you'd accuse Iran, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda of.

 

I agree with some of what you say and Israel sure as hell hasn't handled this situation perfectly. But what are they supposed to do? Nearly the entire Arab world wants them all dead... because they're Jews. Just like Hitler and Stalin murdered tens of millions of them in the not-too-distant past... because they're Jews. What the hell would you do if you were in their shoes? Would you try to appease the terrorists who want you dead or would you go after them aggressively to ensure your survival?

It isn't a religious cleansing that they want. It's pragmatic in dealing with everyday life.

 

Random checkpoints where you can be detained for no reason (hey, if it amuses the guards, they can keep you there all day), massive concrete apartheid walls -- oh, excuse me "security fences" that keep Joe Q. Palestinian from getting to their farm and a system that keeps unemployment rates at over 30% in Palestinian areas...it's no wonder that so much of Palestine is in trouble and wanting to retaliate.

 

After the 1967 war, Palestinian refugees had a helluva time dealing with the Israeli government (wrote my senior thesis on the mental and physical impact of the 1967 war on Palestinians and how these experiences led to the development of militant nationalism). The Israeli government tried to expel all Arabs from the area and included forced bus expulsions, moving people out in the middle of the night, destroying homes/villages to force people out. There was a clear policy set forth by many generals in the IDF during that time that Israel was meant for Jews only and nobody else. Apartheid much?

 

Much like the Jews after the Holocaust, there is such a thing called learned helplessness -- hence many of the Jews living in squalor in the immediate aftermath of the Holocaust and not immediately going out and picking up their lives and starting over. The same thing happened to many Palestinians as a result of the '67 war and it has been documented as a legitimate psychological effect of those as a result of experiencing being displaced by war. Just like the state of Israel eventually seized the nationalist tendencies of a land for Jews only (again going to the previous stuff regarding the 1967 war)

 

And before we get into a debate about the 1967 war, from Norman Finkelstein: "Image and Reality of the Israel-Palestine Conflict" he writes: "At any rate, there was not one civilian casualty on Israel's northern border due to Syrian shelling for the six-month period leading up to the June 1967 war."

 

And Yitzhak Rabin: "I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to the Sinai on 14 May would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive against Israel. He knew it and we knew it." (Le Monde, Feb 29, 1968).

 

Israeli General Peled: "To pretend that the Egyptian forces massed on our frontiers were in a position to threaten the existence of Israel constitutes an insult not only to the intelligence of anyone capable of analyzing this sort of situation, but above all an insult to the Zahal (Israeli army)" (Ha'aretz, Mar 19, 1972)

 

Prime Minister Menachem Begin: "The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him" (Jerusalem Post, Aug 20, 1982)

 

If former Prime Ministers and high ranking Israeli officials don't buy the "OMG! Everybody wants to get rid of us!" paranoia, why should anybody buy it? How does that just justify an Israeli war machine? It's overzealous rhetoric that is a product of the development of militant nationalism and a coping mechanism for people who have lost everything. (A lot of the research I checked out for my thesis was pretty interesting about this topic -- that they didn't necessarily care for the militarism but the ideas of nationalism, pride in the country and hitting the people that had put them in such dire straits was appealing because they didn't have a whole lot else going for them at all)

 

I'm not condoning what they do -- but there is a sociological and psychological basis for it.

 

Why make a business and have a successful household when it can be "accidentally" obliterated in a bombing campaign and you lose it all? No amount of "Oops" from the government is going to bring back their lives before the campaign.

 

State terrorism is the same as "traditional terrorism". If they bomb and kill civilians who are (and I'll take WCSox's statement that Hizbollah is hiding among civilians despite my reading of a few journalists on the ground who have seen the exact opposite) hiding among civilians and this is just seen as "tragic but not preventable" then the same standard should hold for suicide bombings and rocket attacks in Israel. With the forced military service, one could argue that their tactics are meant to attack legitimate military targets (i.e. soldiers eligibile to serve and have/are serving) and that civilian deaths are "tragic but not preventable". If the state's argument is taken to its logical extension, it leads to a place of morality that they do not appreciate.

 

And Nuke -- explain to me how rocket attacks are terrorist, yet shooting missiles out of helicopter gunships is "civilized"...Crown me with a Godwin award for bringing a Nazi reference in but...Israel has toyed with approving the equivalent to the Lidice strategy http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,,1832147,00.html ""Another suggestion was that Israel would 'wipe out' any Lebanese village from which Hezbollah rockets are fired."

[KipWellsFan]

Ummm, that makes absolutely no sense, given that a slew of nations denounced the 9/11 attacks and the Madrid and London bombings.

 

It makes even less sense with regard to the Arab world, where popular opinion casts Hezbollah as a legitimate resistance force and not a terrorist organization.

 

My point is that pretty much every respected nation has condemned Hezbollah's original agression. There's no need to have say Canada condemn Hezbollah everytime they launch a missile. Within the Arab world there's a whole other slew of forces at work.

[Balta1701]

It is difficul to use the term "war crime" here when the instigator is a terrorist organization that doesn't play by the rules of war. Does blowing up a bus full of Israeli civilians in Tel Aviv fall under the "war crimes" definition as well? At least the Israelis told the Lebanese to get out of the region before they attacked.

 

And if you're going to accuse Israel of "ethnic cleansing"... wow... I can't imagine what you'd accuse Iran, Hezbollah, and al Qaeda of.

 

I agree with some of what you say and Israel sure as hell hasn't handled this situation perfectly. But what are they supposed to do? Nearly the entire Arab world wants them all dead... because they're Jews. Just like Hitler and Stalin murdered tens of millions of them in the not-too-distant past... because they're Jews. What the hell would you do if you were in their shoes? Would you try to appease the terrorists who want you dead or would you go after them aggressively to ensure your survival?

Of course blowing up a bus of civilians falls under the war crimes definition. Did I not point out that targeting civilians, with say, rockets that are indiscriminate, is a war crime? And the stuff Al Qaeda does, that is the textbook definition of a war crime; attacks on civilians for no reason.

 

Here's the real key for you...having someone else do something to you, having someone else be the "instigator", does not mean that everything you do is ok. It doesn't matter if who you're fighting is a non-traditional army, it doesn't matter if they start the war or they start targeting civilians first. Having someone commit a war crime against your people does not give you a blank check to go out and commit war crimes. A bomb going off on a bus or a missile hitting a train station does not give you the right to level an entire country and expel everyone who lives there.

 

And yes, a lot of Arabs want them dead because they're Jews. But a lot more Arabs want them dead because of those 34 children they killed 2 days ago.

[Rex Kickass]

My point is that pretty much every respected nation has condemned Hezbollah's original agression. There's no need to have say Canada condemn Hezbollah everytime they launch a missile. Within the Arab world there's a whole other slew of forces at work.

 

Even Saudi Arabia and Jordan and Egypt condemned Hezbollah at first. But the civilian body count in Israel is 13. Although that's a lot of people - and in excusable, over 500 Lebanese have been killed as a result of Israeli attacks. We know at least 60 of them to be civilians. (50+ in a shelter this week, as well as several Canadian citizens trying to flee the country.) Also a handful of Lebanese soldiers who are also not fighting in this fight and trying to flee as well.

 

So in sheer numbers, the condemnation is going to go to the greater attack.

[WCSox]

Here's the real key for you...having someone else do something to you, having someone else be the "instigator", does not mean that everything you do is ok. It doesn't matter if who you're fighting is a non-traditional army, it doesn't matter if they start the war or they start targeting civilians first. Having someone commit a war crime against your people does not give you a blank check to go out and commit war crimes. A bomb going off on a bus or a missile hitting a train station does not give you the right to level an entire country and expel everyone who lives there.

 

I'm not saying that "everything Israel does is OK." I'm saying that they don't have much of choice in this situation. You lash out at them for "targeting civilians" when they're actually targeting Hezbollah guerillas who are blending in with civilians and using them as human shields in their propaganda war. How are they supposed to deal with them? Or do you suggest that they sit there with their tails between their legs and allow the kidnappings and terrorist attacks to continue?

 

The bottom line is that nobody in Lebanon or in the U.N. did anything to keep Hezbollah in check. They were allowed to build up an arsenal (supplied by Iran) so significant that they became more powerful than the Lebanese army. If innocent Lebanese die, it's because Lebanon, Syria, Iran, and the U.N. enabled Hezbollah, not because Israel decided to defend itself. A lot of innocent Germans and Japanese were killed by the United States in World War II. Should F.D.R. and Truman have been put on trial for war crimes? I don't think so.

 

And yes, a lot of Arabs want them dead because they're Jews. But a lot more Arabs want them dead because of those 34 children they killed 2 days ago.

 

And a lot of Jews couldn't care less because of the hundreds that they've lost to terrorist attacks on their own soil over the past 30 years. The Israelis at least had the decency to at least tell the Lebanese to get out because they were going to bomb. The Islamofascists have no such respect for human life.

Edited August 1, 2006 by WCSox

[WCSox]

It isn't a religious cleansing that they want. It's pragmatic in dealing with everyday life.

 

So, it's "pragmatic" for Iran's head of state to call for Israel to be wiped off of the map because of checkpoints around Israel? Look at a map and tell me how many hundreds of miles Iran is from Israel.

 

It has EVERYTHING to do with religious cleansing.

 

Thats his whole M.O. dude. He just loves to try to draw moral equivalency between terrorists and the civilized world when none exist.

 

I have a friend from Ramallah and have heard several stories about the heavy-handidness of the Israeli police/military. Trust me, I know that Israel is far from innocent. But you're correct that there is no moral equivalency between building a highway through a Palestinian man's farm and blowing up a bus full of Israelis. People who believe otherwise need to get away from their socialist college professors for a while and experience the real world.

[Balta1701]

I have a friend from Ramallah and have heard several stories about the heavy-handidness of the Israeli police/military. Trust me, I know that Israel is far from innocent. But you're correct that there is no moral equivalency between building a highway through a Palestinian man's farm and blowing up a bus full of Israelis. People who believe otherwise need to get away from their socialist college professors for a while and experience the real world.

So you choose the most benign example you could possibly give, building a highway through a farm? Do you really think that's even remotely representative of the worst things being done by that side in this conflict?

[WCSox]

So you choose the most benign example you could possibly give, building a highway through a farm? Do you really think that's even remotely representative of the worst things being done by that side in this conflict?

 

You're right. I should've given the examples of the IDF sending suicide bombers into malls and restaurants in Ramallah during a time of peace. Or I could've used the exmaples of the IDF going across the border and kidnapping members of the Lebanese army. Oh, maybe the example of the IDF firing missiles from the backyards of Israeli homes and going screaming to Al Jazeera that the Lebanese are targeting Israeli citizens in their homes.

[StrangeSox]

You're right. I should've given the examples of the IDF sending suicide bombers into malls and restaurants in Ramallah during a time of peace. Or I could've used the exmaples of the IDF going across the border and kidnapping members of the Lebanese army. Oh, maybe the example of the IDF firing missiles from the backyards of Israeli homes and going screaming to Al Jazeera that the Lebanese are targeting Israeli citizens in their homes.

 

you only need suicide bombers when you can't afford Apaches.

[Rex Kickass]

You're right. I should've given the examples of the IDF sending suicide bombers into malls and restaurants in Ramallah during a time of peace. Or I could've used the exmaples of the IDF going across the border and kidnapping members of the Lebanese army. Oh, maybe the example of the IDF firing missiles from the backyards of Israeli homes and going screaming to Al Jazeera that the Lebanese are targeting Israeli citizens in their homes.

How about cutting power and running water to 600,000 Gazans to search for one Israeli soldier?

[Balta1701]

You're right. I should've given the examples of the IDF sending suicide bombers into malls and restaurants in Ramallah during a time of peace. Or I could've used the exmaples of the IDF going across the border and kidnapping members of the Lebanese army. Oh, maybe the example of the IDF firing missiles from the backyards of Israeli homes and going screaming to Al Jazeera that the Lebanese are targeting Israeli citizens in their homes.

Thank you for finally proving my point. Because of the transgressions of their opponents, EVERYTHING Israel does is justified in your eyes. Any time someone points out a war crime Israel has committed, that is exactly your response, you say "yeah, Israel has done some bad things, but they're all ok, because look how bad their opponents are."

 

It is that line of thinking from the west which has helped feed the terrorist threats we see today for decades, and which will continue feeding it for decades to come.

[WCSox]

Thank you for finally proving my point. Because of the transgressions of their opponents, EVERYTHING Israel does is justified in your eyes.

 

Wrong again. I don't believe that their blatant disrespect for the property of Palestinian residents was justified. Nor do I believe that their short-lived policy of breaking the arms of Palestinian youths who threw rocks at their police/soldiers was justified.

 

But in THIS CURRENT conflict, I believe that the Israeli response has been justified. I may have done a few things differently, but overall I support their effort to defend themselves from a terrorist-controlled Southern Lebanon.

[Balta1701]

But in THIS CURRENT conflict, I believe that the Israeli response has been justified. I may have done a few things differently, but overall I support their effort to defend themselves from a terrorist-controlled Southern Lebanon.

And that, right there, is exactly the line of thinking which has made the "War on Terror" go so poorly thus far. When your enemy is willing to attack civilians with no regards to any of the laws of war, a nation can use that reasoning to justify any action in response. The only problem is, of course, that it totally neglects any thought about how the rest of humanity will respond, which is exactly what we're seeing in Israel right now; a dramatic strengthening of support for Hezbollah, and for almost every terror organization, due to the Israeli response, and Israel will spend its next few decades fighting against the terrorists born out of this campaign, just as they've spent the last few decades fighting terrorists born out of previous campaigns.

[YASNY]

And that, right there, is exactly the line of thinking which has made the "War on Terror" go so poorly thus far. When your enemy is willing to attack civilians with no regards to any of the laws of war, a nation can use that reasoning to justify any action in response. The only problem is, of course, that it totally neglects any thought about how the rest of humanity will respond, which is exactly what we're seeing in Israel right now; a dramatic strengthening of support for Hezbollah, and for almost every terror organization, due to the Israeli response, and Israel will spend its next few decades fighting against the terrorists born out of this campaign, just as they've spent the last few decades fighting terrorists born out of previous campaigns.

 

So ... what exactly should Isreal do?

[Balta1701]

So ... what exactly should Isreal do?

I believe the only option in this case is an immediate Cease-fire along the currently proposed lines, with a large U.N. force in the area with the goal of disarming Hezbollah. Of course, this has its own problems, specifically the fact that Hezbollah won't want to be disarmed, and the fact that given the manpower demands in Iraq, very few countries actually have soldiers that could be contributed to such a peacekeeping force, and even fewer would be willing to do so, but it's certainly going to be vastly less messy than what Israel is currently doing.

[NUKE_CLEVELAND]

So ... what exactly should Isreal do?

 

 

Flowers and candy time. Thats the only way to stop terrorism, haven't you heard?

 

I believe the only option in this case is an immediate Cease-fire along the currently proposed lines, with a large U.N. force in the area with the goal of disarming Hezbollah. Of course, this has its own problems, specifically the fact that Hezbollah won't want to be disarmed, and the fact that given the manpower demands in Iraq, very few countries actually have soldiers that could be contributed to such a peacekeeping force, and even fewer would be willing to do so, but it's certainly going to be vastly less messy than what Israel is currently doing.

 

 

Trouble with that is that there HAS been a large U.N. force which has been in place since 1978. Unfortunately they are incapable of doing anything but sitting there.

 

The U.N. is inept, impotent and corrupt. It is HIGHLY unlikely that they could implement any meaningful solution to the problem here. Better to let Isreal finish its business.

Edited August 1, 2006 by NUKE_CLEVELAND

[southsider2k5]

I believe the only option in this case is an immediate Cease-fire along the currently proposed lines, with a large U.N. force in the area with the goal of disarming Hezbollah. Of course, this has its own problems, specifically the fact that Hezbollah won't want to be disarmed, and the fact that given the manpower demands in Iraq, very few countries actually have soldiers that could be contributed to such a peacekeeping force, and even fewer would be willing to do so, but it's certainly going to be vastly less messy than what Israel is currently doing.

 

Which means what? If you know they won't be disarmed, because the UN and Lebannon have not and will not, had the ability or willpower to do so, what is to stop Israel from being invaded and attacked again? How many Israelis should be allowed to die before it is "messy" enough for them to respond?

[Rex Kickass]

So ... what exactly should Isreal do?

 

That's a great question. It has painted itself into a corner, and our lack of diplomatic leadership is certainly not giving Israel any outs. Although Bolton has recently handled himself well in the UN, the leadership of Condi Rice has been less than inspiring to say the least. What Israel should have done, when it announced a 48 hour cease fire in Southern Lebanon to allow civilians to get out was to honor the cease fire it unilaterally announced.

 

If you're trying to be the good guy and trying to play by the rules - you have to at least play by the rules you set. I don't know enough about the players in Lebanon to give you an answer of how a solution gets found here - but I have a feeling it has something to do with US or French leadership and Lebanese secularists and Christians. And yes I said the French. They are the only "power" really actively engaging governments and working for peace at the moment.

[WCSox]

And that, right there, is exactly the line of thinking which has made the "War on Terror" go so poorly thus far. When your enemy is willing to attack civilians with no regards to any of the laws of war, a nation can use that reasoning to justify any action in response. The only problem is, of course, that it totally neglects any thought about how the rest of humanity will respond, which is exactly what we're seeing in Israel right now; a dramatic strengthening of support for Hezbollah, and for almost every terror organization, due to the Israeli response, and Israel will spend its next few decades fighting against the terrorists born out of this campaign, just as they've spent the last few decades fighting terrorists born out of previous campaigns.

 

Israel would have spent the next few decades fighting terrorists whether they would've launched this offensive on Lebanon or not. The extremists in this region want Israel dead AT ALL COSTS and that includes the sacrifice of innocent Muslims.

 

Hezbollah, Al Qaeda, Hamas, The Islamic Jihad, etc. have been attacking civilians for decades, yet they enjoy enormous popularity in the Arab world. "Humanity" in the Middle East has responded to terrorist attacks on Israeli citizens by proclaiming "Death to the Zioninsts!" and ordering more attacks. If you'll recall, Palestinians were dancing in the streets after 9/11. Therefore, giving a flying gosh darn about popular opinion in that part of the world shouldn't be the top priority at the moment.

 

How "humanity" in the Middle East responds to this is predictable: They'll spew out the same anti-Jewish and anti-American garbage that the Mullahs and state-controlled media have been indoctrinating them with for decades. Therefore, the plan to "change the hearts and minds" of the people in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, etc. via diplomacy is futile. The extremists are going to have to be removed by force, not by negotiations. And if the moderate Muslims world aren't going to rise up kick these terrorists organizations out of their nations, somebody else has to. The ethnic hatred and the lack of respect for human life has to stop NOW, not 100 years down the road when Sunnis and Shia grow up and realize that it's not only OK for them to peacefully coexist, but that the Jews have a righ to live as well.

 

So ... what exactly should Isreal do?

 

They're going to need to establish a demilitarized zone in Southern Lebanon, similar to what separates the Koreas. After the heavy-lifting has been done, the U.N. can patrol it.

Edited August 1, 2006 by WCSox

[Balta1701]

The ethnic hatred and the lack of respect for human life has to stop NOW, not 100 years down the road when Sunnis and Shia grow up and realize that it's not only OK for them to peacefully coexist, but that the Jews have a righ to live as well.

Ah, but here's the key...this is not going to happen when the military might of the west keeps turning various countries in the Middle East into failed states.

 

Lebanon was actually starting to look like your real hopeful place, in that someday, it might be able to grow out of the terrorist mess. It actually had a democratically elected government, it was actually on the road to recovery from a long civil war, it was actually undertaking steps at modernization. Yes, Hezbollah was still there and armed to the teeth. However, within Lebanon, there were growing movements before this to either bring Hezbollah into the fold as a solely political organization, a-la the IRA, or to forcefully disarm it by using the Lebanese armed forces. Which btw, may be one of the reasons Hezbollah launched this attack in the first place...now no one in Lebanon wants them disarmed.

 

Now, Lebanon has been once again reduced to a failed state, which will generate decades of additional fighters, and Hezbollah has seemed like the only force capable of acting to defend that country.

 

You cannot simply make millenia-old hatreds vanish by sitting at your computer and telling them that it should happen. You cannot bomb away millenial aged hatreds either. The only way you're going to do that is to actually sit back, try to contain things, and focus on encouraging economic development within the countries that are there. It will take time, and patience, and you will have to deal with managing smaller crises, and occasionally a big one (Peak Oil or the Iranian bomb), but the only way you're going to allow this hatred to die off is to give the people paths to better lives.

[YASNY]

Unfortunately, I can't hand around at the moment and discuss this. But, I will certainly come back to this thread and read the discussion with interest, and then offer my comments. However, I have this comment as of the moment. Rex, you are going off on a tangent with your remarks on Rice and Bolton. What should Isreal do?

[Soxbadger]

I dont get why people think that what Israel does actually matters to the people who want to destroy Israel.

 

All that happens when the Israeli's are the good guys, is they get dicked in the end. They give back Gaza, etc, it only makes the militants more aggressive. As they are giving back the land, the Palestinian's go in and burn down the temples. The Israeli's are the good guys and let it happen. Then people start shooting missles into their country, and the Israeli's barely flinch. Its only when they start kidnapping soldiers, that the Israeli's get to their breaking point.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of rogue Quebec seperatists were shooting rockets across the US boarder?

 

The US would put an end to them, and anyone who was harboring them, or letting them shoot rockets from their backyard would be caught in the cross fire.

 

And if you dont like what people are doing in your country, and you think your getting a bad rap, you come out and do something. You dont just condemn the other side who is protecting its own border, while you sit there and do nothing.

 

As for the ethnic cleansing, that is just naive. If the Israeli's wanted to ethnicly cleanse, the body count would be up in thousands already, and you would be seeing ground troops to come in and kill civilians. That is ethnic cleansing, not shooting missles at terrorists who are being hidden by civilians.

 

In fact in the US we call that a conspiracy or an accessory.

 

The only thing Israel can do is fight fire with fire. And each time those in the Middle East try to harass or destroy them, they must respond with such agression that any time in the future they consider doing the same thing, they will know the penalty.

[WCSox]

Ah, but here's the key...this is not going to happen when the military might of the west keeps turning various countries in the Middle East into failed states.

 

Lebanon was actually starting to look like your real hopeful place, in that someday, it might be able to grow out of the terrorist mess. It actually had a democratically elected government, it was actually on the road to recovery from a long civil war, it was actually undertaking steps at modernization. Yes, Hezbollah was still there and armed to the teeth. However, within Lebanon, there were growing movements before this to either bring Hezbollah into the fold as a solely political organization, a-la the IRA, or to forcefully disarm it by using the Lebanese armed forces. Which btw, may be one of the reasons Hezbollah launched this attack in the first place...now no one in Lebanon wants them disarmed.

 

Hezbollah wouldn't exist in its current form without financial and military support from Iran. Taking out the rogue regime is the key here.

 

This isn't just about "failed states" that can be pinned on the West. The "successful states" like Iran and Saudi Arabia are the real culprits. These totalitarian regimes keep their people poor, ignorant, and angry. The addition of state-sponsored Islamofascism (Iran) is especially destructive.

 

Now, Lebanon has been once again reduced to a failed state, which will generate decades of additional fighters, and Hezbollah has seemed like the only force capable of acting to defend that country.

 

Just to be clear, Lebanon is a failed state because of Iran, Syria, and the U.N., not because of Israel or the U.S. They were a failed state after Syria assasinated its head-of-state and facilitated an arms buildup along the Israeli border.

 

You cannot simply make millenia-old hatreds vanish by sitting at your computer and telling them that it should happen. You cannot bomb away millenial aged hatreds either. The only way you're going to do that is to actually sit back, try to contain things, and focus on encouraging economic development within the countries that are there. It will take time, and patience, and you will have to deal with managing smaller crises, and occasionally a big one (Peak Oil or the Iranian bomb), but the only way you're going to allow this hatred to die off is to give the people paths to better lives.

 

(1) Nor can you allow millenia-old hatreds to culminate in a nuclear weapon that destroys Israel. This needs to be stopped immediately.

 

(2) These people won't have the better lives until the totalitarian regimes are out of the picture. It's no coincidence that the Saudi royal family is hording the nation's weath, there is a 40% unemployment rate, and Saudi Arabia is a breeding ground for terrorists. This is one of the reasons that I supported the overthrow of Saddam. It gives the Iraqi people a chance to experience freedom and possible economic prosperity.

 

 

I dont get why people think that what Israel does actually matters to the people who want to destroy Israel.

 

All that happens when the Israeli's are the good guys, is they get dicked in the end. They give back Gaza, etc, it only makes the militants more aggressive. As they are giving back the land, the Palestinian's go in and burn down the temples. The Israeli's are the good guys and let it happen. Then people start shooting missles into their country, and the Israeli's barely flinch. Its only when they start kidnapping soldiers, that the Israeli's get to their breaking point.

 

Can you imagine what would happen if a bunch of rogue Quebec seperatists were shooting rockets across the US boarder?

 

The US would put an end to them, and anyone who was harboring them, or letting them shoot rockets from their backyard would be caught in the cross fire.

 

And if you dont like what people are doing in your country, and you think your getting a bad rap, you come out and do something. You dont just condemn the other side who is protecting its own border, while you sit there and do nothing.

 

As for the ethnic cleansing, that is just naive. If the Israeli's wanted to ethnicly cleanse, the body count would be up in thousands already, and you would be seeing ground troops to come in and kill civilians. That is ethnic cleansing, not shooting missles at terrorists who are being hidden by civilians.

 

In fact in the US we call that a conspiracy or an accessory.

 

The only thing Israel can do is fight fire with fire. And each time those in the Middle East try to harass or destroy them, they must respond with such agression that any time in the future they consider doing the same thing, they will know the penalty.

 

Wow, you and I actually agree on something.

Edited August 1, 2006 by WCSox

[Rex Kickass]

Unfortunately, I can't hand around at the moment and discuss this. But, I will certainly come back to this thread and read the discussion with interest, and then offer my comments. However, I have this comment as of the moment. Rex, you are going off on a tangent with your remarks on Rice and Bolton. What should Isreal do?

 

Yas,

 

I don't really think that I am on a tangent here. I think that Israel has put themselves on a path that has few options for them. Continue to fight and play along with their objective to defeat Hezbollah. A long term ceasefire for Israel is no longer a unilaterally serious option for Israel. Not on their own anyway.

 

I think the only way for "a way out" from this spiral involves third party intervention. Only a major power like the EU, UN, US, UK or Russia is going to get that cease fire to happen. France too has some pull in the region with special historical ties with Lebanon. The solution is going to involve Lebanese leaders, Israeli leaders, and a third party maybe Egypt. It probably won't involve Hezbollah. The solution will help acheive Israel's goal of disarming Hezbollah because that's a common regional goal - but try to keep as much peace in Lebanon as possible and keep what's left of its government from disintegrating further.

[Balta1701]

Hezbollah wouldn't exist in its current form without financial and military support from Iran. Taking out the rogue regime is the key here.

"Taking out", yes. But not militarily. If you "Take out" Iran using military force, all you do is create another failed state of folks who hate you.

 

This isn't just about "failed states" that can be pinned on the West. The "successful states" like Iran and Saudi Arabia are the real culprits. These totalitarian regimes keep their people poor, ignorant, and angry. The addition of state-sponsored Islamofascism (Iran) is especially destructive.

Just to be clear, Lebanon is a failed state because of Iran, Syria, and the U.N., not because of Israel or the U.S. They were a failed state after Syria assasinated its head-of-state and facilitated an arms buildup along the Israeli border.

In this statement, you totally ignore where Lebanon was actually headed after the Hairi killing. The Lebanese people Had actually effectively rebuilt that country from the civil war. There was a real nascent democracy in that country. It was on the verge of turning from the failed state that gave Birth to Hezbollah into a functioning country that would actually be able to deal with Hezbollah. That course has been totally reversed in this attack.

 

 

(1) Nor can you allow millenia-old hatreds to culminate in a nuclear weapon that destroys Israel. This needs to be stopped immediately.

 

(2) These people won't have the better lives until the totalitarian regimes are out of the picture. It's no coincidence that the Saudi royal family is hording the nation's weath, there is a 40% unemployment rate, and Saudi Arabia is a breeding ground for terrorists. This is one of the reasons that I supported the overthrow of Saddam. It gives the Iraqi people a chance to experience freedom and possible economic prosperity.

1. You and I actually agree on #1, Iran cannot be allowed to get a bomb. This is what my point was earlier...you have to manage these crises however you can, try to not allow things to go too far, and give those people time to actually decide that they want to replace their government. Iran trying to get a bomb is a crisis that must be managed, but the wrong way to do it would be to try to impose a government on Iran militarily.

 

2. How's that freedom and economic prosperity in Iraq working out these days?