This is building into something bigger and bigger. Wonder how long this will go on before US sends some help or we hopefully will let them be.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/12/mideast/index.html

Looks like a "he-said, she-said" situation.

Did the tank cross the border? Is Lebanon in cahoots with Palistine to create a two front war for Israel?

All in all, my favorite quote:
"If the soldiers are not returned we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years," Israel Defense Forces Chief of Staff Dan Halutz to Israeli Channel 10.
I've heard of getting knocked back to last Tuesday, but 20 years? /salute

a "very painful and far-reaching" response..them some serious words.

you should remeber that Isreal is one of the best trained best equiped forces i the world. They beat 8 attackers at once. lebanon and Palestine wouldnt even be a problem. they could just bomb Lebanon back to the stone ages and roll over Pal using thier tanks. then pull back to thier own boarders, not try and pacify the way we are in Iraq and be alright.


Now the response from some of the more radical muslim countries around them would be interesting to watch.

Rev

Israel also doesn't fuck around when it comes to their soldiers, living or dead. Getting them back is a patriotic duty. No surprise that Israel is talking tough, and I expect them to follow through.

Israel also doesn't fuck around when it comes to their soldiers, living or dead. Getting them back is a patriotic duty. No surprise that Israel is talking tough, and I expect them to follow through.


Israel's requirement for military service is not just an order to serve; it is a commitment between country and individual to be faithful to each other, and to allow a soldier or his/her body to be held hostage by an enemy would be breaking that faith, and you will not see that happening, at least not where the public and media can play with it.

Jesus, holding an entire government and soverign country guilty 'cause a terrorist group kidnapped two people?

By that logic, we should have invaded the Irish Republic during the seventies.

Salute to Israel.

Think this is one of those straws on the camels back situations Halo...

Krauthammers article this week is $$

Jul. 10, 2006
Israel Invades Gaza. That is in response to an attack from Gaza that killed two Israelis and wounded another, who was kidnapped and brought back to Gaza ...which, in turn, was in response to Israel's targeted killing of terrorist leaders in Gaza...which, in turn, was in response to the indiscriminate shelling of Israeli towns by rockets launched from Gaza.

Of all the conflicts in the world, the one that seems the most tediously and hopelessly endless is the Arab-Israeli dispute, which has been going on in much the same way, it seems, for 60 years. Just about every story you'll see will characterize Israel's invasion of Gaza as a continuation of the cycle of violence.

Cycles are circular. They have no end. They have no beginning. That is why, as tempting as that figure of speech is to use, in this case it is false. It is as false as calling American attacks on Taliban remnants in Afghanistan part of a cycle of violence between the U.S. and al-Qaeda or, as Osama bin Laden would have it, between Islam and the Crusaders going back to 1099. Every party has its grievances--even Hitler had his list when he invaded Poland in 1939--but every conflict has its origin.

What is so remarkable about the current wave of violence in Gaza is that the event at the origin of the "cycle" is not at all historical, but very contemporary. The event is not buried in the mists of history. It occurred less than one year ago. Before the eyes of the whole world, Israel left Gaza. Every Jew, every soldier, every military installation, every remnant of Israeli occupation was uprooted and taken away.

How do the Palestinians respond? What have they done with Gaza, the first Palestinian territory in history to be independent, something neither the Ottomans nor the British nor the Egyptians nor the Jordanians, all of whom ruled Palestinians before the Israelis, ever permitted? On the very day of Israel's final pullout, the Palestinians began firing rockets out of Gaza into Israeli towns on the other side of the border. And remember: those are attacks not on settlers but on civilians in Israel proper, the pre-1967 Israel that the international community recognizes as legitimately part of sovereign Israel, a member state of the U.N. A thousand rockets have fallen since.

For what possible reason? Before the withdrawal, attacks across the border could have been rationalized with the usual Palestinian mantra of occupation, settlements and so on. But what can one say after the withdrawal?

The logic for those continued attacks is to be found in the so-called phase plan adopted in 1974 by the Palestine National Council in Cairo. Realizing that they would never be able to destroy Israel in one fell swoop, the Palestinians adopted a graduated plan to wipe out Israel. First, accept any territory given to them in any part of historic Palestine. Then, use that sanctuary to wage war until Israel is destroyed.

So in 2005 the Palestinians are given Gaza, free of any Jews. Do they begin building the state they say they want, constructing schools and roads and hospitals? No. They launch rockets at civilians and dig a 300-yard tunnel under the border to attack Israeli soldiers and bring back a hostage.

And this time the terrorism is carried out not by some shadowy group that the Palestinian leader can disavow, however disingenuously. This is Hamas in action--the group that was recently elected to lead the Palestinians. At least there is now truth in advertising: a Palestinian government openly committed to terrorism and to the destruction of a member state of the U.N. openly uses terrorism to carry on its war.

That is no cycle. That is an arrow. That is action with a purpose. The action began 59 years ago when the U.N. voted to solve the Palestine conundrum then ruled by Britain by creating a Jewish state and a Palestinian state side by side. The Jews accepted the compromise; the Palestinians rejected it and joined five outside Arab countries in a war to destroy the Jewish state and take all the territory for themselves.

They failed, and Israel survived. That remains, in the Palestinian view, Israel's original sin, the foundational crime for the cycle: Israel's survival. That's the reason for the rockets, for the tunneling, for the kidnapping--and for Israel's current response.

If that history is too ancient, consider the history of the past 12 months. Gaza is free of occupation, yet Gaza wages war. Why? Because this war is not about occupation, but about Israel's very existence. The so-called cycle will continue until the arrow is abandoned and the Palestinians accept a compromise--or until the arrow finds its mark and Israel dies.

I would totally agree with that article. I was happy to see Gaza being handed back and I actually thought for a minute..hey this could be a start of great things to come. Guess that wasn't the outcome.

Jesus, holding an entire government and soverign country guilty 'cause a terrorist group kidnapped two people?

What you fail to see here though Halo is that the terrorist group has people in power in the government, and these aren't two civilians but military men.

Lebanon has long harbored and supported Hamas and its time to pay the piper. Isreal backs out of Gaza what happens they get attacked. they respond with some measure of control, not a strong point, and then pull back again. they get attacked again. Until the Lebanesse government and the Palestine Gov/People take hamas and other militants by the throat and say stop attacking or we will turn you over this cycle will continue.

Halo is just being halo, peace loving idjit who thinks by walking away you will get peace, but that hasnt and wont work for the Isreal/Palestine problem because when Isreal pulls back they continue to be attacked from the lands they just vacated. Remeber hamas's stated purpose is the complete and utter destruction of Isreal, not peace but war.

Rev

To anyone that's been following this thread, I suggest you watch 'Munich.' I watched it last night, and it breathed further life into this issue for me. Sure it's just a movie, and sensationalizes alot of topics I'm sure, but it was a great move and a good look into the attitudes of the Israelis and the Palestinians.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20060713/wl_mideast_afp/mideastunrestisraellebanon_060713122720

Seems like all the world has an opinion on what Israel should be doing... it's like living with your in-laws or something. Shut up already.

'Halo is just being halo, peace loving idjit who thinks by walking away you will get peace, but that hasnt and wont work for the Isreal/Palestine problem because when Isreal pulls back they continue to be attacked from the lands they just vacated. Remeber hamas's stated purpose is the complete and utter destruction of Isreal, not peace but war.'

- Right, 'cause war is workig so well to sort differences out.
Besides, I'm not peace-loving. I think Iraq and N.Korea deserve a good arse kicking.
I also saluted Israel.

OK fuckhead? Keep yer trollin to a minimum.

And yet you feel that thier holding a government that open harbors and supports thier efforts is wrong. The Lebonesse goverment knows they are harboring one of the Hezbollah leaders. They know we know it the Isreales know it, but they shouldnt be held responsible for harboring him. Explain why it would be wrong to hold them accountable for thier actions?

And since by pulling out of Gaza all they get is attacked more, perhaps it is time to just force since it appears to be the only thing Hezbollah and Hamas recognize. Isreal has tried peace, they pulled out and what happens they get attacked again and again from the place they just vacated.


as for trolling I have been on the boards for just 9 months less than you, I just dont tend to post on every thread that comes up ad nausem, I post when I have something to say that is relevant. can you say the same?

Rev

Solution, keep the land surrounding the civilian populace barren of folks or structures for the range of one of those damn rockets.

Noone else in the Arab world wants the Palastine folks settling on their lands tho huh, now we see why.

Violence without end.

Fandros

Solution, keep the land surrounding the civilian populace barren of folks or structures for the range of one of those damn rockets. Problem with this, the range continues to improve on their missiles (it's now up to 12 miles I think.) Thanks Syria and Iran...

REALLY REALLY not good.

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/article/16089.html

This could be the Archduke Franz Ferdinand moment.

If Iran takes this prisoner, Israel is going to go apeshit on them.. and we will back their play.

Lets see how bad Iran really wants it.

Oman....

And imho we should back their play.

Fandros

its an opportunity I hate to admit it, to deal with Iran and keep our noses fairly clean in the process. but it doesnt boad (SP) well for the Middle East peace process ( or lack there of). If Isreal attacks Iran you might see another of the 8 on 1 wars, and While the Isreal military is very good, I dont know if they can take all of them again.


Rev

While the Isreal military is very good, I dont know if they can take all of them again. Always bet with Israel.

I Personally wouldnt bet against them, to many friends over there but it wouldnt be pretty. It is interesting to note that the number of noble laurieates in the last either 50 or 60 years, more came from Isreal than any other country, if memory serves.


Rev.

Israel wins any war in the middle east because of immediate and overwhelming air superiority.

Iran cant do much to Israel. And Israel cant do too much to Iran except bomb the Beejezzus out of them.

Unless of course, Iran gets frisky and starts with the Missiles, which will have to fly over US airspace. And any Israeli bombing of Iran has to do the same thing.
Either way... we get drawn in.

Yes, but to what degree. there are ways to play the game. for example, Iran launches missles, that have to over fly Iraq and Us controlled air space. We shoot them down Iran gets mad but cant get to mad as we were just defending Iraq airspace and our people on the ground. toss in that the Iranians will have to contact the Swiss or some other intermediary, as we dont have formal relations with them.


on the other side of the coin, Isreal wants to bomb them, they also have to over fly Iraq/US postion. We try and warn the Iranians, by calling guess who the Swiss or some other intermediary, but this takes time and the isrealies strike thier target and destroy it and fly back out. The iranians will want to retalliate but they know we will just shoot down what ever they send over, so they ask an intermediary to talk to us about giving them better warnings or to allow over flies of Iraq to attack Isreal. We of course wouldnt agree to that as it would be endangering a friend, but we tell them we will get back to them.

In the mean time the same cycle is repeated a couple times and we end up being the bad guy in the world stage because we didnt reign in the Isrealies or werent warning the Iranians fast enough. and as a side bonus isreal takes out the various nuclear based targets in Iran as a covert payment to us for overflights.

conspiracy theories anyone?

Rev

Or we can just send in this guy:


http://www.uploadfile.info/uploads/32fd5a3d61.jpg

Now that's racist.....

Why cant Jews have superheros?

Why do you hate the jews Sixee? Now tell us your wife is Jewish.

Back on topic:

Chilling..
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD120406

Emphasis on Hizbullah's Importance to Iran

According to a May 11, 2006 Al-Sharq Al-Awsat report, a high-level Iranian official who held a closed meeting with a small group of Western diplomats in London emphasized Hizbullah's importance to Iran: "Hizbullah is one of the pillars of our security strategy, and forms Iran's first line of defense against Israel. We reject [the claim] that it must be disarmed..." [5]

See thats a basic problem that as a country they see Terrorists/terrorism as a valid part of a national defense. Kinda makes you want to send that jewish superhero in there to take them out. hehe


Rev

The shit is seriously hitting the fan.

Israel is getting pulled into a suckers game. There are no shortage of elements wanting to instigate Israel into full conflict to rally the masses throughout the Middle East, and Israel seems to be playing into that. I can't blame them exactly (patriotic duty aside, they have the military advantage), but it's getting messy fast.

On Israel's side of the equation tho' is the fact that the Muslim extremists have been blowing things up in other people's countries besides Israel, and those people are fed up.

I think we are seeing the seeds of the next big conflict being sown, and I have no doubts that we are going to see nuclear weapons used before all is said and done; the question is only who will be first to play that card.

http://dailytelegraph.news.com.au/story/0,20281,19785089-5001028,00.html
Don't attack Syria, Iran warns Israel

From correspondents in Tehran

July 14, 2006

IRANIAN President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said today an Israeli strike on Syria would be considered an attack on the whole Islamic world that would bring a "fierce response", state television reported.

"If the Zionist regime commits another stupid move and attacks Syria, this will be considered like attacking the whole Islamic world and this regime will receive a very fierce response," Mr Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying in a telephone conversation with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The president made the comments after Israel struck Beirut airport and military airbases and blockaded Lebanese ports in reprisals that have killed 55 civilians in Lebanon since Hezbollah guerrillas captured two Israeli soldiers a day earlier.

"He (Ahmadinejad) also said it was a must for the Organisation of the Islamic Conference to become more active regarding the new crisis created by the Zionist regime," state television reported.

Iran's Islamic government has never recognised Israel and routinely refers to the Jewish state as the "Zionist regime".

Iran has close ties with Syria, and with Hezbollah. But apparently we can't listen to what he says because he doesn't have any control of Iran.

Seriously though, NK has nothing on Iran at the moment.

I would have to agree with you. NK is worrisome but Iran even more so. I hope this all calms down soon, it has the potential to really get big.

If it calms down, it will only fire back up later. There is no solution.

What bothers me the most is if Iran and Israel get into it, we are monkey in the middle in Iraq.

What bothers me is listening to Putin calling for an end to the bloodshed, but yet historically Russia is known for a swift and brutal retailiation for any attacks against them.. go figure.. The Hizballah must get thier ammo from them.

Actually they get their ammo from Iran, North Korea, and China

who are supplied by Russia hehe. JK i dont know that they are

Why cant Jews have superheros?

Why do you hate the jews Sixee? Now tell us your wife is Jewish.

Actually 2 Jewish teens created Superman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superman

The racism there is the Stereotype that all people of the Jewish faith are not Hasidic (having the unshorn locks at the temples).

I think Israel needs to do more undercover operations to get things done. Although they could easily wipe out all of the Middle East, singlehandedly, there's something to be said for tact.
They need plausable deniability in anything "bad" that could "happen" to Hamas leaders.
Rather than playing it like Superman, they need to play it more like Batman, if you will.
:p

That didn't work with respect to Operation Wrath of God after the Munich Olympic kidnappings/slayings and simply led to more bloodshed from both sides. In many cases led to attacks on other nation's embassies as well. To both sides, be it war or covert operations, either will lead to more bloodshed. There's no simple solution to this, just about everything has been tried over the last 2,000 years and more recently since 1948. Covert actions just raise more suspicions even if they can't be proven.

I'm not saying I have a solution, I won't delude myself into thinking that I have answers that no one else has been able to come up with either. I'm also not saying that covert actions can't work elsewhere in the world either, but here, both sides are way to suspicious (and rightfully so) of each other for a covert action to be taken without recourse.

The title of this picture is "The Great Neo Con Middle East Democracy Experiment"
(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/07/bushbabyAP130706_479x600.jpg)

(http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/07/bushbabyAP130706_479x600.jpg)

Because the prequels "I Know What You Did Last Summer" (http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.org/documents/campdavid/) and "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_2000_Summit) did so well.

Because the prequels "I Know What You Did Last Summer" (http://www.jimmycarterlibrary.org/documents/campdavid/) and "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camp_David_2000_Summit) did so well.

Unless I am mistaken, the peace accords between Egypt and Israel have held up over the years pretty well.

I think that it helps that we have control of the Sinai. We rotate troops there and help keep the peace. To invade one.. the other would have to involve the US

Wow watch that stock market tumble...

Okay, the world may be in trouble as we know it.... I agree with L2 on this one unequivically.

Isreal has shown restraint. They could do much more than they have.... Isreal is the reason I'm not that concerned with Iran... they will handle it if we puss out.

Akipt.

There is a fundamental difference between the Camp David Accords and The Grand Experiment.

CD was only trying to bring peace.

An analogy (I know you love them) CD was akin to tearing two fighting dogs apart, giving them stronger leashes, higher fences.. The Bush Initiative is like trying to not only stop dogs from fighting, but teaching them to jump through hoops, roll over, fetch...

Amazing picture from Fox

http://www.foxnews.com/images/212716/31_28_071406_IsraelArtillery.jpg

Amazing picture from Fox



Thats called concussion from a 155 outgoing arty round!

Id hate to be on the incoming end!

Akipt.

There is a fundamental difference between the Camp David Accords and The Grand Experiment.

CD was only trying to bring peace.

An analogy (I know you love them) CD was akin to tearing two fighting dogs apart, giving them stronger leashes, higher fences.. The Bush Initiative is like trying to not only stop dogs from fighting, but teaching them to jump through hoops, roll over, fetch...

Oh for pete's sake, I wasn't giving a history lesson.

This reminds me of a fight I had when I was a kid. It was against this fat kid and he was an asshole. I subdued him and had him in a headlock. I said ok, I win its over and let him out. He proceeded to fight me. I subdued him again. I was really, really mad and wanted to break his f'ing neck. I let him go again but I ran away and it was over. If this ever happened to me again, I would just break his f'ing neck and be done with it. Stop f'ing around trying to be the nice or honorable guy.

Id hate to be on the incoming end!

to say the least its loud.

The Baghdad Bob of Syria...

Imad Fauzi Shueibi, a political analyst who often works as a consultant to the Syrian government, laughed as he said that he believed that Israel was being drawn into a trap if it thought it could successfully fight on two, or even three, fronts.

Israel and the United States have said that they attribute a supporting role in Hezbollah’s attacks on Israel to Syria, and many Syrians are now talking about the possibility of a battle with Israel in the Golan region.

“I am laughing because I am so happy to see that in Israel there are these very stupid leaders,” Dr. Fauzi Shueibi said. “Israel has nothing to gain by changing the balance of power in the region. To fight on two fronts at the same time is stupid; if they try to open three fronts, that will be madness.”

“No one can believe that this will stop without a huge victory for Hezbollah and for Syria,” he added. “I haven’t felt so optimistic since 1973. I think we are closing the noose on Israel. This may be the last battle, and we may be able to redraw the map of the Middle East, but not on the schedule of America’s plan for the greater Middle East.”

It's about time Israel started kicking some ass. A country can only put up with so much bullshit before they scream "Enough!"

I remember watching a documentary on the Israeli Air Force. Apparently they are their Spec Force. 200 Recruits usually sign up to join. Once all is said and done, there's usually 20 or less left. Now that's attrition. Makes for helluva Air Force though. I believe they've never lost one of their F-15's in combat (correct me if I'm wrong).

Either way, with the technology that the Israeli's are developing (IE: The omni-directional Laser defence of incoming missles and RPG's), their training, the fact that they are battle hardened, and that their kit is top notch, I wouldn't fuck with them in a million years.

If I had to say anything, I'd say "Take em all out. Iran, Syria, Egypt, Palestine and anyone else foolish enough to take up a rifle against them". I'm fed up with watching the small guys kill and maim without fear of consequences for their actions. As someone said earlier, it's time to pay the piper.

Israel has over and over again offered a hand in peace, only to be rebuffed by the surrounding countries with Egypt and Jordan being the exceptions.

If these Islamic extremists wish to promote hate, then by all means, wipe them out. The only thing they seem to understand is violence and death so give them that X 10.

Iran is going to come out of this current situation either as a major power in the Middle East, or as a marginalized also-ran which has lost both prestige and a large portion of it's military capability (assuming they back up their tough talk with actions). Syria is going to get it's ass kicked if it does not change direction, and soon; the question is whether we are involved in any of that, due to Syria also being involved in Iraq's insurgency.

Israel tried to give the Palestinians a chance at a peaceful coexistence, as well as the people of Lebanon.

Israel has over and over again offered a hand in peace, only to be rebuffed by the surrounding countries with Egypt and Jordan being the exceptions.



Let me first off say that I pretty much agree with everyone here, that Israel is about to lay the smack down and with good reason. Im behind them 100% and I hope the United States stands by thier allies, as finding trust worthy ones, has become increasingly rare these last few years.

While it is true that Israel has tried for peace many times, they are hardly with out guilt.

They have caused alot of the problems there aswell. That said...i wholely believe they are more the victem than the aggressor.

This is just a neat tid bit of history I found.

I did find it interesting they sank the USS Liberty though. I did not know about that at first.

http://www.ussliberty.org/

http://home.cfl.rr.com/gidusko/liberty/

I tend to believe they didnt like a US spy boat in thier area , thinking they may be keeping tabs on what they were up too. Take that how you want.

I think you are very vulnerable to the U.S. press, which seeks to justify everything Israel does. I don't believe in black&white, and while moving out from Gaza was a pretty nice move, throwing back missiles and disrupting power for the kidnapping of 1 soldier is way too much. Even in the name of solidarity (destroying a military base would have been a largely enough answer for kidnapping, why punish the civilians?). I even doubt that the kidnapping is real - it could be just organised by Israel to give an excuse for attacks. But even if it weas real, such overreactions do cause the real wars - and in my eyes are a stupid move causing many deaths.

I am not a middle-east expert, but I have learned to be careful when listening to news... each country only publishes his version. Israel might have some right, but don't believe everything they say to you to convince you :)

Lani

I think you are very vulnerable to the U.S. press, which seeks to justify everything Israel does.

You are very wrong there. The American press tends to come down on the side of anti-war more often than not.
You have to also realize that while Isreal is not without fault, they have been more than accomidating to their neighbors in the past.
Do you blame the lion for killing a hyena when the pack has been nipping at him for days?

Lanilya,

Your comments remind me of an arguement I had with a girl that my old roommate brought home from the bar. She was telling me how the US supported terrorism and how we are worse then Al-Qaeda. How we supported the suppression of the palistinian people and encouraged killing of muslims. Now mind you.. she was not middle-eastern, or muslim. After listening to this madness, I took a shot in the dark and asked if she lived with anyone, and she proceeded to tell me that her roommate was a foriegn exchange student from Eygpt. Believe what you want.. but I do not hear comments from Isreal saying that they are going to wipe out the islamic faith. Also, this is a country that has been attacked by every surrounding islamic country in the past.. why should they show restraint. Hezballah and Hamas have never shown us any reason to think that they want peace....

I even doubt that the kidnapping is real - it could be just organised by Israel to give an excuse for attacks.

You have got to be kidding me.

You say going to war over one life seems extreme.

My question to you is this:

How much is a persons life worth?

I am very impressed with the fact that they don't give up any of their own without a fight. It's an example all countries should follow.

Being a military person myself, I know it would keep me strong in the face of the enemy knowing full well that my fellow troops are busting their balls (figuratively and literally) to get me back.

You say going to war over one life seems extreme.

My question to you is this:

How much is a persons life worth?

I am very impressed with the fact that they don't give up any of their own without a fight. It's an example all countries should follow.

I agree wholeheartedly. No man left behind. A life is more precious than property or something of material. I applaud them for going after their people and I think it's something we used to do but have become so bogged down in diplomacy we sometimes miss the window of opportunity. When dealing with a viper peace is rarely an option. I don't blame them for their actions but I don't want us to have any part in it. Let them blow each other up for God sakes nothing else can be done anyway.

She was telling me how the US supported terrorism and how we are worse then Al-Qaeda. How we supported the suppression of the palistinian(sic) people

The sad part being that, aside from the "encouraged the killing" part this is entirely true. We don't encourage killing, we just give dictators billions of dollars in weapons and sip Miller High Life while they prosecute a ten year war on their Islamic neighbor. (you get points if you even know what two states this was. Hint: They both start with I, but neither contains an S)

That doesn't legitimize groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, but it sure explains them. The US effective veto in the UN has been keeping the Palestinians from statehood for decades. We never hear about that stateside, of course, but that is par for the course. The socializaton of anti-Israel sentiment in the region tends to blend a lot of factual grievances together into a mushy amalgamation that doesn't make a whole lot of sense, especially in places like Egypt that lost wars to Israel, but the real problems are still there. (It's comically instructive to compare the anti-Israel zeitgeist to anti-Gay rhetoric from the religious right here)



The Baghdad Bob of Syria...

Going back to why this isn't WW3. Syria and Iran may talk big, but when the shooting starts aren't dumb enough to run afoul of anyone in G8.

it's rather obvious you are speakign of Iraq and Iran in the 80s

Supposing the kidnapping is real, its perfectly logical to kill 1000 persons to save one man? There was a movie with that theme - in hungarian the title was "Saving Private Ryan" - it perfectly explains the tragedy of lives behind. Families loosing their children because one person - and families are dying to save one person? Is a human life worth 1000 others?

Solidarity MUST exist - and it gives huge moral to soldiers knowing that their country cares about them. But the effort should be limited to military environment, and killing civilians (of which some have voted for democracy, against Hamas) is unforgivable. For me, the logical answer would have been to launch Air attacks on military bases - and not on power supply reducing the quality of life of civilians. Not to mention that the more you reduce their comfort, the more susceptible they are to religion and - in extreme cases - terrorist actions. Killing civilians is not only a moral question - its also an utter idiocy imho.

Then again, I am not saying that Israel is certainly unjust here. What I know, is that Israel is attacking civilians, destroying economy and creating more harm than good. Palestinien and Libanon government might be happy with Israel attacks, that creates more poor people, that make people more religious and more fanatic. And thats a big mistake from Israel - and they should stop the attacks immediately. Should the attacks continue, next elections would yield 90% success for Hamas and such.

Lani

Supposing the kidnapping is real, its perfectly logical to kill 1000 persons to save one man? There was a movie with that theme - in hungarian the title was "Saving Private Ryan" - it perfectly explains the tragedy of lives behind. Families loosing their children because one person - and families are dying to save one person? Is a human life worth 1000 others?

Bad example really...so instead of having to send soldiers to pick up Private Ryan..we should have just stayed the hell out of Europe during WWII.

To me it's no surprise that a person from a country that sent 440,000 Jews to Aushwitz would doubt the validity in Israel's right to conduct war against two groups of people that not only kidnap their troops, but have also repeatedly conducted terrorist acts against Israel.

For me, the logical answer would have been to launch Air attacks on military bases

It's not possible to attack Hamas and Hezbollah and not impact the civilian population. Both organizations set up shop in densely populated areas for the sole purpose of increasing collateral damage if they are targetted. Also, neither is a legitimate military organization. Both are basically paramilitary militias. They have offices and other organizational buildings, but most of their "infrastructure" is hidden in civilian areas. The only way to strike their military might is in those areas. As much as you want to blame Israel for civilian casualties, you have to place that blame at Hamas and Hezbollah. They know what they are doing putting their rockets in densely poplated areas, and it's part of their grand schemes to villainize Israel.

There was a movie with that theme - in hungarian the title was "Saving Private Ryan" - it perfectly explains the tragedy of lives behind. Families loosing their children because one person - and families are dying to save one person? Is a human life worth 1000 others?

Funny, I got a different message from the movie:
That soldiers are willing to give up everything to save 1 of thier own, even their own lives.
But then again, I was a soldier, so maybe my perspective was skewed a bit.

People who are siding against Israel here are failing to see the underlying principle. If you give into the demands of the terrorists... YOU LOSE. Ok.. lets say that Israel does not fight back, how long would it be before 2 more soldiers are taken? Well.. then just attack the Airbases? How is this any different then what they are doing now? As Taleren pointed out.. the Hezballah are not firing rockets from military sights.. but from Akmed's rooftop. There really is not any other way to avoid collateral damage.

Btw Taleren.. good to see you are still here.. after reading this I got scared..

http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/07/15/20060715-E1-01.html

bahh... i can't even speak spanish

I think you are very vulnerable to the U.S. press, which seeks to justify everything Israel does. I don't believe in black&white, and while moving out from Gaza was a pretty nice move, throwing back missiles and disrupting power for the kidnapping of 1 soldier is way too much. Even in the name of solidarity (destroying a military base would have been a largely enough answer for kidnapping, why punish the civilians?). I even doubt that the kidnapping is real - it could be just organised by Israel to give an excuse for attacks. But even if it weas real, such overreactions do cause the real wars - and in my eyes are a stupid move causing many deaths.

I am not a middle-east expert, but I have learned to be careful when listening to news... each country only publishes his version. Israel might have some right, but don't believe everything they say to you to convince you :)

Lani

Wow, and they said that Hitler's brown shirt youth movement had tapered off. Here's proof yet that denial is not only a river in Africa...

Fandros

Ok.. lets say that Israel does not fight back, how long would it be before 2 more soldiers are taken?

Thats exactly the reason why you dont talk to terrorists. You talk to them - they will do more terrorist actions to make themselves hear. I bet it will take much more time before 2 more soldiers are taken, if Israel wouldnt have fought back.

I dont know - maybe I am less influenced by Israel newspaper, maybe Hungary (who is supposed to be one of the best friends of USA in Europe) publishes strangely the news in a different angle... but for me, punishing civilians because of a kidnapping... Has Israel even asked the reason for kidnapping? Had he tried to negociate? No - direct war. No thinking just war. Ariel Sharon's work crumbles in dust.

Do you really think war will stop kidnapping? Quite the opposite, its oil on fire.

Lani

The kidnappings could have been organized by Israel. The kidnappings could have been organized by Lanilya. The kidnappings could have been organized by Captain Jack Sparrow. The probability of any of the three scenarios is ~ equal. Israel has a hair trigger at the best of times, and is unlikely to fabricate reasons for the actions they've taken. They just don't need to bother. They've endured enough provocation over the years to warrant such a response.

Whether the response is justified given the kidnappings and whether Israel are immaculate "good guys" isn't relevent to the above. They don't need to make up stories to find reasons to justify their actions.

Wow, and they said that Hitler's brown shirt youth movement had tapered off. Here's proof yet that denial is not only a river in Africa...

Fandros

I was keeping my arguments civilised. I thought my arguments are constructive, and worth discussing. If they yield to insults I will stop here - I absolutely dont care about convincing you that Israel is wrong. I guess I should keep my oppinion to myself then.

Lani

Thats exactly the reason why you dont talk to terrorists. You talk to them - they will do more terrorist actions to make themselves hear.

Has Israel even asked the reason for kidnapping? Had he tried to negociate? No - direct war.

...

Thats exactly the reason why you dont talk to terrorists. You talk to them - they will do more terrorist actions to make themselves hear.





Has Israel even asked the reason for kidnapping? Had he tried to negociate? No - direct war.


Now that's not talking out of both sides of your mouth....

Im not really sure what Israels end game in this.

I mean, they occupied Lebanon for 18 years and couldnt disarm Hezbollah. Why are they expecting this new, fragile government to be able to do it?

They have bigger fish to fry me thinks...

They have bigger fish to fry me thinks...

Than a group that's stated goal is the destruction of Israel, that launches missle attacks over the border for years, and various other terrorist attacks on Israel?

I guess you could state that Syria and Iran are these bigger fish, but Hezbollah is just an arm of both of those governments anyhow.

yea.
War on Lebanon serves no real purpose... other than to bring Syria and Iran out from behind their proxy.

Sucks to be Lebanese

I agree it sucks to wage war on Lebanon per se, but I don't see this as so much a war on Lebanon as a war on Hezbollah. I understand that by hitting infrastructure that Israel is trying to push the hand of the Lebanese government in dealing with Hezbollah, we'll see if it is effective at all.

The problem is, to hit Hezbollah, they have to hit Lebanon. Lebanon giving Hezbollah a place to fester has to take some responsibity in this, and I have yet to see them take any of the responsibility in action or words for Hezbollah.

Lebanon giving Hezbollah a place to fester has to take some responsibity in this, and I have yet to see them take any of the responsibility in action or words for Hezbollah.

But I'm sure there would be dancing in the streets if the situation was reversed, and Hezbollah was the one doing the attacking....

On World News tonight, last night, they interviewed some woman in the streets of Lebanon and she was screaming, "This is G. Bush's fault, look what hes doing to us"..... They don't get it, never will.

On World News tonight, last night, they interviewed some woman in the streets of Lebanon and she was screaming, "This is G. Bush's fault, look what hes doing to us"..... They don't get it, never will.

I saw that and I wanted to reach thru my TV and slap the shit out of her. How in the hell is this G. Bush's fault? I don't really like him but I don't see it as his fault either.

It wasn't too long ago that the U.S.A. engaged in "total war" and targeted civilian targets during wartime.

We say we won't do that anymore, but if it was required to secure the safety of our nation, I bet we'd change our tune. I can't expect Isreal to do any differently. However, I don't see how it is going to help their relations with other countries in the area.

The conflict of Isreal vs. Everyone Around Them isn't going to be over until Isreal is gone or Everyone Around Them changes their minds regarding Isreal's right to even exist. I'm not going to hold my breath on either count.

Im not really sure what Israels end game in this.

I mean, they occupied Lebanon for 18 years and couldnt disarm Hezbollah. Why are they expecting this new, fragile government to be able to do it?

They have bigger fish to fry me thinks...

LL I think the immediate goal is to take out all the weapons that can reach Israel.... seems to be those rockets but I'm sure it's any artillery etc....

Another goal would be to cripple Hezbullah in Lebanon which they are doing at present. They have cut off retreat routes and we will see (or maybe not) land based attacks to actually root out the enemy....

Lastly we probably will see the spot light shown directly on Iran, then we will help Isreal take out those Nuke plants.... :)

No need to watch CNN MSNBC FOX or ESPN.... you got it all here first :)

Bise has it exactly right.

Sucks to be Lebanese

Yup. Lebanon is a human shield for Syria and Iran...

Oh and someone mentioned UN peacekeepers for the region. They're there now... sitting in their bunkers on the Lebanese / Israeli border.

Lotta good they've done eh?

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150886027895&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"There are moments in the life of a nation, when it is compelled to look directly into the face of reality and say: no more!"

"It is a difficult battle," Olmert said. "It may become even more difficult. It is a painful test, and we may have to bear more suffering. Such a battle is never easy. It is strewn with pain and suffering, sacrifice, and casualties. But, we have no intention of giving up our desire to live a normal life. We will not apologize for this desire, and we do not need anyone's approval to defend ourselves."

Olmert spelled out the four gorals of the military operations: The return of the abducted Israeli soldiers, a complete cease fire, deployment of the Lebanese army in all of southern Lebanon, expulsion of Hizbullah from the area, and fulfillment of United Nations Resolution 1559.

Quote:
Has Israel even asked the reason for kidnapping? Had he tried to negociate? No - direct war.
Now that's not talking out of both sides of your mouth....

Oh gosh - there is a difference between asking the freedom of a kidnapped person (this isnt negotiation!) and starting a war within 24 hours - nothing proves better than the kidnapping is just an excuse for a long wished war.

I think you accept way too easily the war. Even if you very well know that it doesnt bring anything besides pain. Have you heard the latest news?

- 200 dead (of which 190 civilians), more than 400 wounded.
- Hezbollah's reputation is strongly increasing, and is gaining supporters! (at least thats what Hungarian news say - I wonder if they confirm this in US).

Both news are terrible. I wonder if the war brings any advantage compared to that. I cant think of any.

Lani

p.s. Bonus question - if you were Hezbollah - why in hell would you kidnap a Soldier from Israel? What would be your goal with it? Hope to exchange for another prisoner knowing that Israel wont negociate? I am more and more convinced that the kidnapping is not real. Or there is something more behind it. Or is it Hezbollah's interest to start the war, because they know that they will gain supporters, and Israel is dumbly falling in the trap?

Lanilya, the problem I think you may be having with this is you are viewing the extremists as rational people, while their actions and behavior have consistently shown a lack of rational processes.

Go put your head back in the sand Lan, you're hopeless.

Kidnapping is an age old tradition in the Muslim community. Lost ya there eh?

Yes they were trying to force concessions from Israel, but ya know damn well they couldn't give those concessions.

When you enlist with the Israel security forces you sign a pact with your country. Noone gives up on anyone...

You simply are way out of your depth here.

Fandros

And you guys thought I was a nutcase?

So let me see if I understand your rationale, Lanilya:

Don't negotiate with terrorists, because this emboldens them.
Don't go to war with them because you'll kill civilians that they are using as shields.
Israel orchestrated the kidnappings.
Israel obviously wanted to start killing civilians as soon as possible because they went from protesting the kidnappings to blowing stuff up in the space of 24 hours.

So what would you have Israel do? Just sit there till the entire nation is kidnapped?
Or are you just mad there won't be a video released on the Internet showing the 2 Israeli soldiers getting thier gourds hacked off?

Im getting REALLY fucking tired of Euros saying "You Americans are not well informed because of the bias of your news shows"

Oh please, Euros carry the more misconceptions and distortions of fact than any other specific group of people that ive seen discuss the news. It is rife with conspiracy theories and tin foil hattery. And in most cases the information comes from only a couple sources, unless you speak english.
I think Americans, by and large have the best news delivery apparatus in the world, the press is more open and there is more competition. WingNut videos like "Loose Change" are treated as fact in many of the Euro dailies and the bias is largely unchecked.

p.s. Bonus question - if you were Hezbollah - why in hell would you kidnap a Soldier from Israel? What would be your goal with it? Hope to exchange for another prisoner knowing that Israel wont negociate? I am more and more convinced that the kidnapping is not real. Or there is something more behind it. Or is it Hezbollah's interest to start the war, because they know that they will gain supporters, and Israel is dumbly falling in the trap?

Wait.. Wait.. I know this one... Wait... I got it!!!!

Why the hell would Hezbollah start a crisis in the middleeast? Ok.. lets look at this from a different angle. LL has already laid the groudwork and clues... Think.. think.. ok, nevermind I will just say it. IRAN!! What has been happening for the last month at the UN? (other than accepting bribes) Yes.. Iran was refered to the Security Council, and what better way to derail the process then having the organization that they fund start a diversion. It is so clear it is scary....

Why would they kidnap Israeli soldiers? I guess you should ask Hamas the same question as they did the same thing a few days earlier. Or was that a sham too?

If you honestly think these kidnappings were staged, I have some oceanfront property in Hungary to sell you (yes I'm well aware there is none and that's my point).

... which is why Iran was ignoring last week's UN deadline for response and instead wasn't going to respond until later in August. They knew this was going to happen.

And you're playing right along with their plan Lani. In a few weeks, more and more countries are going to moan about all the civilian deaths, the UN security council is going to suddenly forget about UN Resolution 1556 (disarming Hizbollah), and it's all going to be Israel's fault for escalating the situation. And all eyes will be turned away from Iran... bravo.

Wait.. Wait.. I know this one... Wait... I got it!!!!

Why the hell would Hezbollah start a crisis in the middleeast? Ok.. lets look at this from a different angle. LL has already laid the groudwork and clues... Think.. think.. ok, nevermind I will just say it. IRAN!! What has been happening for the last month at the UN? (other than accepting bribes) Yes.. Iran was refered to the Security Council, and what better way to derail the process then having the organization that they fund start a diversion. It is so clear it is scary....

The sad part is so few people actually get this and it's why before long the bleeding hearts will be all over it :( The trouble is people don't follow enough of what the heck is going on to get a bigger picture. Instead they see something hit the headlines of their news channel/outlet without the background. I doubt very many people knew what was happening at the UN because it wasn't in the main focus; it just doesn't sell like explosions do.

I actually think I figured it out last night.

Follow along with me.

Think of that picture with the sniper. Think of the weapon he is using and the round that it fires. The AK and its varients are the weapon of choice amoung the insurgency. Even with over 2,500 American deaths, that number is REMARKABLY low when it is considered how much lead is really flying around in that country.

Check this video out
http://www.youtube.com/watch?search=Sniper+Iraq&v=vwbgUAGcJM0

I think that happens alot. Basically American Kevlar is stopping alot of the low grade Soviet surplus weaponry that is being used. Especially from afar.
The insurgents realized this and attempted to engage the US forces in close combat, Fallujah being a prime example, and had their asses handed to them by a superior fighting force utilizing excellent squad based tactics and combined arms doctrine.

The insurgents/Al-Queda are low trained/high motivation with poor equipment. And still they have had success (very very limited) against the US. The Iranians have been playing close attention.

Hezbollah is something entirely different. Hezbollah has been the controlling power in Southern Lebanon for 18 years. They have fortified the ground and have decent training for its 10,000 permanent militia.
Not only that, but Iran has been funding Hezbollah and its fighters are not using the AK47 7.62x39 from the post Soviet Going Out of Business Sale. What they have been equiped with, and trained to use is the Iranian manufactured Khaybar KH2002 5.56x30.
They have the same fantatical level of motivation that the Iraqi insurgents have, but also have permanent defenses and a workable level of training.

The Khaybar is a weapon that will rip through the kevlar protection that American troops (and Israeli) use. If the Iraqi Insurgents had access to these weapons, American death rates would skyrocket in Iraq.

I think the reasoning of what is going on in Lebanon is 2 fold.
1. Hezbollah and Iran are trying to draw Israel into sending ground forces enmasse into Southern Lebanon where they can engage troops in small squad engagements, inflicting very heavy casualities. If they can win a battle and force Israel to withdraw while Hezbollah is still intact, then they have won the biggest battle in the Arab mind since Saladin drove the Crusaders out.
But it has to be defensive. Hezbollah does not have the capacity to strike into Israel with troops, but it can bloody its nose in a Fallujah style defensive.

2. The second rational behind this is Iran is sending a message to the US. "We arent Iraq" They want the Israelis with their US equipment to suffer a defeat by their proxies using their weapons and training in a defensive war. Hezbollah = Iran.

Basically think of Hitlers motivation with the Spanish Civil war in the 30s.

Amazing how cyclical history is.

Israel on the other hand is trying to play by Hamah Rules (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hama_Massacre), but Lite. All Hezbollah has to do is hold on and wait for the Israelis to invade with ground troops... then the battle begins. Israel has put itself in a bad situation.. if they do not destroy Hezbollah, Hezbollah has won a victory, if they invade, they are entering into a massive battle in which they could very well lose, if not the fight, then their souls.

I agree with pretty much all that, except for this...

The Khaybar is a weapon that will rip through the kevlar protection that American troops (and Israeli) use. If the Iraqi Insurgents had access to these weapons, American death rates would skyrocket in Iraq.

Kevlar isn't used by our troops to stop high powered rifles like the AK47... they've upgraded the armor significantly, even since 2003's invasion. I don't have time now to link, but from my memory we're using boron carbinate <sp?> which can stop a AK47 from 15 feet. It's the strongest, lightest metal made now...

I know we used to have experts on this board who could talk the differences up in the Iranian versus Russian rifles... guess thats why we have google now, who needs know-it-alls ;)

That video was chilling. I was impressed that the soldier jumped up and was ready to fight..... then took cover. Whether is was ingrained training or just a clear battlefield head, he did damn good if you ask me.

The point of view that Lanilya is coming from is that Isreal wanted a conflict so they made something up to start one. Even if that is the case it bodes poorly for Iran. If we are concockting (sp) stories and events like this with Isreal it would have to be to lay the ground work to pummel Iran shortly.

Either way I'm okay with it but I seriously doubt you can determine the outcome that many steps away.

What reason does Isreal have do what they are doing if not for self defense? They are taking no land, only eliminating threats. Also, Isreals terms for cease fire are the same exact terms that were agreed upon when they moved out of Lebennon all those years ago, it is just that noone enforced the rules. After 18 years I would take action too.

Im getting REALLY fucking tired of Euros saying "You Americans are not well informed because of the bias of your news shows"

Oh please, Euros carry the more misconceptions and distortions of fact than any other specific group of people that ive seen discuss the news. It is rife with conspiracy theories and tin foil hattery. And in most cases the information comes from only a couple sources, unless you speak english.
I think Americans, by and large have the best news delivery apparatus in the world, the press is more open and there is more competition. WingNut videos like "Loose Change" are treated as fact in many of the Euro dailies and the bias is largely unchecked.


wow, thats just...golden, did you google this or do you write your own material L2? :(

I write all my own baby..

btw, whats your opinion of "Loose Change"?

First of all - apologies if I offended anyone, that was not my goal. Will try to answer a few posts:

@Bylimet - you might be right saying that terrorists are not rational. In that case the kidnapping was dumb. Still - they get out lucky, because they gain supporters - weather it was a rational or irrational act.

@Fandros - resisted your taunt again :)

@Sixee - I dont think war is the only solution. Kidnappings have been done with Spanish, French and I dont know how many people - did these countries enter War? This is why I think kidnapping is not the real reason for war. Is it Iran? Thats a good possibility too - and I can accept that even if I am dubious over it.

@Lleauric - my apologies for the news thingies - I didnt mean it that way. I was wondering if the Hungarian news were correct - hence my question. During 40 years we have been mislead with news, I know perfectly that government can easily manipulate the population with misleading information. I remember seeing a film on Spektrum TV - it was about a love affair between Kruschow, Bresnew and Ronald Reagan, Nixxon and I dont know how many other politicians - all this sounded very real, based on facts - and at the end of the film, they said that it was utter bullshit, and if we believed it, we are very vulnerable to political manipulation. Since I have been also mislead by this film, I am cautious now. And I certainly didnt mean that US information is falsified - I just asked if we both hear the same things.

That Iran thingie gave me some thoughts - maybe you are right saying that the real target is Iran, and not those terrorists. That explains the overreacting over kidnapping and the lack of US / Europe intervention. Israel is just executing US and Europe will. Might be.

Lani

if that's the video with the missile-on-plane-theory etc then its obviously filled with raging bullshit and i obviously don't treat it as fact in any way. Although i must say, the pentagon wreckage had some weird shit going on.

Sorry Lan, wasn't really a taunt. A taunt implies I wish to debate and go around the mulberry bush with ya, tossing heated barbs till we both get weary.

I was merely stating a point, you are out of your depth and obviously wearing a very tight tin foil hat.

Israel didn't fake the kidnappings, to think so shows just how you shouldn't be allowed back into the genetic pool.

Hezbollah was formed with one thing in mind, eradicating Israel...

Fandros

Oh gosh - there is a difference between asking the freedom of a kidnapped person (this isnt negotiation!) and starting a war within 24 hours - nothing proves better than the kidnapping is just an excuse for a long wished war.

I think you accept way too easily the war. Even if you very well know that it doesnt bring anything besides pain. Have you heard the latest news?

- 200 dead (of which 190 civilians), more than 400 wounded.
- Hezbollah's reputation is strongly increasing, and is gaining supporters! (at least thats what Hungarian news say - I wonder if they confirm this in US).

Both news are terrible. I wonder if the war brings any advantage compared to that. I cant think of any.

Lani

p.s. Bonus question - if you were Hezbollah - why in hell would you kidnap a Soldier from Israel? What would be your goal with it? Hope to exchange for another prisoner knowing that Israel wont negociate? I am more and more convinced that the kidnapping is not real. Or there is something more behind it. Or is it Hezbollah's interest to start the war, because they know that they will gain supporters, and Israel is dumbly falling in the trap?


First lets take a serious look at this:

Hezbollah and Hamas both have one single goal, that is to eradicate Israel...thats not hearsay nor is it speculation, it is something they openly say in public.

There is no interest on the side of Hezbollah or Hamas to have peace with Israel, this is not in dispute as they publicly state they do not want peace with Israel, in fact, they don't want peace with any non-muslim country and that is not in dispute as they also publicly state that they want to eradicate all non-muslims.

Have they sprung a trap in order to gain more support of the populace of muslim countries? Probably, their method of waging war should show that to even the most illiterate of human kind. Why might you ask is this so obvious? Well lets answer that.

When you hide behind a civilian populace to launch attacks and it is well known that the response is going to cause the Israelis to fire at the point of launch you are deliberately causing the Israelis to kill civilians.

You see, Hezbollah will use a civilian house, often times one that they know has both women and children in it, to launch a rocket from. Israel in defense will pinpoint the location of launch and fire artillery at that point of launch, by the time the artillery hits the Hezbollah fighters are gone and all that is left is a house with women and children in it that is thereby destroyed by artillery killing all inside.

Hezbollah then will use the deaths of those women and children to advance their cause saying that Israel is targeting women and children and that Israel is full of evil people who want to kill muslim children.

So really who is the guilty party here when it comes to the deaths of the innocent civilians? Is it Israel that is guilty, because it was their artillery that actually physically killed them? Or is it Hezbollah that is guilty because they knew by launching from that position that women and children would be killed by the defensive artillery?

I think if you read my post history here I am not a person who is very supportive of waging war, it doesnt solve much and often times the real losers are the innocents who just want to live their lives unencumbered.

However, in the situation of the Hamas-Hezbollah what we have is two groups that are most obviously getting their marching orders from Iran and that is not in dispute as the Iranian government has stated publicly that "No Part of Israel is Safe". Now please explain why Iran would say this if they werent directly involved in supplying and providing the strategy to these groups?

You see, my problem with Hezbollah-Hamas is that they are guilty of exploiting the very civilians that they claim to protect by knowingly having their homes, schools and places of work targeted by the Israeli military. These groups have no real defined military bases and if they do they are ALWAYS right in the middle of a civilian populace, I assure you this is by design not by accident.

I am curious as to why the people who are under the rule of groups like Hezbollah don't speak out and tell them to not launch their attacks from their houses and schools? Why is that? Is it because to speak out against them would cause them to behead the person speaking out?

How come no one ever expects the leaders of these groups to tie a bomb around themselves and perform a suicide attack? After all the leaders say that doing this will grant them a ticket directly into paradise. Shouldn't the leaders who preach this lead by example?

I find it quite ironic that groups who have appointed themselves as protectors seem to openly exploit those they supposedly protect by knowingly creating situations that will cause their deaths. The desire for power is a funny thing isn't it.

Let me end by asking you this: Do you know of any Israeli suicide bombers? Have you seen where any Israeli has hijacked a plane and deliberately crashed it into a building of unsuspecting innocent people? Have you seen where any israeli has gone into the middle of someones wedding, someone who had nothing to do with setting policies, and blown themselves up along with the innocent wedding guests? Have you seen any Israeli capture and hold hostage the olympic athletes of any country?

Again, if Israel wanted a conflict they'd just start conflicting -- no story needed. There is pretext aplenty and has been for decades. This is the case whether you view Israel positively, negatively or in shades of grey.

Why kidnap? To start a regional war. It may or may not be for the reasons L2 suggests (tho' his theory is certainly plausible), but it's very well known that there are elements in Hezbollah that want nothing less than the destruction of Israel. Hell, I think it's the organization's defining characteristic.

I don't know that Iran was behind the act that precipitated all this, but no doubt they approve. It wouldn't surprise me if there was a broad "find a way to start some shit" order passed down. Now, it could be that a few rogue Hezbollah extremists saw an opportunity to fuck with Israel and took it, without orders from Hez-central or Iran.

But were that the case, Hez-central would surely look to free the prisoner in order to avoid conflict. No attempt to free the prisoner suggests a desire for this conflict, and so here we are.

Hezbollah was formed with one thing in mind, eradicating Israel...

Fandros

I keep hearing it's a humanitarian group.

Much like the residents of Gaza, the Shia dominated south of Lebanon, which has seen widespread humanitarian support from Hezbollah, has become stronger willed over time.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0607/S00215.htm

http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyid=2006-07-18T180844Z_01_OLI848020_RTRUKOC_0_US-MIDEAST-IRAN-HIZBOLLAH.xml&src=rss&rpc=22TEHRAN (Reuters) - Iran's Hizbollah, which claims links to the Lebanese group of the same name, said on Tuesday it stood ready to attack Israeli and U.S. interests worldwide.

"We have 2,000 volunteers who have registered since last year," said Iranian Hizbollah's spokesman Mojtaba Bigdeli, speaking by telephone from the central seminary city of Qom.

"They have been trained and they can become fully armed. We are ready to dispatch them to every corner of the world to jeopardise Israel and America's interests. We are only waiting for the Supreme Leader's green light to take action. If America wants to ignite World War Three ... we welcome it," he said.

Iranian religious organisations have made great public show of recruiting volunteers for "martyrdom-seeking operations" in recent years, usually threatening U.S. interests in case of any attack against the Islamic Republic's nuclear programme.



But there is no record of an Iranian volunteer from these recruitment campaigns taking part in an attack.

Iran's Hizbollah (Party of God) says it is spiritually bound to Shi'ite Muslim guerrillas in Lebanon but its command structure and funding are unclear.

Despite Iranian Hizbollah's insistence that it takes orders from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, government ministries say Hizbollah does not implement official policy. Iran's government has said it hopes for a diplomatic solution to the Israeli offensive in Lebanon.

While Iran did fund and support Lebanese Hizbollah during the 1980s, Tehran says it has not contributed troops or weapons in the latest violence. Israel says Iranian armaments have been fired against it.

Oh, they have a civilian branch to be sure.

But that came after they formed up, not during the creation process.

Fandros

Just read an interesting analysis (http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001538.php) by a foreign policy wonk about Israel's actions thus far. The thesis' main points are:

*The pattern of Israel's attacks suggest that the new PM and Defense Minister (neither of whom are former field command generals) are trying to establish their bona fides as far as their willingness to protect Israel and use its military resources as necessary. Rather than opting for stealth or pinpoint attacks on Hez positions, Israel is going for dramatic big booms "in Gaza and in Beirut seem made for Fox News, CNN and the next Schwarzenegger movie."

*The Israeli response is exacty the sort of thing Hezbollah wanted (something I alluded to earlier). Israel surely knows this, so why go this route?

*The explanation:
The flamboyant, over the top reactions to attacks on Israel's military checkpoints and the abduction of soliders -- which I agree Israel must respond to -- seems to be part establishing "bona fides" by Olmert, but far more important, REMOVING from the table important policy options that the U.S. might have pursued.

Those policy options: 1) working toward a new equilibirium in Iraq that included some measure of troop (presence) withdrawal; 2) attempting to ultimately make nice with Hamas; 3) "...despite lots of tit-for-tat tensions and enormous mistrust, Iran and the U.S. were tilting towards a deal to negotiate about Iran's nuclear pretensions and other goals."
Some in Israel viewed all three of these potential policy courses for the U.S....as negative for Israel.
Thus, Israel's actions are, in part, meant to constrain US foreign policy decision making. At the very least, an intersting perspective, troubling if factual.

Israel complied with the UN resolution, and left Lebanon; Hizbollah moved to within striking distance of the Israel border as a result.

America told the Lebanese government that we would support and assist them to establish their demoracy; we have provided little in the way of assistance, and have taken more of a do as we say approach. Our current lack of support of Lebanon is a contradiction to what we have been telling folks in the Mid-east when we flout the ideals of a democratic form of government, thus reducing our credibility.

Israel has compromised our political and diplomatic efforts, as has been pointed out. We must stand with israel at this point if only because of the vast sums of money we have been funneling as "aid", and our commitment to having a free democracy in the region.

Hisbollah is a Shiite extremist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel, while Hamas is a Sunni extremist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel.

The grand poobah in Iran is espousing threats of taking the war to any and all American interests throughout the world.


Screw It! Take out the airport in Damascus, disrupting the supply of arms to the Hisbollah extremists, and let Iran know we will turn their country to rubble if they want to mess with us.

These Islamic extremists cannot be reasoned with, and the only way to effectively deal with them is with an assist to their journey to meet Mohammed.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3278026,00.html

Hizbullah preventing civilians from leaving villages in southern Lebanon

The IDF has found that Hizbullah is preventing civilians from leaving villages in southern Lebanon. Roadblocks have been set up outside some of the villages to prevent residents from leaving, while in other villages Hizbullah is preventing UN representatives from entering, who are trying to help residents leave. In two villages, exchanges of fire between residents and Hizbullah have broken out. (Hanan Greenberg)

Told ya. Human shields .. the entire country.

yep.

"martyrs" wether they like or not.

In ww2, there was a country whos military used unconventional military tactics. Namely suicide bombers (in planes). Our response to this unconventional attack was to use our own unconventional attack. If this does become "ww3" where lebanon, syria, iran and any number of other islamocratic countries, are against the US, Isreal and our allies, are we once again allowed to also use unconventional weapons / tactics?

according to my magic 8 ball... signs point to yes

Hisbollah is a Shiite extremist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel, while Hamas is a Sunni extremist group dedicated to the destruction of Israel.


The best part of that is they also want to wipe each other out...I say let them.

The best part of that is they also want to wipe each other out...I say let them.

Only problem is, as they have a mutual enemy, they will band together to fight against that mutual enemy.
They will only wipe each other out after they have "pushed Israel into the sea" and destroyed the "Great Satan".

Another spin on this is, if your traveling abroad, you must take some responsibility on your choice of vacation spot on your self:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/18/stranded.family/index.html

I feel sorry for that family but I personally wouldn't load up my wife and KIDS and go anywhere NEAR the middle f'ing EAST. I don't care if Beruit is the Paris of the middle east....find a safer spot likkkkkkkkkkkeeee DISNEY LAND.

Another spin on this is, if your traveling abroad, you must take some responsibility on your choice of vacation spot on your self:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/18/stranded.family/index.html

I feel sorry for that family but I personally wouldn't load up my wife and KIDS and go anywhere NEAR the middle f'ing EAST. I don't care if Beruit is the Paris of the middle east....find a safer spot likkkkkkkkkkkeeee DISNEY LAND.

It's not exactly a "family" vacation.

Tony Esseily is Lebanese, and Monika Esseily is American. They made the trip this summer so their 9-month-old son, T.J., could be baptized in Lebanon.

i would find a safer spot like say South central LA

The silent majority ( and actual muslim mainstream) speak out against the latest Hezbollah/Hamas actions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-07-18-militants-mideast-conflict_x.htm

Overdue...

Fandros

The silent majority ( and actual muslim mainstream) speak out against the latest Hezbollah/Hamas actions.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-07-18-militants-mideast-conflict_x.htm

Overdue...

Fandros

But unfortunately that is probably the only place it will be printed. I saw a recent article where the National Council of Churches spoke out against the Christian Right and it got very little distribution.

The moderate voices don't sell newspapers as well as don't give ratings on TV and that is most unfortunate.

Hey Rover, I said something very similar on another thread.
Scary that we agree on something.
I expect Famine, War, Pestilence, and Death to come riding in, any minute now...

Well, in this particular case, the moderate voices of Islam do nothing to stop the radical voices of Islam. In fact, the moderate voices of Islam contribute large sums of money that go to Islamic schools that help foster these radical voices.

One wonders how much of the rhetoric is for the West's consumption, and how much is heartfelt criticism of these extremists.

Newt Gingrich said it this morning, we are at the beginnings of WW3; looking at a global map of the Islamic extremists and their activities, how can anyone not see that this is a world now at war with these people? The only question left is not whether we will seek to further appease these people but how soon will we strike them.

Remove the Damascus airport, and then the highways connecting to Iraq, and then Syria can sit and stew while we deal with Iran.

I like your thinking.

The moderate voices don't sell newspapers as well as don't give ratings on TV and that is most unfortunate.Looks like attitudes are changing...

Leading Saudi Sheik Pronounces Fatwa Against Hezbollah (http://www.nysun.com/article/36373)

and from arabtimes...

ISRAEL IS ACTING IN THE INTEReSTS OF THE ARABS (http://www.arabtimesonline.com/arabtimes/opinion/view.asp?msgID=1242)

Without mentioning Hezbollah by name Saudi Arabia blamed certain “elements” inside Lebanon for the violence with Israel and said “it is necessary to make a distinction between legitimate resistance and uncalculated adventures adopted by certain elements within Lebanon without the knowledge of legal Lebanese authorities.” While reiterating its support for Palestinian and Lebanese resistance against Israeli occupation, Saudi Arabia has clearly said it is against irresponsible adventures undertaken by certain elements in the region without consulting the legal authorities putting all Arab nations at risk. The Kingdom has also said “these elements must take responsibility for their irresponsible actions and they alone should end the crisis created by them.”

Damn those elections that put Hamas and Hizbollah in political office. /grin

This is an old one...

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1150886029284&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The Saudi stand reflected the position of all the Gulf countries, which are unhappy not only with Hizbullah, but with Hamas as well. The Gulf countries are of the opinion that Hizbullah and Hamas are acting on orders from Teheran and Damascus.

That's why most Arab governments have refrained from making efforts to resolve the current crisis. As one government official in the Gulf explained: "We cannot play the role of mediators upon the request of some parties that act without taking into consideration the consequences of their actions." Similar sentiments have been reflected in a series of articles that appeared in the Arab media over the past few days. Some of the articles appear as if they had been written by Israeli government spokesmen. Ironically, the fact that Hizbullah and Hamas are now on the defensive has encouraged many Arabs to come out against the two groups in public.

Good news.

Possible blowback is escalation of wider Sunni/Shia regional conflict triggered by this and a civil war in Iraq.

Lots more in NYTimes today .. no time to read it all, but I caught this...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/20/world/middleeast/20shiites.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

A growing number of Iraqi officials have stepped forward in recent days to condemn Israel. On Sunday, in a rare show of unity, the 275-member Parliament issued a statement calling the Israeli strikes an act of “criminal aggression.” The militant Shiite cleric Moktada al-Sadr, whose followers play a crucial role in the government, said last Friday that Iraqis would not “sit by with folded hands” while the violence in Lebanon raged. Mr. Sadr commands a powerful militia, the Mahdi Army.

So far, the most prominent Shiite cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, has remained silent. But another Shiite cleric, Ayatollah Ahmad al-Husseini al-Baghdadi, of Najaf, in an Internet posting on Wednesday accused the “international arrogant forces, especially America” of igniting conflict between Shiite and Sunni Arabs in Iraq and provoking Israel to attack the Palestinian territories and Lebanon. The ayatollah has relatives in Lebanon.

/sigh

I don't like it when Sistani is silent. And for pete's sake, someone put a bullet into Sadr's head please.

http://www.theadvertiser.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,19866737%255E910,00.html

Not gonna be pretty when they invade Leb I think...

Fandros

A good three-page read if you have the time...

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-2281184_1,00.html

It's not only ordinary Iranians who are worried about what the Middle East explosion means for Iran. Even as state infomercials order Iranians to boycott soft drinks, officials in Tehran--pragmatists and conservatives alike--concur that the conflict is bad news for the Iranian regime because it exacerbates the West's image of Tehran as a regional troublemaker.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1218048,00.html?cnn=yes

Some good Iranians in the mix!

I realize he's just pandering, but gah. Honest John...

"If I was president, this wouldn't have happened," said Kerry during a noon stop at Honest John's bar and grill

We sure dodged a bullet last election.

I was watching CNN and Chritiane Ammanpore (sp) is reporting from Northern Isreal.... she must have said the Isreali soldiers are "putting on their war paint" "are in there war paint" "are heading into battle with their war paint" 10 times or more...

I know I have been out for a while but when I was in the service we called it "camoflage".... I get out and they start calling it something really cool :(

We sure dodged a bullet last election.

And into a knife.

No good option in 2004, Kerry would have sucked, maybe more than Bush, but in a totally different, probably Carter-esque way

I was watching CNN and Chritiane Ammanpore (sp) is reporting from Northern Isreal.... she must have said the Isreali soldiers are "putting on their war paint" "are in there war paint" "are heading into battle with their war paint" 10 times or more...

What a stupid bitch. I guess that is her Oh-So-Erudite way of making a connection between Israelis and savage Indians, going on the "warpath"
She is one of the ones that conservatives have a point about, she is constantly trying to shape her language and reporting to influence public opinion. Probably comes from not being an American, she doesnt understand we dont like having our minds made up for us.

We sure dodged a bullet last election.
Consequently, a lot of people have had to dodge bullets since.

We sure dodged a bullet last election.

Thats right, we held our ground and got slammed by artillery. Hey, we can all follow the lead of Dick Cheney and as he say's, the war in the middle east is enough of a reason to keep the republicans in power.

I say to the likes of Hezbollah...you want a war...bring it on....we've got Dick on our side and you'll never lick our Dick!

Sorry, all this nostolgia over the last elections made me think of this...

http://www.jibjab.com/JokeBox/JokeBox_JJOrig.aspx?movieid=65

Consequently, a lot of people have had to dodge bullets since.

Sorry, but as if they wouldn't have had to otherwise?

Hard to prove otherwise but I'm pretty confident this conflict was coming, whether in Iraq or abroad.

Fandros

Hard to prove otherwise but I'm pretty confident this conflict was coming, whether in Iraq or abroad.Hard to prove hell.

This conflict in its current form has been going on for decades. The only reason we saw relative "peace" on the Israeli front the past few years was because we took out Saddam.

For people to even hint that this conflict suddenly started because we invaded Iraq or because we're in a quagmire in Iraq or Bush can't do diplomacy blah blah blah shows a serious lack of reality.

Hard to prove hell.

This conflict in its current form has been going on for decades. The only reason we saw relative "peace" on the Israeli front the past few years was because we took out Saddam.

For people to even hint that this conflict suddenly started because we invaded Iraq or because we're in a quagmire in Iraq or Bush can't do diplomacy blah blah blah shows a serious lack of reality.

I think its pretty well agreed upon across the world that taking out Saddam has emboldened Iran and opened the doors for a more active roll in that region by Iran.

Taking out Saddam hasn't brought any peace to the region, in fact it has heated things up, I think you'll find that is pretty much agreed upon by the world.

Regardless if one despises Bush/Cheney or worships the ground they walk on it was a huge error in judgement on their part to invade Iraq, that is a fact and no amount of debate will change the facts. They either didn't foresee the blowback from it or they just chose to ignore it but either way it has opened the door for alot of power hungry groups who are either as dangerous as Saddam was perceived to be or much more dangerous to the stability of the world than Saddam ever was.

I think its pretty well agreed upon across the world that taking out Saddam has emboldened Iran and opened the doors for a more active roll in that region by Iran.

Taking out Saddam hasn't brought any peace to the region, in fact it has heated things up, I think you'll find that is pretty much agreed upon by the world.

Regardless if one despises Bush/Cheney or worships the ground they walk on it was a huge error in judgement on their part to invade Iraq, that is a fact and no amount of debate will change the facts. They either didn't foresee the blowback from it or they just chose to ignore it but either way it has opened the door for alot of power hungry groups who are either as dangerous as Saddam was perceived to be or much more dangerous to the stability of the world than Saddam ever was.

LMAO it's hardly fact nor agreed upon by the world Rover. The only ones that "know for a fact" are those in league with Nostradamus or perhaps your local gypsy seer.

I'm up in the air myself, I firmly believe it had to be done and actually should've been done 10 years prior, but there are no such facts.

lmao man you make me laugh.

Fandros

I think its pretty well agreed upon across the world that taking out Saddam has emboldened Iran and opened the doors for a more active roll in that region by Iran.Yup.

And taking out Saddam has also allowed other powerhouses in the region (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, ...) to actively engage Iran as well... instead of uniting as Muslims against the evil Zionist regime and the great Satan, they're condemning Iran on the world stage.

Please Rover open your eyes. Get past your lick Dick and Bush lapdog comments to see something truly remarkable. This month has seen such a shift in the middle east I didn't think was ever possible.

I've linked to at least 2 articles here recently that spoke of how Suadi Arabia and Egypt and other middle eastern countries have called Hizbollah to task. This occurred at the Arab League.... Imagine that. I consortium of arab countries got together and managed to not spew hatred and death down on the zionists... but instead defended their response and called to task the bastards causing trouble (hizbollah and Hamas.)

Simply unheard of, ever. If you can't see this as good progress, you're blind man.

/nods my thoughts exactly Akipt. I think it has incredible potential even to the point of nearly impossible for all of this to simply "fall" this way.

But you won't convince Rover or those that hate on Bush and Co. I might question but I'm starting to wonder just what was being put into motion behind the scenes.

Fandros Finglaflin

I agree that it is a very good thing that Saudi Arabia and others are coming out against Hezbollah, it is about time.

I doubt very much that any of that was by design on the Bush/Cheney side as much as it wasn't by design on the Hezbollah side.

Hopefully after all is said and done things will work out and we can all sit back and say WOW!

Progress?

Fuck.. Are you kidding me? Oh, gee, the Arabs and the Persians dont like each other.. Seriously? Who woulda thunk it.

There is no progress here.

The Saudis are acting against Iran because Iraq being up for grabs (and it is up for grabs) has opened the very real and very dangerous reality of the Shia Crescent becoming reality

http://op-for.com/Shia_Crescent.jpeg


Hizbollah has been called the "Two Front Teeth" of the Iranian Crescent. Thats why they have never, and will never disarm.
Peace because the Sunnis are speaking out against Iran? HA!
Lets say that Israel fell, Hizbollah and Hamas would be killing each other in the streets of Tel Aviv the very next day.

Iraq was a mistake. A geopolitical blunder of epic proportions. And STILL, I think if could have worked. But you had a bunch of shit heads who thought it could be done on the cheap. Iraq required a collossal effort that combined the Marshall Plan with FDRs New Deal. It would have been expensive and hard, but it would have worked. Instead we Donny Rums and The K(BR)Mart "Greeted As Liberators" Special.

The whole REASON that we have given Israel such a blank check is to attempt the knock back the tremendous momentum that Iran has in establishing this new Persian Empire.

Oh, yea.. while this is going on, guess what Iranian scientists are feverishly working on...
And Saudi scientists..
And Egyptian scientists..


Progress my ass... just another future war.

Oh I agree there L2, we should've taken their oil sold it and totally refinanced a very FDR like set of projects in Iraq.

Hard to rail against the west when you yourself see that it's no so evil living in it's lap.

Fandros

'Oh, yea.. while this is going on, guess what Iranian scientists are feverishly working on...
And Saudi scientists..
And Egyptian scientists..'

- A cure for those weird jelly things on the bottom of my testicals?

Oh, wait...

I have a cure for you Halo, don't dip your testicles into cans of SPAM.

Wow, now that's a /derail!

Yes yes, it's all Bush's fault.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2000/40-231000.html

RUSSIA'S IVANOV IN TEHRAN AMIDST NUCLEAR DEAL UPROAR. Russian Federation Security Council Secretary Sergei Ivanov arrived in Tehran on 17 October to participate in discussions regarding Central Asian security and terrorism emanating from Afghanistan. (While there, Ivanov linked violence in the West Bank with the Taliban, "RFE/RL Newsline" reported on 16 October.) Moscow's official ITAR-TASS news agency reported that economic issues would be the focus of the discussions, particularly problems with the Bushehr nuclear power plant.

Ivanov's Iranian counterpart, Hassan Rohani, said that ties between Iran and Russia are not directed against any other country. Rohani also emphasized that Russia and Iran must cooperate in "defending the oppressed Palestinian nation and condemning the Zionist regime's crimes," IRNA reported. Ivanov delivered an invitation from President Vladimir Putin for President Mohammad Khatami to visit Russia. Ivanov told Rohani that Russia's relations with Iran will not be influenced by a third party.

Ivanov's visit to Tehran came in the midst of reports that the U.S. government had agreed not to put sanctions on Moscow for sending arms to Iran in exchange for Russian promises that it would eventually stop. According to reports in the American press, former Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin wrote a letter to U.S. Vice President Al Gore in which Gore was asked to withhold information from Congress about Russian nuclear deals with Iran, the "Washington Times" reported on 17 October. That paper suggested that this would appear to violate the Nuclear Non-proliferation Act, which requires the White House to keep Congress informed about such transactions. Moreover, a classified analysis accompanying the letter warned that such transactions could lead to Iran's acquisition of a nuclear weapons capability.

When Khatami met with Ivanov on 18 October, he said that Iran's nuclear cooperation with Russia is peaceful and Iran has a right to use nuclear technology.

Russia is to Iran as we are to Saudi Arabia. Its that simple. Pick a side: Sunni or Shia.

There is progress in Iraq, great progress. A civil war in Iraq means that it is no longer a war against the US but Iraqi vs Iraqi instead.


Now thats some great strategy on the part of Bush/Cheney.

Fuck.. Are you kidding me? Oh, gee, the Arabs and the Persians dont like each other.. Seriously? Who woulda thunk it.

Russia is to Iran as we are to Saudi Arabia. Its that simple. Pick a side: Sunni or Shia.I'm not saying otherwise.

I am also very aware of the fact that Shia, Sunni, Druze, Christians, Baathists, Persians, Indians, Semites, Communists, Conservatives, Capitalists, Colonialists, Humanists, and apparently even Nobel Peace Prize winners can barely withhold their true feelings before wanting to do violence on one or more of the other groups.

All the pretty little copy pasted maps on the internet that you can find cannot mask the fact I see a dramatic shift in our interests there. Yes they all hate each other. Yes they all pretty much want to kill each other. But at least at the moment they're not all wanting to kill us or our allies, as they have vehemently wanted to do not long ago.

And if you think a great socialist's wet dream experiment would have solved all of Iraq's problems, you're dillusional.

Could have things been done better? Obviously. Not a war in the entire history of mankind has gone by without some wanker elitest saying "I could have done it better."

Could have things been done better? Obviously. Not a war in the entire history of mankind has gone by without some wanker elitest saying "I could have done it better."

Do you mean the wanker elitist US Army Generals, US Marine Generals, US Air Force Generals and Navy admirals who said that about the strategy we used in Vietnam or the ones who said that about Iraq?

Did I stutter?

Saddam provided a buffer between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Saddam was keeping Sunni's in the power position which was what the Saudi's wanted; his expansionist ambitions and demonstrated willingness to try to take what he wanted (Kuwait) provided the Saudi's sufficient reason to ally themselves with the west in the two Iraq invasions.

A more thoughtful study of the religious foundations of the area prior to an invasion may have allowed for better planning, including working with a wider group of potential successors to Saddam. This may have had some impact on the current violent insurgency, or maybe not.

Iran is now stepping in to the void left by Saddam's defeat, and unfortunately for many in the region, Iran is predominantly Shia. This is why the Arab consortium is not supporting Iran, because they are predominantly Sunni, and can see the potential conflicts should Iran be allowed to grow too powerful; Hezbollah provides Iran an extension of their power.

YES, I am an outspoken Bush/Cheney despiser, but I am not wringing my hands over the war being a mistake. I am saying that the war was prosecuted without sufficient planning and research into the consequences and how to effectively deal with them. Taking out Saddam was going to happen during the Bush presidency. Bush just screwed the pooch using the 9/11 attack as justification, and rushing the invasion without doing his homework.

The Middle East is not like the West, where we live so much in the moment and want instant gratification. Do not be too hasty making assumptions about the longevity of the attitudes that may be expressed today, as they may be fleeting, or used to mask other intents. Let's wait and see how things are looking in December, and in 2007, and 2008, and then maybe we will have enough to make reasoned judgements on whether any of this was good or bad or really made no difference in the big picture.

We need not point to criminal heads of state or centuries old ethnic conflicts to find the source of the current trouble. The reason for this spate of violence is the same as that for all the terrible events of recent years: gays (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51128).

Homosexuality: the most powerful force in Creation

See there are nuts everywhere.

We need not point to criminal heads of state or centuries old ethnic conflicts to find the source of the current trouble. The reason for this spate of violence is the same as that for all the terrible events of recent years: gays (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51128).

Homosexuality: the most powerful force in Creation

I wonder if there will be folks in the congregation now calling for a full investigation of Reverend Pat's bloodlines.:D

Akipt you dont get the dynamic of the middle east.

The "socialists wet dream" is already being lived out there, except the benefactor isnt the government, it is organized religion. From free schooling in the madrassas to the every day things the poor dont get from their corrupt, inefficent governments.

The need is to break the connection between the all encompassing religious authority and the individual. How do you think a suicide bomber comes about? Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Sadr, whoever... pays for everything for the family, takes care of them, watches out for them.. In return the obligations are unspoken, but clear.

There has to be an stage between the welfare of the Mosque and the free market. You cant just wave your hand magically and "voila... behold the wonders of Adam Smith... bootstraps kids, bootstraps." This is one of the core reasons why the Bush plan failed in Iraq, a failure of ideology.
The loyalty of the Iraqi (or any Arab/Persian really) breaks down as such...
Family
Tribe
Sect
religion
nationality
country.

We are appealling to Iraqis on the lowest level of their loyalty. No wonder they arent listening.
Israelis know this. Why do you think that Israelis bulldoze houses? Those are the houses of the families of suicide bombers. The message is clear. "You may be in heaven with 64 Virgins, but your family is going to be suffering here on earth." This is the right idea, but the wrong approach, but really, israelis have no other option at this point.

For Iraq to work the New Deal type program we needed was to get the entire nation working. Get men unemployed or with nothing to do admist the chaos and get them building their own infrastructure. It doesnt matter what they would be doing.. anything.. build a fucking dam in the desert. It doesnt matter.
What WOULD have been important is that those young men would have been earning money. They would be able to provide for their families without the help of the Mosque. Send that money home.. Work hard.
Then their loyalities would have changed. The pull of the radical would have been less as the country went about working and staying busy.

Instead.. we dismissed the army, dismantled the government then stood around for 24 months with our thumbs up our asses.. Meanwhile these people needed food and help and assistance... and who was there... the Mosque, with love, from Iran.

Akipt you dont get the dynamic of the middle east.It's all about face L2 and you would have shamed them for generations.

"haha, look at Akmed building his worthless damn in the desert!"

Instead.. we dismissed the army, dismantled the government then stood around for 24 months with our thumbs up our asses..Officially we disbanded the army but I think it pretty much disbanded itself without much effort on our part. I'll give you the first year we botched it. Paul Bremer's 'Coalition Provisional Authority' should have existed for two months at most (if at all), instead of the year it took to start building a real government.

Frankly I don't think any amount of planning or more understanding would have resolved the situation much better than it already is playing out. More troops? Defaced and humiliated Iraqis even more as likely would have happened. More money for reconstruction? Give me a break. One of the consistent gotchas by Democrats is the "cost of Iraq" and how its killing our budget. It doesn't matter what happens, the other side will bitch about something... and they could have done oh so much better.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5215366.stm


- Jesus. Those poor Jews can't get a break, eh.

- Jesus. Those poor Jews can't get a break, eh.

Is that meant to be ironic?

It's all about face L2 and you would have shamed them for generations.

Oh please, they said that about the Japanese, but look what a properly done occupation/reconstruction can accomplish.

Were the men of the United States in the 1930s feckless cowards? My great grandfather was one of the proudest men you would have ever met. A northern Italian brickmason who lived and breathed old school pride... But he went with the CCC, along with Millions of other American men, and worked cutting down trees at a lumberjack camp in Northern Maine. And he sent every penny he earned home to his family, and they survived.
I dont care who you are, its about family. Putting food on the table is the universal motivation.
Do you even understand the simplest thing? What shames a man more? Working on a superfluous building project and earning a days pay for a days work, or being unemployed and not being able to provide for those who depend on you?
I would bet that the vast majority of Iraqi men would have jumped at the chance to work on some of those projects rather than be at the mercy of the charity of mosque, going there hat and in hand for charity.
Thats where is starts... economic independence, from there you can start building a society.

Btw..

The beat goe$ on (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/22/world/middleeast/22military.html?ex=1311220800&en=f256f1d08772835d&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss)....

The munitions that the United States is sending to Israel are part of a multimillion-dollar arms sale package approved last year that Israel is able to draw on as needed, the officials said. But Israel’s request for expedited delivery of the satellite and laser-guided bombs was described as unusual by some military officers, and as an indication that Israel still had a long list of targets in Lebanon to strike.

The Bush administration announced Thursday a military equipment sale to Saudi Arabia, worth more than $6 billion, a move that may in part have been aimed at deflecting inevitable Arab government anger at the decision to supply Israel with munitions in the event that effort became public.

Cease Fire? Not with all this profit to be made!

L2 brings up two salient points, 1) that our disaster capitalism policies, which made billions for large corporate interests, aggressively unemployed an estimated 1.5 million Iraqis from which various resistance/insurgency groups had ample recruiting pools.

And 2) Bush's real political base couldn't be happier about war in the Middle East, since those aid packages never even leave US banks. They get transfered directly from the public debt (what you and I and our children will eventually have to pay off) directly into the coffers of Raytheon, Lockheed, Halliburton, et al, to send planes and bombs and $5000 screwdrivers to Israel and Al Saud. Doesn't that warm the cockles of your anti-communist heart?!

If Iraqi men aren't willing to build a dam in the desert then why the hell do we keep hearing stories about 30 men dying in one car bomb because the bomber pulled up and started offering jobs?

The thing that pisses me off the most is not that we are in Iraq, but that now, when the real war starts, are we ready? Hell no. Our troops are demoralized, out weapons caches are low, we are burned out militarily. When Syria starts defending Israel and then Iran gets involved, are our troops suddenly going to get rejuvenated to cross the border into Iran? Hardly. And what happens when the first nuke goes off? I am pretty sure it won't be Israel's doing. Btw, did anyone see the report about Iranian officials being present at the recent n Korea missle test?

Frankly I don't think any amount of planning or more understanding would have resolved the situation much better than it already is playing out. More troops? Defaced and humiliated Iraqis even more as likely would have happened. More money for reconstruction? Give me a break. One of the consistent gotchas by Democrats is the "cost of Iraq" and how its killing our budget. It doesn't matter what happens, the other side will bitch about something... and they could have done oh so much better.

Sad to say, Akipt,but this post has shown better than any others of your's why you are unable to debate issues; you do not see the issues, but instead see Democrats vs. Republicans. This is not an issue of political parties but is an issue of our leaders fucking up by not doing an adequate job of preparing for this war.

You could take any number of high school students who paid attention in class that could have explained to Bush the potential crises that would arise in an invasion of a Moslem country by Christians; it has been mentioned several times that his own advisors have made mention of some of these ideas, only to be disregarded. Also disregarded was the suggestion that the invasion and subsequent occupation would take many more troops than what was being called for by Bush and his commanding general; more troops could have helped secure the borders against the fighters entering from Syrian, Jordanian and Iranian soil, as well as protecting infrastructure and preventing the looting and destruction subsequent to our "success".

To say that no amount of planning could have resulted in a better outcome is to admit a blind faith in your leader, which is pretty much what we are facing in our fight against the insurgents; do not question, but only obey and believe, and you will get to paradise and your virgins.

We put a bureaucrat in charge in Paul Bremer, and he plainly screwed-up on a number of fronts, from the disbanding of the military (yes, Akipt, we did that) to not providing sufficient protection to the electrical facilities, and oil fields and pipelines. It provides a good lesson for future conflicts to keep the military and civilian elements separate, to minimize fuck-ups.

But, you continue to miss the most critical of elements in this debate, and that is the religious conflict between Christianity and Islamic faiths; that history goes back tens of generations, and is not easily dismissed by a people who measure time since the last Crusade. A simple visit to a public library could have given Bush much needed knowledge regarding our foes in the Middle East, but sadly only one member of the Bush family seems to enjoy library privileges.

Oh please, they said that about the Japanese, but look what a properly done occupation/reconstruction can accomplish.You just likened post-war Japan with post-war Iraq? lmao. We could only wish Iraq was an isolated island with the single most submissive culture and united people on the planet. Took them 8 years to get their government off the ground too. By this 'properly done' reconstruction goal, we're 4 years ahead of schedule. Bravo the conquering occupational imperialists!

Sad to say, Akipt,but this post has shown better than any others of your's why you are unable to debate issues; you do not see the issues, but instead see Democrats vs. Republicans. Nice try Byl, but you can't invalidate everything I've argued about on this board because I made an obvious statement about the general polarization of our international policies. Every single foreign action by Bush has been made a political debate, left/right liberal/conservative Dem/Repub whatever have done it. So much for the 'at the waters edge' policy.

To say that no amount of planning could have resulted in a better outcome...Insert a 'more' planning in my previous post. We both can argue about whether it was enough or right or wrong, but come on Byl, you know I know there was planning done beforehand.

But, you continue to miss the most critical of elements in this debate, and that is the religious conflict between Christianity and Islamic faiths; that history goes back tens of generations, and is not easily dismissed by a people who measure time since the last Crusade. Go back a few posts Byl, I did acknowledge that and more. And if you think it's only about Christians versus Muslims, you're missing the big picture.

A simple visit to a public library could have given Bush much needed knowledge regarding our foes in the Middle East, but sadly only one member of the Bush family seems to enjoy library privileges.Complete arrogance on your part.. or ignorance. I'll assume ignorance. If what I've read and heard is true, I dare say that George W Bush has read more historical and autobiographical books than you, me, and Ll combined.

Hell, people could probably realistically accuse Bush of being an out-of-touch intellectual, but that wouldn't play with the politics of Bush being the so-called moron.

If what I've read and heard is true, I dare say that George W Bush has read more historical and autobiographical books than you, me, and Ll combined.

And Kim Jong Il hit 11 hole in ones his first round of golf, if what you've heard is true.

Touché

And before anyone comments, no I wasn't comparing GW with Kim Jong Il.

You just likened post-war Japan with post-war Iraq?

You said everything was about "saving face".. has there ever been a civilization more consumed with "saving face" than the Japanese?

Yea, the Japanese were submissive.. because we came in with overwhelming force and power. Yet despite 2 Nukes and the fire bombing of 50% of the entire population of the Japanese citizenry, resulting in 200,000 deaths and the complete and utter defeat of a the people of country who thrown themselves entirely into the war, even willing to die to last man, we still needed 400,000 troops stationed there.

Yet Iraq? We think 150,000 troops, in as you pointed out, a much more difficult, hostile and complicated area, is sufficient? Ill give you an assist on that point, because you helped me make it.

but come on Byl, you know I know there was planning done beforehand.

Yea, by Donald Rumsfeld, who advocated for a grand total of 60,000 troops for the invasion. History is going to be very unkind to this man.

Actually L2 I don't think he was referring to the Japanese being submissive after we defeated them as much as he was referring to the culture having a strong submissive element.

By that I mean they give up far more easily personal comfort and gain for the greater good than we do in the West ( or ME for that matter).

The culture is so vastly different from the Iraqi culture as to really forbid the comparrision you were attempting to make.

Fandros

They didnt seem to be submissive at Okinawa...

No, because at that time their Emperor had decreed we were to be destroyed at any costs.

They follow their leader to the letter, the same can not be said of the Iraqi's.

Hence the comparrison is moot.

Fandros

No, because at that time their Emperor had decreed we were to be destroyed at any costs.

They follow their leader to the letter, the same can not be said of the Iraqi's.

Hence the comparrison is moot.

Fandros

Is it?

http://www.mona-lisa.org/muqtada-al-sadr.jpg

Breaking that connection is the critical element.. we broke it with the Emperor as we need to break it with Shia in Iraq.

Still moot because of the variety of factions in Iraq imho.

In Japan they all followed one Emperor( their God personified ) while in Iraq so many follow so many different leaders.

Even the Shia have various factions inside their own religions.

Fandros

I dont think you are following my point..

Yes they have different leaders, many from religious authority. Mostly this is because of the failure of Saddams government. But that linkage to authority and the debt incurred are a major souce of the problems in Iraq today. The Death Squads roaming the streets of Baghdad are not spontaneous mobs arising out of nowhere.
They are recruited, equipped and sent out by people to who they owe alliegence to.

Wether is be Al-Sadr or someone else, its the same thing. Create a thriving middle class by using the government as a spring board to economic development, ala FDRs New Deal.
Middle Class people by and large around the world are not interested in Martyrdom or getting quickly to the afterlife. Its is the poor and disinfranchised that strap bombs to their chests. Middle Class people making money are far too interested in the Here and Now, because its working for them.

Oh, I already agreed to that point earlier in this thread L2.

Sadly any attempts to rebuild infrastructure or give succor and aid to the populace is promptly shut down by the self same leaders of the Death Squads.

FDR type programs wouldn't work because it would take power away from the religious leaders. They know the only way to maintain their base is to keep the populace unlearned, anchorless and without hope.

You'd almost have to find a way to shut them out of the loop before you could rebuild the populace up.

Saddam did this by fear and genocide. Tactics we can't use if we're to create a lasting change.

Fandros

Not entirely true Fandros...

One of the reasons why Iraq was so attractive to the Neo Con was the presence of a large Sunni secular middle class. This was a gold mine.. Saudi Arabia with the most significant Sunni population was overrun by the radical Wahhabist Sunni sect.
And why had Wahhabism not taken hold in Iraq? Not because of the brutality of Saddamn, the Sunnis were the favored class. They held the power, they had economic opportunity and a degree of Freedom. They had no need for radical religion.

The Shia on the other hand, were repressed. The mosques that Saddam permitted were their only refuge.

And what do we do? We remove the support that made the Sunni so secular and middle class, and replace it with nothing. Remove all baathists from positions in the government, take away their livelyhoods and throw them into the position of a minority facing the rule of a hostile majority..
And for the Shia, we keep them beholden to the mosques, now openly influenced and supported by Iran, who secretly had been supporting them and building close ties for years..

Big government programs was the only way to bring about real change and loyalty to the government and marginalize the influence of radical clerics.

Is it?

http://www.mona-lisa.org/muqtada-al-sadr.jpg

Breaking that connection is the critical element.. we broke it with the Emperor as we need to break it with Shia in Iraq.

Maybe if we introduce him to a good dentist, he'll become our friend....

could buy him a Mach III and a ballcap too.

I think using the term middleclass to describe the caste positions the Sunni held is a huge misnomer.

They weren't your working class, blue collar, average joes. They held a position of power and utterly ridgid control over the Shia's.

The systems you describe did indeed help the lower and middle classes L2. It's not like we went over there and removed average folks like myself and you from the system L2. We took out a class of tyrannical religion oriented power mongers. Ones who could stone a Shia to death based on said power.

It was corrupt, that's rarely denied, and restrictive and wouldn't benifit from a FDR style reform without removing the tyrant caste.

Fandros

When talking about the Sunni minority, you are talking about 20% of the total population of Iraq. Yes, while some were part of the oppressive appartus of the Saddam regime, most of them led normal middle class lives. As a result of this, many of them had educational opportunities and skilled training that the Shia population never had access to.

Instead of bringing the Shia up to the level of the Sunni, what we did was simply to bring the Sunni down to the level of the Shia.

The plot thickens............Someone said nobody cares about Lebanon (Halo I believe) but what he fails to see is everyone has interests in Israels destruction or success. Israeli general states....expect a "few" more weeks of combat. They are going to be going at it for many more "years" more like it. Insurgency > all.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/27/mideast.main/index.html

Iran is sending in volunteers through Turkey and then through Syria to combat the Israelis. Of course this isn't "government sponsored," but you can't pee there without the government knowing it. The longer this goes on, the more likely it is to blow up further, obviously.

I sure hope Israel can complete their targetted mission sooner rather than later.

I don't get it.
Kidnap two soldiers and they invade.
Blow up 4 UN soldiers and it's "whoops".

What is hard to understand about a violation of sovereign territory by a foreign power whose set goal is the destruction of the country causing the outbreak of hostilities?

Why does Hezbollah exist Halo?

Either Lebanon cant, or wont, do anything about Hezbollah. So what are Israels choices? You tell me? Give more land? Talk? Pray?

/nods Fandros for running with the Iraq stuff.

I want to make this a quick post but I know it's going to be much longer than I want.. and I'm not going to have the time to reply to any comments on this.

[haha, long-assed post sorry.]

So...

This was a hugely complicated project because it was so hugely complicated before we even went in. Only on the most basic level can Iraq be compared to WW2's Japan or Germany. From Iraq's own internal divisions to the entire plethora of foreign interests ranging from Al-quida (yes they had interests and a presense there), Iranian, regional religious sects, and other surrounding Middle Eastern countries' own interests, there was and still exists a web and tangle of such complexity that this simple quick point of mine turned into a paragraph. And I still didn't list a twentieth of what's going on there.

Taking out Saddam smashed and cut that tangled web causing a frenzy we're still seeing unravel to this day. I want to say this was a house of cards before we went in, but that gives a wrong impression. For lack of a better analogy (since I hate them anyway) I'll go with it, but Iraq and the region has not been stable in a very long time, if ever.

Therefore, there was no single solution that would have solved all the problems in Iraq post invasion. It required an entire array of assets, money, tools, expertise, and just plain old luck. Mistakes happened. Murphey's law knows where to go to get the most attention. Anything this huge and complicated required mistakes to happen. Some were slow to be fixed, many many others were fixed and you didn't even have to read about this in NYTimes beforehand.

This is the single most frustrating thing to read, over and over again on this board and in editorials: If only we had done x all the problems would be solved. X may even be the right thing to do, but you're not living in reality if you think it's that easy.

This New Deal that is discussed here so proudly as the cure-all was attempted and for the most part is still ongoing. You can argue about details, but billions and billions of dollars went into Iraq immediately after the invasion. Heck, the money started rolling into Iraq before we even reached Baghdad.

Ok, send more money, make more jobs! you say. Build more damns! Get them doing something! you say. Ok, I can see the merit in that. Sounds like a damned good idea to me. Let's do it...

Uh, reality sets in though...

My memory sucks. Ask my wife she'll tell you. But wtf? How much hand-wringing and bellyaching was done because Halliburton, Bechtel et al was getting all that money to 'run with it' to make stuff happen? Am I the only one that remembers that? Hello?

Ok. Halliburton is out of the question because God forbid a Republican president use them the same way the last Democrat president did. Let's give all the money to the former state run agencies of Iraq to rebuild their own infrastructure.

... "uh, anyone seen Akmed lately? He said he was going to the bank and would be right back..."

Let's admit to ourselves something... Money corrupts. It always has and always will. Want to solve a problem with money? Take a clue from post-Katrina recovery. It's NOT working... and it didn't work in Iraq as well as it should have either.

And even though contractors were stashing hundreds of thousands of dollars into lockers and several of our soldiers were gambling away the hand-out money, they still haven't spent a third of all those billions meant for the reconstruction.

Yes, throwing people into the middle of chaos and telling them to pull themselves up by their bootstraps won't work. But neither would giving them millions of dollars solve their problem either. As all things political, the solution is usually somewhere in the middle.

I'm at a limit of my direct knowledge on nation building. I know when I'm ignorant, but I've read several editorials on how cash infusions into Haiti and other countries we've done experiments on have gone to waste... or even made the situations worse. I highly suspect that there were advisors who gleened such knowledge and applied it to Iraq. Be my guest to argue whether that was right or wrong, but please don't be so arrogant to think that you've got the only solution and the other guy is a brain dead moron who hasn't even read a book.

Rover constantly mentions all the advisors who told Bush or told Rumsfeld this or that and they had their feelings hurt when they didn't get their way. Some of those people go one to make multi-million dollar book deals. I don't have any pity for them. I can only hope Bushco would target me for my inane ideas.

Here's some news though: on any given multi-billion dollar project there are hundreds of thousands of people, all with personal ideas and goals for what needs to happen to make the project a success. I imagine this country has a pool of the most intelligent and good hearted people in the world's history working for it right now...from all walks of life... but some of those people are invariably not going to get their way because not everyone can be right.

Anyway, it came down to this: give or not to give billions of dollars for Iraq's reconstruction. I think we ended up somewhere closer on the giving billions of dollars side...

So that's only ONE hurdle of many many more. Next... Where are you going to get this additional money? You think Congress would hand out more money to Iraq? Ain't no way... politics of war and the domestic front. How many Demo (and Repub) congress talking heads I see on TV bitching about the cost of Iraq to their pork barrel errr their constituency's domestic budget? Many... even here there're people saying that the Iraq war is costing too much.

The devil is in the details. Spending billions more for Iraq's New Deal sounds good, but I don't see that it would have made much difference. Post-Katrina reconstruction isn't having much success... for some different reasons entirely probably, but many are shared. Is there a better way? Maybe, but maybe there's just a limit to the amount of reconstruction a people can go through. Fatigue, corruption, .... whatever, millions of threads in the whys and the why nots and its beyond me.

People here often accuse me of being a Bush lapdog because I rarely if ever make negative comments about what he does. I do disagree with him on a number of things but there's enough negative energy directed towards Bush on this board already, you don't need to hear mine.

To end this too long post, I'm not saying I have any answers. I'm simply saying there's no one simple solution to this or any other problem facing this country or world.

And admitting that would never get a politician elected. Yet we have to elect people who try to tell us they have all the answers. Utter nonsense.

Yet another problem of the puzzle...

Good post Akipt.


http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2242357

OoOo the mighty are coming, the mighty are coming.

If I was a civilian in Lebanon I'd be for getting the hell out. They are the best weapons/shields against Israeli forces.

Without them, Hezbollah ...Hamas and bin Laden's yuck yucks would be done.

Forces of God indeed.

Fandros

Well, I take some small comfort in Akipt's post....

As badly as Halliburton has screwed up in Iraq and in the post-Katrina reconstruction (and I won't even go into their corrupt billing practices) maybe, just maybe, they also screwed up in their work in Iran, and whatever jobs they performed there might also be just as fucked up.:rolleyes:

If I was a civilian in Lebanon I'd be for getting the hell out. They are the best weapons/shields against Israeli forces.


Hezbollah is preventing them from leaving the villages. But hey, they are tough guys who fight for the Muslims in the villages...how else will the villagers know who is fighting for them if they leave?

Let me just clarify my position concerning when I talk about "New Deal" type programs...

What I am primarily talking about is how Roosevelt recognized the importance of getting unemployed men off the streets and working.. being productive. Im not talking about setting up a cradle to the grave welfare system. Im talking about redirecting the energy of a population to useful means, rather than sitting around on street grousing and being radicalized.

Hezbollah is preventing them from leaving the villages. But hey, they are tough guys who fight for the Muslims in the villages...how else will the villagers know who is fighting for them if they leave?

exactly.. then you get morons like this:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/E2EBD522-29A9-4798-9DDD-0483DA36B73F.htm

Not once in the article does she mention Hezbollah.

On the Eve of Madness

Thomas Friedman.




Over Turkish coffee the other morning, I picked up a copy of The Syria Times, the local English-language paper, and my eye immediately went to a small box at the top of the front page. It said, “The Middle East on the Eve of Modernity ... P. 5.”

I thought: What a perfect way to describe the Middle East today — going back to some pre-modern era. Alas, The Syria Times was not trying to be ironic. It turned out the headline was the title of a book about Aleppo in the 18th century. But had it been a news headline it would have been apt.

Condoleezza Rice must have been severely jet-lagged when she said that what’s going on in Lebanon and Iraq today were the “birth pangs of a new Middle East.” Oh, I wish it were so. What we are actually seeing are the rebirth pangs of the old Middle East, only fueled now by oil and more destructive weaponry.

Some of the most primordial, tribal passions, which always lurk beneath the surface here — Sunnis versus Shiites, Jews versus Muslims, Lebanese versus Syrians — but are usually held in check by modern states or bonds of civilization, are exploding to the top.

There is nothing that you can’t do to someone in the Middle East today, and there is no leader or movement — no Nelson Mandela and no million-mom march — coming out of this region, or into this region, to put a stop to the madness.

And I mean madness. We’ve seen Sunni Muslims in Iraq suicide-bomb a Shiite mosque on Ramadan; we’ve seen Shiite militiamen torture Sunnis in Iraq by drilling holes in their heads with power tools; we’ve seen Jordanian Islamist parliamentarians mourning the terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, even though he once blew up a Jordanian wedding; we’ve seen hundreds of Palestinian suicide bombings of Israeli cafes and buses; and we’ve seen Israel retaliating by, at times, leveling whole buildings, with the guilty and the innocent inside.

Now we’ve seen the Hezbollah leader, Hasan Nasrallah, take all of Lebanon into a devastating, unprovoked war with Israel, just to improve his political standing and take pressure off Iran.

America should be galvanizing the forces of order — Europe, Russia, China and India — into a coalition against these trends. But we can’t. Why? In part, it’s because our president and secretary of state, although they speak with great moral clarity, have no moral authority. That’s been shattered by their performance in Iraq.

The world hates George Bush more than any U.S. president in my lifetime. He is radioactive — and so caught up in his own ideological bubble that he is incapable of imagining or forging alternative strategies.

In part, it is also because China, Europe and Russia have become freeloaders off U.S. power. They reap enormous profits from the post-cold-war order that America has shaped, but rather than become real stakeholders in that order, helping to draw and defend redlines, they duck, mumble, waffle or cut their own deals.

This does not bode well for global stability. A religious militia that calls itself “the party of God” takes over a state and drags it into war, using high-tech rockets — mullahs with drones — and the world is paralyzed. Those who ignore this madness will one day see it come to a theater near them.

In part, though, this madness is home-grown. I sat at a swank rooftop restaurant the other night with some young Syrian writers and listened to a discussion between a young woman dressed in trendy clothes, talking about how she would prefer to see Israel disappear, another writer who argued that Nasrallah was an Arab disaster, and an Arab journalist who described the “pride” and “dignity” every Arab felt at seeing Hezbollah fight Israel to a standstill.

When will the Arab-Muslim world stop getting its “pride” from fighting Israel and start getting it from constructing a society that others would envy, an economy others would respect, and inventions and medical breakthroughs from which others would benefit?

There will be no new Middle East — not as long as the New Middle Easterners, like Rafik Hariri, the former Lebanese prime minister, get gunned down; not as long as Old Middle Easterners, like Nasrallah, use all their wits and resources to start a new Arab-Israeli war rather than build a new Arab university; and not as long as Arab media and intellectuals refuse to speak out clearly against those who encourage their youth to embrace martyrdom with religious zeal rather than meld modernity with Arab culture.

Without that, we are wasting our time and the Arab world is wasting its future. It will forever be “on the eve of modernity.”

Friedman can say more in a single paragraph than I ever could, especially compared to my rambling essay post yesterday. Suppose that's why he makes the big cash.

Doesn't mean I agree with everything he says though :)

The world hates George Bush more than any U.S. president in my lifetime. He is radioactive — and so caught up in his own ideological bubble that he is incapable of imagining or forging alternative strategies.

Friedman is probably as guilty of the 'ideological bubble' syndrome as everyone else (including Bush) so it's no suprise that he then goes on to lament not being liked by these same people who he later bitches about not doing enough to stop the problems in the first place.

Incoherent train of thought he does.

I don't want to be loved by people like Kafi Annan, the same corrupt asshat who accuses Israel of intentionally killing UN peacekeepers even though he knew that Hezbollah built their outposts practically on top of theirs just for that purpose.

This isn't a popularity contest.

Israel knew that, too, though, and kept sending in the shells despite being asked to stop.

So by stopping, you would reward Hezbollah for using human shields?

And as the moral clarity of John Bolton declared the other day, no one has figured out how to implement a cease fire against a terrorist organization.

No one has figured out how to win a war against them either, but that hasn't stopped us from expending a lot of money and lives trying.

In as much as we like to think Captain America and Kid Israel can rambo their way out of anything, there are times at which a mature realization is that there are some things you don't win, only not lose worse. Is a cease-fire the best idea? I don't know. I do know that in the long term, flattening Lebanon (again) is not a strategy for peace in the region, or the encouragement of strong, democratic states.

Akipt finally(j/k) has a good point....

How can you you negotiate a cease fire with an "organization" whose only goal is to kill Israelis and doesn't care, and actually benefits, when the people it's "supposedly" fighting for are killed by their actions?

Answer is...you can't. The only time you can really achieve a "cease-fire" is when every member of Hezbollah and Hamas are dead or locked in a hole somewhere.......and that's so darn close to impossible it's not even worth thinking about. The only way a cease fire ever happens is when the unwashed masses are educated and their standard of living is raised to the point where these kind of goals and actions are no longer in their best interest....and the current leaders in the Middle East will not allow that to happen because keeping these people ignorant and desititute is their power base.

Answer...make Israel an osasis in a sea of glass. :devil j/k

I've often said irradiating the "Holy Land" sure would bring a lot of peace to the world. Who wants to fight over land that has a half life of 10,000 years?

So by stopping, you would reward Hezbollah for using human shields?
Use at least a little imagination. Do we "reward" kidnappers by not blowing up the house in which they keep their captives? According to the survivors, they asked Israel multiple times to stop shelling their position, and Israel stated they would stop (perhaps giving the UN personnel no reason to leave the scene, assuming they had somewhere to go).

But Israel did not stop, and the UN personnel died because of it. Israel could have ceased, given the UN time to leave (perhaps even assisted them in doing so), or simply gone after other targets while warning the UN to remove themselves from that post. Was killing UN persons just to get at a few Hezbollah really worth it?

Given the poor resultant PR, Hezbollah gets their reward anyway.

Do we "reward" kidnappers by not blowing up the house in which they keep their captives?We would never use a 5 ton laser guided ordinance on a suspected kidnapper as he was walking down the street either.

I hate analogies because by their very definition they fail to fully explain what you're comparing... and then you get into the muddled ground on just how much equality the author of the analogy really meant in the first place... which probably leads to even more communication to explain the differences... which is kinda stupid because you use analogies in the first place to make your position more clear. Thus I hate analogies.

However, I do like to see an analogy sometimes though, and that's when I see a beam of shining light on a subject and finally come to the realization that the author and I completely disagree on some very fundamental things.

You and I disagree on some very very fundamental things Thormir.

http://www.tnr.com/user/nregi.mhtml?i=w060724&s=brook072806
The war between Israel and Hezbollah has sparked widespread debate on the subject of proportionality. One might have hoped that the human rights community would take this opportunity to educate political leaders and the public on the international law of proportionality and how it applies to the current fighting. Indeed, some groups have done just that. But others have chosen to brazenly distort international law in their zeal to condemn Israel.
...
Legal scholars who want to focus on the UN Charter as the sole source of legal authority for the use of force - and hence see any armed action by a party as having to be 'proportionate' pending some (typically mythological) intervention by the Security Council - tend to underplay that the Charter does not remove the customary law of self-defense, which does not require a "proportionate" response once belligerency is underway.

Israel causes civilian (and UN Peace Keeper) casualties when it misses a target. Hezbollah causes civilian casualties when it hits its target.

I think that sometimes Israel does target civilians. It has to.

Think about it. How do you stop a suicide bomber? You really cant. A person commited enough to give his own life to detonate a bomb in a public place is almost unstoppable. Maybe Bruce Willis can shoot the detonator out of his hand in Hollywood, but in the real world, the suicide bomber is a devastatingly potent weapon.

So what do you do? You stop the next one. How do you do that?
This is what logic dictates:
After a suicide bomber strikes, you go to that persons home with bulldozers and soldiers. You level the building. All thier possessions inside are destroyed. If they have animals, you slaughter them. If they have cars, you destroy them. If they have assests in the bank, you seize them. If they have land, you destroy their crops and sew salt into the earth.
If they rebuild, you do it again.

And you do it in broad daylight, with everyone watching.

The message is clear: You may believe that martyring yourself will get you into heaven, but if you do, you will be causing your family a lifetime of suffering.

Israel causes civilian (and UN Peace Keeper) casualties when it misses a target. Hezbollah causes civilian casualties when it hits its target.

Though I like that statement Akipt, it's not entirely accurate.

Israel causes civilian (and UN Peace Keeper) casulaties when it hits and misses it's targets and Hezbollah plans it that way. They revel in the deaths of Muslim women and children and go about planning for Israel to make it happen....and they kill innocents themselves by targeting them.

I'm sorry, I see no justification for demonizing Israel in this. Blame Hezbollah, Iran, Syria, and the ignorant Lebonize government.

Israel causes civilian (and UN Peace Keeper) casualties when it misses a target. Hezbollah causes civilian casualties when it hits its target.
In this case, Israel continued to "miss" their target as the UN personnel were killed. The UN informed the Israeli military that they were being shelled, this was acknowledged, and yet the shells kept striking. So while the above quote is generally true, in this instance it does seem that Israel is responsible for the deaths.

This says nothing about the wider question of Israel's actions in Lebanon.

I did find this (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/28/hezbollah/index_np.html) interesting. An excerpt:
Throughout this now 16-day-old war, Israeli planes high above civilian areas make decisions on what to bomb. They send huge bombs capable of killing things for hundreds of meters around their targets, and then blame the inevitable civilian deaths -- the Lebanese government says 600 civilians have been killed so far -- on "terrorists" who callously use the civilian infrastructure for protection.

But this claim is almost always false. My own reporting and that of other journalists reveals that in fact Hezbollah fighters -- as opposed to the much more numerous Hezbollah political members, and the vastly more numerous Hezbollah sympathizers -- avoid civilians. Much smarter and better trained than the PLO and Hamas fighters, they know that if they mingle with civilians, they will sooner or later be betrayed by collaborators -- as so many Palestinian militants have been.

I think that sometimes Israel does target civilians. It has to.

Think about it. How do you stop a suicide bomber? You really cant. A person commited enough to give his own life to detonate a bomb in a public place is almost unstoppable. Maybe Bruce Willis can shoot the detonator out of his hand in Hollywood, but in the real world, the suicide bomber is a devastatingly potent weapon.

So what do you do? You stop the next one. How do you do that?
This is what logic dictates:
After a suicide bomber strikes, you go to that persons home with bulldozers and soldiers. You level the building. All thier possessions inside are destroyed. If they have animals, you slaughter them. If they have cars, you destroy them. If they have assests in the bank, you seize them. If they have land, you destroy their crops and sew salt into the earth.
If they rebuild, you do it again.

And you do it in broad daylight, with everyone watching.

The message is clear: You may believe that martyring yourself will get you into heaven, but if you do, you will be causing your family a lifetime of suffering.

This statement is money, dead spot on.

Sadly , the bleeding hearts would never condone this...ever.

It's why you don't see too many suicide bombers take out fellow Muslims. This is likely exactly how they would deal with it.

I'd support such a measure, it wouldn't take but a few months for this to sink home....literally.

Fandros

Sounds like a plan to me too.

Kofi has now gone so far as to claim that Hezbollah must be included in any cease fire discussions, because they are not a terrorist organization but a legitmate part of the Lebanes government.

That being the case, why hasn't Kofi condemned Lebanon for attacking Israel and kidnapping Israeli soldiers?

This sucker talks out of all three sides of his mouth.


And btw, I also support the tactics of destroying everything of the "martyr".

How do you know if Kofi Annan is lying?


His lips are moving

Rev

The root of thie entire problem is the fact that there are people and organizations that feel their number one mission in life is to destroy Israel. As long as people hold that belief there can never be peace. I hope I never meet a person face to face that admits to me that he holds that belief. Yes, I am a Jew, and a damn fierce militant one too.

If someone came up to you and said, "I am going to spend every last day and ounce of energy trying to kill you." What would you do about this? Lets also assume this person is half your size. How do you deal with it? Do you hide and always live in fear? Do you just deal with each attack individually and only use the amount of force necessary to repel the attack? Do you just break the fuckers neck and be done with it?

Talk amongst yourselves...

Late responding sorry, entirely too busy irl.

No one has figured out how to win a war against them either, but that hasn't stopped us from expending a lot of money and lives trying.
Sure we've figured out how to win a war against them. You block or deny them their foreign aid and they dry up and blow away in the wind. Hizbollah would be in the dust bin of Middle Eastern history without Syria and Iran's help. Scratch that. Hizbollah isSyria and Iran and the sooner people acknowledge that, the better off we will be.Though I like that statement Akipt, it's not entirely accurate. In re: to "Israel causes civilian (and UN Peace Keeper) casualties when it misses a target. Hezbollah causes civilian casualties when it hits its target. " Yes, blanket statements usually are not 100% accurate.

Israel does target civilians as L2 demonstrated... but that's not the same as lining women and children up to be used as human shields.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,,19955774-5007220,00.html
"Hezbollah came in to launch their rockets, then within minutes the area was blasted by Israeli jets," he said.

"Until the Hezbollah fighters arrived, it had not been touched by the Israelis. Then it was totally devastated.

"It was carnage. Two innocent people died in that incident, but it was so lucky it was not more."

The release of the images comes as Hezbollah faces criticism for allegedly using innocent civilians as "human shields".

I just can't get too worked up about Israel's response, including the bombing of the UN's outpost. Sad yes, but it's war and the UN did not hold up its part of the bargain to disable Hizbollah. Instead, the UN tried to remain "neutral" to events leading up this current situation they are in, including withholding video tapes of abductions and such. Wtf is that about anyway. Instead of disabling Hizbollah they were being used by them for the world's moral equivalence lectures.

Israel's response has been entirely restrained and within proportion. Maybe not proportional to the global moral equivalence and blinders given to Hizbollah's actions, but I see it justified.

I personally think if the entire southern border of Lebanon was a parking lot...

http://www.colossusblog.com/mt/archives/images/b52.jpg

...most of their problems would be on the road to being solved.

You're the biggest arm-chair cock-munch around, Akipt.

The UN is not the one who is supposed to disarm hezbolla. It is a UN resolution that calls on Lebanon to disarm them. Considering that the Lebanese army is weaker than hezbolla that's not likely to happen.

I love you too Halo.

Considering that the Lebanese army is weaker than hezbolla that's not likely to happen.Yup, it's a mess.

The root of thie entire problem is the fact that there are people and organizations that feel their number one mission in life is to destroy Israel. As long as people hold that belief there can never be peace.

I don't agree with Phel on much but on this we are allied ....

Isreal can and will defend itself and not worry about every television pundit and the repercussions of not be pussified about using it's strength.

I wish the US would start kicking some ass instead of worrying about what Tim Russert is going to say every Sunday.

In this case, Israel continued to "miss" their target as the UN personnel were killed. The UN informed the Israeli military that they were being shelled, this was acknowledged, and yet the shells kept striking. So while the above quote is generally true, in this instance it does seem that Israel is responsible for the deaths.

Just so you get the full story Thormir... even the poor Canadian who died doesn't blame Israel...
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/744393.html
Messages sent by the Canadian UNIFIL officer killed in the Israel Air Force attack on a UN post in Lebanon last week indicate that Hezbollah had been firing rockets at Israel from a location near the post "on a daily basis" prior to the IAF attack.

Several days before his death, Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener sent an email in which he wrote: "We have on a daily basis had numerous occasions where our position has come under direct or indirect fire from both artillery and aerial bombing. The closest artillery has landed within 2 meters of our position and the closest 1000lb aerial bomb has landed 100 meters from our patrol base. This has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity."

http://www.iranpolicy.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=151&Itemid=1

Washington, DC—On 25 July 2006, during a visit to the White House by Iraqi Prime Minister Maliki, the Iran Policy Committee (IPC) held a press conference to discuss the Iranian regime’s brazen efforts to fuel the insurgency and exacerbate sectarian violence in Iraq. The IPC revealed newly-acquired intelligence identifying the exact location of a roadside bomb factory in Tehran that manufactures improvised explosive devices (IEDs) for shipment to Iraq.


Georgetown professor and former senior member of the National Security Council staff Raymond Tanter stated: “The Ordnance Factories Complex is located in the Lavizan neighborhood in northern Tehran and consists of three separate and independent industrial sections called Sattari, Sayad Shirazi, and Shiroodi, each with its own products. The Sattari Industry specializes in making various types of anti-tank mines and bombs. The industry works on turning mines and bombs into improvised explosive devices.”

Professor Tanter went on to say: “Intelligence reports received from reliable sources inside Iran indicate that powerful explosively formed projectiles (EFPs), or shaped charges, used against the multinational force in Iraq are built under a confidential order by the Qods (Jerusalem) Force, in Iran. Explosively formed projectiles are advanced improvised explosive devices that are harder to detect, can penetrate thicker armor, and are more lethal than traditional IEDs. The Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps Qods Force has active relations with the Ordnance Factories Complex and places its orders with the group.”


Struan Stevenson, a Scottish Member of the European Parliament added, “I am alarmed at the intelligence reports of Iranian improvised explosive devices that are being shipped to Iraq and are leading to British and American deaths.” Stevenson said, “In 2006, improvised explosive device casualties accounted for half of coalition deaths in Iraq. Not only are IEDs becoming more lethal, they are becoming much more plentiful, with the number of roadside bombings almost doubling between 2004 and 2005 in Iraq.”


Commenting on Iran’s links to al Qaeda, Clare Lopez, a former undercover operations officer with the Central Intelligence Agency, added, “We know that Iran has set up a network of terrorist training camps on Iranian soil, which employ al Qaeda experts to train Iraqi insurgents in the latest explosives techniques.”


To counter the threat posed by Iran supplying Iraqi insurgents with explosively formed projectiles, Lt. Col. Bill Cowan (U.S. Marine Corps, Ret.) said, “The United States should put Iran on notice that we are going to threaten its regime in the worst way possible—from within: Tell Tehran that we will be providing money, assistance, and advice to empower Iranian resistance movements. Washington’s pressure on Tehran constrains Iran’s options and forms an anvil against which Israel can hammer Iran’s proxy in Lebanon—Hezbollah.”

How many times have the Israeli people been attacked by suicide bombs and terrorist acts, killing civilians including children?

How many times have the Arab media and religious leaders called these attacks acts of savagery and condemned them?

All this hand-wringing and calls of outrage over the casulaties of Israel finally saying they have had enough are bullshit; if the UN had backed up it's resolution, and if Lebanon had grown some intestinal fortitude and done it's duty in accordance with the UN resolution, this might not be occurring today.

Kofi the Corrupt sits in his ivory tower wanting to pass judgement, but each time he opens his mouth he just puts his foot farther in, and is doing nobody any good. Lebanon now says Condi is not welcome, because she has not moved fast enough to do the bidding of the Arab world; fine, let Lebanon take care of it's own, and if Syria and Iran want to continue sticking their noses into the matter supporting this terrorism, then Bush better back up his tough talk and fight those who support terrorism, wherever they may be.

From Akipt's post:

This has not been deliberate targeting, but has rather been due to tactical necessity."

It begs the question....why the hell was this guy ordered to stay in this post? Seems like the UN commander has some questions to answer for this as well.

The evidence looks pretty darn good that Hezbollah wanted the people in Qana dead:

Israel apologized for the deaths and promised an investigation but said Hezbollah had fired more than 40 rockets from Qana before the airstrike, including several from near the building that was bombed. Foreign Ministry official Gideon Meir accused Hezbollah of "using their own civilian population as human shields."

The evidence looks pretty darn good that Hezbollah wanted the people in Qana dead:

You bet they do, how else would they deflect the blame for their actions which started this whole mess.

Was flipping between CNN and Fox news last night and became quite irritated at the coverage of the situation.

Much kvetching and whining and throwing blame towards Israel for colateral damage.

Not one thing said in 20 mins on either channel stating how Hezbollah uses them as shields, that they fire from within civilian populace.

Put the press on the damn job, show WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY Israel has to target those areas.

Fandros

Was flipping between CNN and Fox news last night and became quite irritated at the coverage of the situation.

Much kvetching and whining and throwing blame towards Israel for colateral damage.

Not one thing said in 20 mins on either channel stating how Hezbollah uses them as shields, that they fire from within civilian populace.

Put the press on the damn job, show WHY WHY WHY WHY WHY Israel has to target those areas.

Fandros

CNN has been pretty clear that Hezbollah is using civilians as shields, they have been running videos showing rocket launches from civilian areas by hezbollah.

They didn't last night. Both networks were pissing me off at the amount of bs they were slathering on Lebanon.

I did see some of that footage showing a Hezoballah missile launch from within a city suburb tho. Think I caught it on local news, not sure where the feed was coming from.

Fandros

Hezbollah Rockets in Qana

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2759420

Hezbollah Rockets in Qana

http://www.ifilm.com/ifilmdetail/2759420

This is what needs to be played on by the Israelis. They need to show how Hezbollah is good at fighting as long as children are their sandbags. What a bunch of pussies, I wish Reagen had gone after them in '83 instead of just walking away and letting them get away with killing 241 Marines.

I saw a runthrough by Anderson Cooper last night and they actually played the video in that link that has the Hebrew text and they also played some other video that shows a rocket taking off from behind that very same building. I was very happy to see Isreal offering this material.

These groups like hezbollah and hamas are the worst of the worst. Israel kills arab/lebanese civilians in a strike and they sincerely apologize, these other bastards kill Israeli children and they cheer for what they have done.

The Israelis should push those dogs right into the mediteranean and drown them but unfortunately their deaths wouldnt be painful enough.

These groups like Israel and America are the worst of the worst. Israel kills arab/lebanese civilians in a strike and they apologize, as if they really mean it, right?

The Arabs should push those dogs right into the mediteranean and drown them but unfortunately their deaths wouldnt be painful enough.

Linlaweniel, you are an idiot, no soldier wants to kill women, children or non combatants, but when your enemy uses them and hides with them then you dont have any choice. You just to stupid to see the facts in front of your face.

Rev

These groups like Israel and America are the worst of the worst. Israel kills arab/lebanese civilians in a strike and they apologize, as if they really mean it, right?

The Arabs should push those dogs right into the mediteranean and drown them but unfortunately their deaths wouldnt be painful enough.

So would it be better if Israel said what hezbollah said? hezbollah states they take great joy in the killing of Israeli children, do you think that is good that they feel that way?

Please show me where hezbollah has targeted 1 rocket against the Israeli military. Every rocket hezbollah has fired has been pointed at a civilian population center in Israel.

The Lebanese civilians are being killed because hezbollah is launching strikes from civilian areas, they are launching from peoples yards, apartment building or from anywhere that they know that the counter fire from Israeli forces will kill civilians.

Hezbollah purposefully does this in hopes of causing civilian casualties and the poor arab populace buys into their crap that they are protecting them.

Israel has repeatedly dropped leaflets asking the civilian population to leave the areas they are going to go after hezbollah in, unfortunately hezbollah has been preventing the civilians from leaving. They do this at great risk to their own forces because they are also letting hezbollah know right where they are going.

Israel is using very accurate weapons in targeting launch points for the hezbollah rockets, these rockets that hezbollah are firing are aimed directly at Israeli cities, towns and population centers and you know that is true.

If Israel had any interest in killing mass amounts of civilians they most certainly wouldnt do this. There have been some very unfortunate civilian casualties in Lebanon and Israel has apologised for this, unfortunately hezbollah lacks the integrity to admit their complicity in this.

I am curious as to why the arab/muslim world is so disgusted over these civilian deaths in Lebanon yet has remained totally silent about the civilian deaths of over 100 per day in Iraq. Is it because it is ok for muslim to kill muslim? I haven't heard one single muslim speak out against Bin Laden for advocating an all out war against the Sunni's in Iraq, why is that ok in the minds of the muslim world?

How much of what hezbollah has done to instigate this was done to deflect the press off of the slaughter of thousands of muslims by muslims in Iraq? Why is it that you would ever think that the leaders of hezbollah or Syria or Iran or AlQaeda are incapable of manuipulating the press or the populace to fit their agenda?

You are quite ignorant for believing that hezbollah is innocent in this situation, by their own admission and by the admission of the populace of Lebanon they are responsible for starting this.

Linlaweniel, you are an idiot, no soldier wants to kill women, children or non combatants, but when your enemy uses them and hides with them then you dont have any choice. You just to stupid to see the facts in front of your face.

Rev

That is not true, the soldiers of hezbollah, hamas, al qaeda ALL have stated publicly that they desire to kill women, children and non-combatants and they take great joy in every death they cause.

These groups like Israel and America are the worst of the worst. Israel kills arab/lebanese civilians in a strike and they apologize, as if they really mean it, right?

The Arabs should push those dogs right into the mediteranean and drown them but unfortunately their deaths wouldnt be painful enough.

Flame baiter..should ban this guy. He hates Americans (thats not really the problem) and never has one thing constructive to say or that makes one bit of sense.

Rover,

Those fuckers are not soldiers, they are punks to scared to meet thier enemies in honorable combat on the open field (always wanted to use that line). Soldiers represent countries and are covered and for the most part constrained by the Geneva Convention. Terrorist are what these punks are nothing more, and god willing soon to be fertillizer care of the Isrealie Military.

Rev

Good read from an Israeli columnist (editorial on what Ehud Olmert should say to the world)

Ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world. I, the Prime Minister of Israel, am speaking to you from Jerusalem in the face of the terrible pictures from Kfar Kana. Any human heart, wherever it is, must sicken and recoil at the sight of such pictures. There are no words of comfort that can mitigate the enormity of this tragedy. Still, I am looking you straight in the eye and telling you that the State of Israel will continue its military campaign in Lebanon.

The Israel Defense Forces will continue to attack targets from which missiles and Katyusha rockets are fired at hospitals, old age homesand kindergartens in Israel. I have instructed the security forces and the IDF to continue to hunt for the Katyusha stockpiles and launch sites from which these savages are bombarding the State of Israel.

We will not hesitate, we will not apologize and we will not back off. If they continue to launch missiles into Israel from Kfar Kana, we will continue to bomb Kfar Kana. Today, tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. Here, there and everywhere. The children of Kfar Kana could now be sleeping peacefully in their homes, unmolested, had the agents of the devil not taken over their land and turned the lives of our children into hell.

Ladies and gentlemen, it's time you understood: the Jewish state will no longer be trampled upon. We will no longer allow anyone to exploit population centers in order to bomb our citizens. No one will be able to hide anymore behind women and children in order to kill our women and children. This anarchy is over. You can condemn us, you can boycott us, you can stop visiting us and, if necessary, we will stop visiting you.

A voice for six million citizens . Today I am serving as the voice of six million bombarded Israeli citizens who serve as the voice of six million murdered Jews who were melted down to dust and ashes by savages in Europe. In both cases, those responsible for these evil acts were, and are, barbarians devoid of all humanity, who set themselves one simple goal: to wipe the Jewish race off the face of the earth, as Adolph Hitler said, or to wipe the State of Israel off the map, as Mahmoud Ahmedinjad proclaims.

And you - just as you did not take those words seriously then, you are ignoring them again now. And that, ladies and gentlemen, leaders of the world, will not happen again. Never again will we wait for bombs that never came to hit the gas chambers. Never again will we wait for salvation that never arrives. Now we have our own air force. The Jewish people are now capable of standing up to those who seek their destruction - those people will no longer be able to hide behind women and children. They will no longer be able to evade their responsibility.

Every place from which a Katyusha is fired into the State of Israel will be a legitimate target for us to attack. This must be stated clearly and publicly, once and for all. You are welcome to judge us, to ostracize us, to boycott us and to vilify us. But to kill us? Absolutely not.

Four months ago I was elected by hundreds of thousands of citizens to the office of Prime Minister of the government of Israel, on the basis of my plan for unilaterally withdrawing from 90 percent of the areas of Judea and Samaria, the birth place and cradle of the Jewish people; to end most of the occupation and to enable the Palestinian people to turn over a new leaf and to calm things down until conditions are ripe for attaining a permanent settlement between us.

The Prime Minister who preceded me, Ariel Sharon, made a full withdrawal from the Gaza Strip back to the international border, and gave the Palestinians there a chance to build a new reality for themselves. The Prime Minister who preceded him, Ehud Barak, ended the lengthy Israeli presence in Lebanon and pulled the IDF back to the international border, leaving the land of the cedars to flourish, develop and establish its democracy and its economy.

What did the State of Israel get in exchange for all of this? Did we win even one minute of quiet? Was our hand, outstretched in peace, met with a handshake of encouragement? Ehud Barak's peace initiative at Camp David let loose on us a wave of suicide bombers who smashed and blew to pieces over 1,000 citizens, men, women and children. I don't remember you being so enraged then. Maybe that happened because we did not allow TV close-ups of the dismembered body parts of the Israeli youngsters at the Dolphinarium? Or of the shattered lives of the people butchered while celebrating the Passover seder at the Park Hotel in Netanya? What can you do - that's the way we are. We don't wave body parts at the camera. We grieve quietly.

We do not dance on the roofs at the sight of the bodies of our enemy's children - we express genuine sorrow and regret. That is the monstrous behavior of our enemies. Now they have risen up against us. Tomorrow they will rise up against you. You are already familiar with the murderous taste of this terror. And you will taste more.

And Ariel Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza. What did it get us? A barrage of Kassem missiles fired at peaceful settlements and the kidnapping of soldiers. Then too, I don't recall you reacting with such alarm. And for six years, the withdrawal from Lebanon has drawn the vituperation and crimes of a dangerous, extremist Iranian agent, who took over an entire country in the name of religious fanaticism and is trying to take Israel hostage on his way to Jerusalem - and from there to Paris and London.

An enormous terrorist infrastructure has been established by Iran on our border, threatening our citizens, growing stronger before our very eyes, awaiting the moment when the land of the Ayatollahs becomes a nuclear power in order to bring us to our knees. And make no mistake - we won't go down alone. You, the leaders of the free and enlightened world, will go down along with us.

So today, here and now, I am putting an end to this parade of hypocrisy. I don't recall such a wave of reaction in the face of the 100 citizens killed every single day in Iraq. Sunnis kill Shiites who kill Sunnis, and all of them kill Americans - and the world remains silent. And I am hard pressed to recall a similar reaction when the Russians destroyed entire villages and burned down large cities in order to repress the revolt in Chechnya. And when NATO bombed Kosovo for almost three months and crushed the civilian population - then you also kept silent. What is it about us, the Jews, the minority, the persecuted, that arouses this cosmic sense of justice in you? What do we have that all the others don't?

In a loud clear voice, looking you straight in the eye, I stand before you openly and I will not apologize. I will not capitulate. I will not whine. This is a battle for our freedom. For our humanity. For the right to lead normal lives within our recognized, legitimate borders. It is also your battle. I pray and I believe that now you will understand that. Because if you don't, you may regret it later, when it's too late.


Not sure I agree with all of it....but certainly with the sentiment.

Interesting read and I could see this actually being said. I don't disagree with enough of it to think they would be out of bounds following this message to the T.

Fandros

Thomas Friedman wrote a good piece on the latest war...


Buffett and Hezbollah

Warren Buffett. The most important thing you need to know about Israel today and how it has performed so far in the war with Hezbollah is Warren Buffett.

Say what? Well, the most talked-about story in Israel, before Hezbollah started this war, was the fact that on May 5, Mr. Buffett, the Berkshire Hathaway chairman and the world’s most successful investor, bought an 80 percent stake in the privately held Israeli precision tools company, Iscar Metalworking, for $4 billion — Mr. Buffett’s first purchase of a company outside America. According to BusinessWeek, as a result of the deal, Iscar’s owners were “likely to pay about $1 billion in capital gains taxes into the Israeli government’s coffers — an unexpected windfall. With the Israeli budget already running a $2 billion surplus, the government is considering slashing value-added tax by one percentage point to 15 percent.”

In May, Israeli papers were filled with pages about how cool it was that Israel had produced a cutting-edge company that Warren Buffett wanted to buy. It was being discussed everywhere, pushing the Tel Aviv stock exchange to an all-time high.

That is where Israel’s head was on the eve of this war — and it explains something I sensed when I visited Israel shortly after the fighting started. Nobody wanted this war, and nobody was prepared for it. Look closely at pictures of Israeli soldiers from Lebanon. There is no enthusiasm in their faces, and certainly no triumphalism. Their expressions tell the whole story: “I just don’t want to be doing this — another war with the Arabs.”

Israeli soldiers were napping when this war started — that’s why they got ambushed — for the very best reasons: They have so much more to do with their lives, and they live in a society that empowers and enables them to do it. (Unfortunately, the Buffett company is in northern Israel and had to be temporarily closed because of rocket attacks.)

Young Israelis dream of being inventors, and their role models are the Israeli innovators who made it to the Nasdaq. Hezbollah youth dream of being martyrs, and their role models are Islamic militants who made it to the Next World. Israel spent the last six years preparing for Warren Buffett, while Hezbollah spent the last six years preparing for this war.

“Israel was not prepared for this war,” said the Israeli political theorist Yaron Ezrahi. “It came upon us like the crash of a meteorite. ... The whole focus of debate in the country before this war was on withdrawal.” The Israeli Army had just taken on its own extremists, the settlers in Gaza, and removed them against their will, added Mr. Ezrahi, “and the country had just elected for the first time a prime minister who promised voters to unilaterally withdraw from the West Bank in return for nothing.”

In the end, Israel will do whatever it has to do to prevail. But what is so troubling for Israelis is that this war is about nothing and everything. That is, Israel got out of Lebanon, and yet Hezbollah keeps coming. It is all about Hezbollah’s need to justify its existence and Iran’s need for a distraction.
What is doubly sad is that Lebanon was getting its act together. Rafik Hariri, the former prime minister, represented a whole new type of Arab leader — one who rose to power by being a builder and an entrepreneur. He understood that Lebanon, freed of Syria, was a country whose youth had the energy and skill to compete anywhere. He thought Lebanon could again be a model of how Arabs can embrace modernity. But Mr. Hariri was murdered, allegedly by Syria, and now Lebanon’s democracy is being murdered by Hezbollah. Once again, in the Arab world, the past buries the future.

Israel mustn’t get sucked into that same grave. Israel needs to get a cease-fire and an international force into south Lebanon — and get out. Israel can’t defeat Hezbollah, it can only hurt it enough to make it think twice about ever doing this again — and it has pretty much done that. It must not destroy any more of Lebanon, which is going to still be its neighbor when the guns fall silent.

Israel wins when Warren Buffett’s company there is fully back in business — not when Nasrallah is out of business. Because that will only happen, not by war, but when Arabs wake up and realize that he is just another fraud, just another Nasser, whose strategy would condemn the flower of Arab youth — who deserve and need so much better — to another decade of making potato chips, not microchips. Nasrallah can win in the long run only if he can condemn the flower of Israel’s youth to the same fate. Don’t let it happen, Israel.

The op-ed Ailwon shared is a fantastic piece of oratory, and there is little I would not agree with whole-heartedly. That sums up exactly the position people need to be considering.

Now, if he would just give that speech to the U.N., and let them mull it over in contrast to the behavior and speeches of the Iranian and Syrian reps.

Good articles all around.

The view on the other side of the Atlantic...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1839280,00.html


Israel responded to an unprovoked attack by Hizbullah, right? Wrong

The assault on Lebanon was premeditated - the soldiers' capture simply provided the excuse. It was also unnecessary

George Monbiot
Tuesday August 8, 2006
The Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/)

Whatever we think of Israel's assault on Lebanon, all of us seem to agree about one fact: that it was a response, however disproportionate, to an unprovoked attack by Hizbullah. I repeated this "fact" in my last column, when I wrote that "Hizbullah fired the first shots". This being so, the Israeli government's supporters ask peaceniks like me, what would you have done? It's an important question. But its premise, I have now discovered, is flawed.

Since Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000, there have been hundreds of violations of the "blue line" between the two countries. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (Unifil) reports that Israeli aircraft crossed the line "on an almost daily basis" between 2001 and 2003, and "persistently" until 2006. These incursions "caused great concern to the civilian population, particularly low-altitude flights that break the sound barrier over populated areas". On some occasions, Hizbullah tried to shoot them down with anti-aircraft guns.

In October 2000, the Israel Defence Forces shot at unarmed Palestinian demonstrators on the border, killing three and wounding 20. In response, Hizbullah crossed the line and kidnapped three Israeli soldiers. On several occasions, Hizbullah fired missiles and mortar rounds at IDF positions, and the IDF responded with heavy artillery and sometimes aerial bombardment. Incidents like this killed three Israelis and three Lebanese in 2003; one Israeli soldier and two Hizbullah fighters in 2005; and two Lebanese people and three Israeli soldiers in February 2006. Rockets were fired from Lebanon into Israel several times in 2004, 2005 and 2006, on some occasions by Hizbullah. But, the UN records, "none of the incidents resulted in a military escalation".

On May 26 this year, two officials of Islamic Jihad - Nidal and Mahmoud Majzoub - were killed by a car bomb in the Lebanese city of Sidon. This was widely assumed in Lebanon and Israel to be the work of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency. In June, a man named Mahmoud Rafeh confessed to the killings and admitted that he had been working for Mossad since 1994. Militants in southern Lebanon responded, on the day of the bombing, by launching eight rockets into Israel. One soldier was lightly wounded. There was a major bust-up on the border, during which one member of Hizbullah was killed and several wounded, and one Israeli soldier wounded. But while the border region "remained tense and volatile", Unifil says it was "generally quiet" until July 12.

There has been a heated debate on the internet about whether the two Israeli soldiers kidnapped by Hizbullah that day were captured in Israel or in Lebanon, but it now seems pretty clear that they were seized in Israel. This is what the UN says, and even Hizbullah seems to have forgotten that they were supposed to have been found sneaking around the outskirts of the Lebanese village of Aita al-Shaab. Now it simply states that "the Islamic resistance captured two Israeli soldiers at the border with occupied Palestine". Three other Israeli soldiers were killed by the militants. There is also some dispute about when, on July 12, Hizbullah first fired its rockets; but Unifil makes it clear that the firing took place at the same time as the raid - 9am. Its purpose seems to have been to create a diversion. No one was hit.

But there is no serious debate about why the two soldiers were captured: Hizbullah was seeking to exchange them for the 15 prisoners of war taken by the Israelis during the occupation of Lebanon and (in breach of article 118 of the third Geneva convention) never released. It seems clear that if Israel had handed over the prisoners, it would - without the spillage of any more blood - have retrieved its men and reduced the likelihood of further kidnappings. But the Israeli government refused to negotiate. Instead - well, we all know what happened instead. Almost 1,000 Lebanese and 33 Israeli civilians have been killed so far, and a million Lebanese displaced from their homes.

On July 12, in other words, Hizbullah fired the first shots. But that act of aggression was simply one instance in a long sequence of small incursions and attacks over the past six years by both sides. So why was the Israeli response so different from all that preceded it? The answer is that it was not a reaction to the events of that day. The assault had been planned for months.

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that "more than a year ago, a senior Israeli army officer began giving PowerPoint presentations, on an off-the-record basis, to US and other diplomats, journalists and thinktanks, setting out the plan for the current operation in revealing detail". The attack, he said, would last for three weeks. It would begin with bombing and culminate in a ground invasion. Gerald Steinberg, professor of political science at Bar-Ilan University, told the paper that "of all of Israel's wars since 1948, this was the one for which Israel was most prepared ... By 2004, the military campaign scheduled to last about three weeks that we're seeing now had already been blocked out and, in the last year or two, it's been simulated and rehearsed across the board".

A "senior Israeli official" told the Washington Post that the raid by Hizbullah provided Israel with a "unique moment" for wiping out the organisation. The New Statesman's editor, John Kampfner, says he was told by more than one official source that the US government knew in advance of Israel's intention to take military action in Lebanon. The Bush administration told the British government.

Israel's assault, then, was premeditated: it was simply waiting for an appropriate excuse. It was also unnecessary. It is true that Hizbullah had been building up munitions close to the border, as its current rocket attacks show. But so had Israel. Just as Israel could assert that it was seeking to deter incursions by Hizbullah, Hizbullah could claim - also with justification - that it was trying to deter incursions by Israel. The Lebanese army is certainly incapable of doing so. Yes, Hizbullah should have been pulled back from the Israeli border by the Lebanese government and disarmed. Yes, the raid and the rocket attack on July 12 were unjustified, stupid and provocative, like just about everything that has taken place around the border for the past six years. But the suggestion that Hizbullah could launch an invasion of Israel or that it constitutes an existential threat to the state is preposterous. Since the occupation ended, all its acts of war have been minor ones, and nearly all of them reactive.

So it is not hard to answer the question of what we would have done. First, stop recruiting enemies, by withdrawing from the occupied territories in Palestine and Syria. Second, stop provoking the armed groups in Lebanon with violations of the blue line - in particular the persistent flights across the border. Third, release the prisoners of war who remain unlawfully incarcerated in Israel. Fourth, continue to defend the border, while maintaining the diplomatic pressure on Lebanon to disarm Hizbullah (as anyone can see, this would be much more feasible if the occupations were to end). Here then is my challenge to the supporters of the Israeli government: do you dare to contend that this programme would have caused more death and destruction than the current adventure has done?

whatever....The Guardian, a bastion of truth and honesty everywhere it seems.

Fandros

What is untrue or dishonest in the above piece?

My only question to that guardian writer is this.....

What is the stated reason for being of Hezzbollah?

I'll even answer it for him....the destruction of Israel by any means possible.

What is the stated reason for being of Israel?

To survive as a nation insuring the safety and happiness of it's people.


See a difference?

Pre-planned or not...it was necessary to sap the power of the Hezbollah terrorists...the longer they waited the worse.

Funny thing is Thor, it fails to recall that daily rockets fly into Israel long before this. It fails to see the suicide bombings. And you fail to recognize a serious anti Israeli publishment when you read it.

Not going to argue with you, the article is pure tripe. Truth is Hezbollah did kidnap the soliders didn't they?

All else is supposition on the writers part.

Fandros

Ahhh let's go on shall we for those deathly afraid of the truth.

Israel occupied a portion of Lebanon for a time...then gave it back

How were they rewarded? Continuing aggression against it's women and children.

But wait, you are Sooooo right...it's clearly Israel's fault...honest.

My question here is...mildly or full blown retardation that and/or a serious case of hating on the Jewish folks. Erik Cartmen much?

Fandros