Conflict: Israel and Lebanon part 4

Politics International Politics
41

[quote=“MikeN”]Okay, when Israel warned everyone in southern Lebanon to evacuate, it was supported by some here who said that that was all that was necessary; anyone staying behind had voluntarily assumed the risks and was not entitled to sympathy.

So now that Hizbullah has clearly given similar warnings to northern Israel, does the same apply? If not, why not?[/quote]

Uh… I should think the difference is obvious.

IDF is going after Hizbollah soldiers and positions, which just happen to be situated amongst the general Lebanese civilian population. IDF is giving the civilians a chance to get out before Israel goes after military targets.

Conversely, Hizbollah is simply lobbing missiles at Israeli residential (civilian) areas. Hizbollah is not targeting IDF military positions.

42

I guess Hizbollah have a Christian wing.

43

I guess Hizbollah have a Christian wing.[/quote]

Is Hizbollah not permitted to use bridges in Christian areas for resupply?

44

Hizbollah made us do it

  • More than 841 killed and 3243 wounded, the majority civiians and one-third of whom are children

  • Over $2 billion damage to national infrastructure including Beirut International airport, all national airways and major ports, electrical power plants, national fuel depots, factories, warehouses, dams, schools, t.v. & radio stations, churches, mosques, hospitals, ambulance & civil defense centers

Gott Mit Uns

45

[quote=“Tigerman”]

[quote=“cfimages”]I guess Hizbollah have a Christian wing.

[quote=“BBC”]Israeli planes also struck bridges in mainly Christian areas north of Beirut
[/quote][/quote]

Is Hizbollah not permitted to use bridges in Christian areas for resupply?[/quote]

As the Christian militias from the civil war days are now generally political parties in the ruling coalition, I’d have thought that the government and armed forces would have been able to keep the Christian areas a Hizbollah-free zone.

I could be wrong though.

46

The gov’t and armed forces wouldn’t have done much to restrict free movement, but Hizbollah wouldn’t have found any support in the Christian areas. Not, that is, until recently. Surprisingly, sectors of Lebanese society that fought Hizbollah during the civil war are now supporting it out of disgust with the Israeli reaction.

Hearts and minds… not won, but lost, when those of their children were splattered on the concrete.

47

"The Israeli government has accused Hezbollah of using civilians as shields. But Human Rights Watch, in a report released Thursday after investigating dozens of civilian deaths, concluded the opposite.

“In none of the cases of civilian deaths documented in this report is there evidence to suggest that Hezbollah forces or weapons were in or near the area that the IDF targeted during or just prior to the attack,” the rights group said. . . .

(Lebanese President Emile Lahoud) . . . told the AP that Israel is trying to strong-arm Lebanon into accepting its terms for a cease-fire.

“The Israeli enemy’s bombing of bridges and roads is aimed at tightening the blockade on the Lebanese, cutting communications between them and starving them.”
– CNN

48

Pity.

So, tell us… were those hearts and minds lost… were they previously helping to make Israel safe from Hizbollah attacks launched from Lebanon?

Its really quite simple. Stop attacking Israel and Israel stops attacking Hizbollah and Hamas, and innocent bystanders no longer are harmed, and Israel gives back the occupied territories.

Keep attacking Israel from Lebanon and the occupied territories and Israel keeps counter-attacking its enemies, and innocents will continue to suffer as they are caught in the crossfire and or made to continue living under Israeli occupation.

Or, let’s all just agonize and scream righteous indignation… but let’s not do anything to actually stop the cycle of violence.

49

Who were the Christian militias in Lebanon working with during the civil war? That’s right: Israel.
Which way were their hearts and minds leaning? Towards Israel.
When Hizbollah kicked this off, who was the Christian community blaming? Hizbollah.
Who bombed their communities? Israel.
Who has been killing their children? Israel.

What were they previously doing to make Israel safe? Cedar Revolution? Helping to bring pressure to get Syria out? Working to really establish the roots of democracy?

You can say “scream righteous indignation” all you want. Alternatively, you could do a little research and try to map out (realistically) how this round of violence is making (or will make) anything better. When you discover that the military option is a blind alley, maybe you can back up a bit and consider other options. And maybe, just maybe, when you realize that nearly a thousand people on both sides of the border have died for nothing, and that the situation has only been made worse… nah, nevermind.

I don’t expect you to empathize with anyone. Not the Christian Lebanese, bombed by former allies. Not the children of Lebanese families supporting Hizbollah. Not the family of that Israeli father and his 14 year old daughter, killed by a late-arriving rocket when they wandered outside after the air raid sirens were silenced prematurely. I think real pity is more than deserved, but I no longer expect it. A sardonic “Pity”, that’s what I’ve come to expect. :s

I also expect better than a Cracker Jack map to peace if violence is the vehicle.

50

So what? Israel left Lebanon 6 years ago, per a UN resolution.

In the past 6 years, have the Cristian militias keep Hizbollah out of Lebanon? Did they stop Hizbollah from attacking Israel from Lebanon?

No.

Why don’t you consider an option to what was in place prior to this round of violence, because that certainly didn’t work, did it?

You keep saying we need to consider different approaches and options… well, tell us what?

And of course I consider all of this violence to be senseless and tragic… you haven’t got a monopoly on compassion. :unamused:

But, it seems all you have to bring to the table is screaming that this is all so sensless… NO SHIT?

Yes, the military option is a blind alley. So what is your plan?

I’ve already repeated my plan over and over. The Palestinians must stop terrorizing Israel. The Iranians and Syrians must stop supporting and encouraging terrorism against Israel. Those fuckers in Iran and Syria haven’t done a bit of good for the palestinians over the years… they have helped to make things worse for the Palestinians. Once the Palestinians stop terrorizing Israel, Israel can feel secure enough to return the occupied territories to the palestinians and everyone can get to work on establishing a Palestinian state that will coexist peacefully with Israel. The US and other nations will provide support to the new Palestinian state.

Is there any other way out of this mess? I mean, any other way that doesn’t involve total conflagration of the entire region?

Give us something more than your righteous indignation. Give us some ideas.

That’s a crappy thing to post… :unamused:

I want this to end just as much as anyone. My disagreement with you doesn’t make me less compassionate than you… :unamused:

51

So what? Israel left Lebanon 6 years ago, per a UN resolution.

In the past 6 years, have the Cristian militias keep Hizbollah out of Lebanon? Did they stop Hizbollah from attacking Israel from Lebanon?

No.

Why don’t you consider an option to what was in place prior to this round of violence, because that certainly didn’t work, did it?

You keep saying we need to consider different approaches and options… well, tell us what?

And of course I consider all of this violence to be senseless and tragic… you haven’t got a monopoly on compassion. :unamused:

But, it seems all you have to bring to the table is screaming that this is all so sensless… NO SHIT?

Yes, the military option is a blind alley. So what is your plan?

I’ve already repeated my plan over and over. The Palestinians must stop terrorizing Israel. The Iranians and Syrians must stop supporting and encouraging terrorism against Israel. Those fuckers in Iran and Syria haven’t done a bit of good for the palestinians over the years… they have helped to make things worse for the Palestinians. Once the Palestinians stop terrorizing Israel, Israel can feel secure enough to return the occupied territories to the palestinians and everyone can get to work on establishing a Palestinian state that will coexist peacefully with Israel. The US and other nations will provide support to the new Palestinian state.

Is there any other way out of this mess? I mean, any other way that doesn’t involve total conflagration of the entire region?

Give us something more than your righteous indignation. Give us some ideas.

That’s a crappy thing to post… :unamused:

I want this to end just as much as anyone. My disagreement with you doesn’t make me less compassionate than you… :unamused:[/quote]

:bravo: :bravo: :bravo:

Very well said Tigerman.Why more people on this forum can’t or refuse to see this is beyond me.

52

[quote=“Tigerman”]In the past 6 years, have the Cristian militias keep Hizbollah out of Lebanon? Did they stop Hizbollah from attacking Israel from Lebanon?

No.[/quote]
How long did Reconstruction take following the American Civil War? Was it a success? That war, at least, ended with a decisive victory. Following the American Civil War, did the Yankees sweep the Klan from the South? No. The Lebanese civil war didn’t end with a victory; it just ground to a halt. Given the difficulties putting the Union back together, why would you expect the Lebanese to have an easier time of it? Particularly with no decisive victor, and aggressive states on the borders continuing to fight a lukewarm war by proxy. Nonetheless, they’ve established and nourished a fragile democracy, helped to pressure out the Syrians, and rebuilt the nation’s infrastructure… not to mention avoiding a new civil war when the popular former PM and architect of the reconstruction was assassinated. Acknowledge the degrees of success as well as the degrees of failure.

[quote=“Tigerman”]Why don’t you consider an option to what was in place prior to this round of violence, because that certainly didn’t work, did it?[/quote] It was hardly an out of the park homerun, but things were slowly, steadily getting better, and despite efforts to destabilize the situation, there was no great leap backwards. Not making things worse isn’t a very ambitious goal, but so long as there’s progress–however modest–it’s still movement in the right direction. At the very least, more people awake, everyday, to a better day and greater opportunities.

[quote=“Tigerman”]You keep saying we need to consider different approaches and options… well, tell us what?[/quote] Engagement. Bush I and James Baker managed to put together a coalition, including many Arab nations, against Iraq. Bush II and Co. have taken a radically different tact, with different results, and far less creditability as a result. Taking a hands-off approach didn’t work. Flying in to be an honest broker, tailed by a cargo plane rushing a fresh shipment of arms to one party, probably won’t work either. (I’ll expand on this later.)

[quote=“Tigerman”]And of course I consider all of this violence to be senseless and tragic… you haven’t got a monopoly on compassion. :unamused:

But, it seems all you have to bring to the table is screaming that this is all so sensless… NO SHIT?[/quote] Really? I don’t have a monopoly on compassion? See, I thought that I didn’t. I argued that the motivating power of emotions was relevant to politics… or do you mean that your compassion is politically moot? See, I figure that it’s not, and shouldn’t be. In that argument, I’ve got David Hume on my side, or more recently, Armartya Sen, Martha Nussbaum, Jon Elster, and a dozen Truth and Reconciliation Commissions. The argument the these are relevant also has the rage and fear driving so many policies of so many on it’s side. Is emotion politically moot? No. Politically muddling? No… but that argument takes longer and you could just read the authors mentioned to get their take.

[quote=“Tigerman”]Yes, the military option is a blind alley. So what is your plan?[/quote] Good! It’s a blind alley. So STOP.

[quote=“Tigerman”]I’ve already repeated my plan over and over. The Palestinians must stop terrorizing Israel. [/quote] Stop. No, you stop. Ow! Stop it. smack Ow! No! You stop it! smack

[quote=“Tigerman”]
Is there any other way out of this mess? I mean, any other way that doesn’t involve total conflagration of the entire region?[/quote] What stops kids fighting in the backseat of the car? overwhelming outside force. So, where’s Big Daddy?

[quote=“Tigerman”]Give us something more than your righteous indignation. Give us some ideas.[/quote] Hold that thought…

That’s a crappy thing to post… :unamused: [/quote] Reciprocity. You feel free to characterize my posts as “idiocy”, to call for “ideas”. :laughing: I’ve asked you to stow that crap. I’ve asked you to stow the :unamused:. You refused. Reciprocity. You’ll get all the respect you give. If you’re finding my positions “idiotic” and characterizing them as such, don’t be surprised when I characterize your posts precisely as I read them: heartless.

53

If the shoe fits:

“Terrorism refers to a strategy of using violence, or threat of violence to generate fear, cause disruption, and ultimately, to bring about compliance with specific political, religious, ideological, and personal demands. The targets of terrorist attacks typically are not the individuals who are killed, injured, or taken hostage, but rather the societies to which these individuals belong.”

54

Oh, fer chrissakes… are you kidding?

When did you call for Hizbollah to stop arming itself to the teeth as the UN stood by and watched? When did you tell Iran and Syria to stop calling for the destruction of Israel and the death of all Jews? When did you tell Saddam to stop supporting terrorism against Israel? I don’t recall your crys of outrage then? Is it only outrageous when the Israelis commit violence?

Once Israel strikes back… you start screaming bloody murder and crying, “Stop!”

Here’s a clue, Jaboney… if you really want to stop the violence, you have to make BOTH sides stop.

It doesn’t do any good to scream and moan only when one side resorts to violence while remaining silent when the other side commits terrorism.

You should have been screaming a long time ago. :unamused:

55

[quote=“spook”]If the shoe fits:

“Terrorism refers to a strategy of using violence, or threat of violence to generate fear, cause disruption, and ultimately, to bring about compliance with specific political, religious, ideological, and personal demands. The targets of terrorist attacks typically are not the individuals who are killed, injured, or taken hostage, but rather the societies to which these individuals belong.”[/quote]

Well then, spook, I guess the question is…

is there a difference between terrorism committed with the aim of destroying a state and killing all of its inhabitants, and terrorism committed in reply to terrorism committed against it?

I mean, is there a difference between terrorism committed for the purpose of murdering your neighbor, and terrorism committed to survive?

56

When East Timor voted to become independant from Indonesia, Indonesian militias went on a rampage that was only stopped by an Australian-led UN peacekeeping force (one of the UNs few successes). The militia’s were directed by fanatics in the Indonesian military, but the actual attacks were mostly carried out by unemployed Indonesian youths (late teens, twenties). The orders were coming from people with power, the actions were undertaken by people with little education and little prospects. It was reported that many of the militia leaders received training from the US under the Clinton administration. The actual foot-soldiers of the militias, the worst of which was Aitarak, were unemployed men with little or no prospects. Until the militias offered to pay them and their families money to kill the East Timorese. And instilled the whole “patriotic fever” idea in their impressionable minds. Which led to widespread slaughter of the East Timorese.

Compare this with Palestine. In 1999, before the current intifada (which was started when Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, the Palestinians protested and ended up throwing rocks at the Israeli security forces, who responded with bullets), unemployment in the Palestinian controlled areas was 14.4%. Today, it’s 60% in Gaza and 48% in the West Bank. 75% live in poverty (less than $2/day).

So what do we have? A majority (or close to) of young, bored, impressionable men with no money for their families. No prospects. No hope. All just ready for the “chance” to become a “martyr”.

Let’s hope that similar circumstances don’t happen in Lebanon.

57

[quote=“Tigerman”]Oh, fer chrissakes… are you kidding?
…yadda, yadda, yadda…
You should have been screaming a long time ago. :unamused:[/quote]

I haven’t always been here, have I? So, it would have been pretty difficult for you to have heard, particularly around the time Arafat and Sharon kicked off the last intifada. But good work on those assumptions. Keep ‘em~ and those eyeballs~ rollin’ rollin’ rolling… :unamused: :unamused: :unamused:

Oh, yes… you didn’t bother answering: what’s the point of continuing down this blnd alley?

[quote=“cfimages”]It was reported that many of the militia leaders received training from the US under the Clinton administration.[/quote] That’s correct. I went to grad school with one the officers involved. His ph.d dissertation was pretty much screwed when the US decided to cease cooperating with the Indonesians. Few years of school and language training shot to hell.

58

There’s no point. I’ve never stated or implied that there is a point in it.

But, I don’t expect Israel to sit back and absorb terrorist attack after terrorist attack without responding in kind. :unamused:

59

But you expect the Palestinians to do so? :unamused:

60

[quote=“Tigerman”][quote=“spook”]If the shoe fits:

“Terrorism refers to a strategy of using violence, or threat of violence to generate fear, cause disruption, and ultimately, to bring about compliance with specific political, religious, ideological, and personal demands. The targets of terrorist attacks typically are not the individuals who are killed, injured, or taken hostage, but rather the societies to which these individuals belong.”[/quote]

Well then, spook, I guess the question is…

is there a difference between terrorism committed with the aim of destroying a state and killing all of its inhabitants, and terrorism committed in reply to terrorism committed against it?

I mean, is there a difference between terrorism committed for the purpose of murdering your neighbor, and terrorism committed to survive?[/quote]

In other words, is there “good” terrorism and “bad” terrorism?

No. That’s a deluded notion with no rational basis.