An Israeli View: "Morality is not on our side"

[BurtWorm]

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/742257.html



Morality is not on our side
By Ze'ev Maoz

There's practically a holy consensus right now that the war in the North is a just war and that morality is on our side. The bitter truth must be said: this holy consensus is based on short-range selective memory, an introverted worldview, and double standards.

This war is not a just war. Israel is using excessive force without distinguishing between civilian population and enemy, whose sole purpose is extortion. That is not to say that morality and justice are on Hezbollah?s side. Most certainly not. But the fact that Hezbollah ?started it? when it kidnapped soldiers from across an international border does not even begin to tilt the scales of justice toward our side.

Let?s start with a few facts. We invaded a sovereign state, and occupied its capital in 1982. In the process of this occupation, we dropped several tons of bombs from the air, ground and sea, while wounding and killing thousands of civilians. Approximately 14,000 civilians were killed between June and September of 1982, according to a conservative estimate. The majority of these civilians had nothing to do with the PLO, which provided the official pretext for the war.


In Operations Accountability and Grapes of Wrath, we caused the mass flight of about 500,000 refugees from southern Lebanon on each occasion. There are no exact data on the number of casualties in these operations, but one can recall that in Operation Grapes of Wrath, we bombed a shelter in the village of Kafr Kana which killed 103 civilians. The bombing may have been accidental, but that did not make the operation any more moral.


...

[bloom]

1. "This war is not a just war."

It's nice when people are honest.

[Eric J in MN]

2. K and R

NT

[BillZBubb]

3. It's good to see at least one Israeli knows the truth.

[Bjorn Against]

124. There are many more as well

Despite what the US corporate media and AIPAC would like you to believe, there are many Israelis who do not approve of the actions of their government. I stand with everyone who wants peace whether they are Israeli, Palestinian, Lebanese, American or from any other nation for that matter. It is important we give voice to the people who truly want peace, and make it clear that those who say war is peace are dead wrong.

[Democrats_win]

4. Then there are those who don't support a cease fire: aka Warmonger Bush.

[jberryhill]

5. Why Does Ze'ev Maoz Hate Israel?

That anti-semitic rag Haaretz should be shut down.

[madeline_con]

17. That's wrong on so many levels.

Haaretz obviously does not hate Israel, or they wouldn't bother taking time out of their day to publish.

There's no indication of anti-Semitism, they seem like a reasonable group.

For the sake of free speech alone they should be allowed to voice their opinion of their country's policies.

[fujiyama]

31. Ummm...

He/She was being sarcastic.

But then again, there have been so many hateful comments on all sides the past few days, it's hard to tell anymore.

[warrens]

64. He was KIDDING

Playing off "why does John Kerry hate America" etc., the usual right-wing crap.

[w4rma]

24. You forgot your sarcasm tag. (nt)

[jberryhill]

58. Did Mark Twain Use A Sarcasm Tag?

C'mon.

[stepnw1f]

74. Mark Twain never posted on a Message Board

if he did, he'd probably consider the possibility people may misunderstand his sarcasm... being a literary person in all.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

99. probably not. Those too unsubtle to understand,

he would have ignored.
If sarcasm MUST be marked as such, there are three possibilities:
1) The sarcasm needs a little touch up.
2) The reader is not capable if recognizing sarcasm
3) a touch of both.

I would be against any hard and fast rule REQUIRING the use of a sarcasm signal.

[stepnw1f]

100. nobody is lobbying for a rule

and those are your words not his... after all, he is "dead".

[ChairmanAgnostic]

101. the rumors of his death have been widely exaggerated

Besides, with a wit like his, his thoughts live on forever.

[madeline_con]

40. My apologies if that was sarcasm....

Either way, welcome to DU. I didn't notice you were a newcomer at first. :hi:

[jberryhill]

127. Sarcasm

Is the chasm between what I wrote and what you understood.

[laura888]

6. thank you! n/t

[Pithy Cherub]

7. Serious rational thinking in the midst of all the heated rhetoric.

Finally, thank you to the brave soul that wrote it!

[davidinalameda]

8. when you have terrorists that hide among the populace

it's a bit difficult to only target them

the Lebanese government has allowed Hezbollah to use their terrority to launch strikes against Israel and they are paying the price of turning a blind-eye to the murders of innocent Israelis

I wonder how opposed to Israel's actions the author would be if it was his family who had been killed by the Hezbollah terrorists

[Lindacooks]

9. Oh wake up.

Hezbollah is in the government because they STARTED SOCIAL PROGRAMS that HELPED people. It's a grass roots organization that arose out of Israel's occupation of Lebanon.

And I can't stand that casual tone you 'Israel, right or wrong' people have about 'a bit difficult to only target them'. Why don't you take a look at some of the children who have been maimed and killed and then see if you can be so cavalier about it?

[davidinalameda]

11. grass roots?

how many grass roots organizations are responsible for the deaths of innocents; how many grass roots organizations lob bombs into neighboring countries

they are terrorists, pure and simple

[Lindacooks]

13. Look it up.

Grass roots means it grew among the people who live there.

Duh.

[shadowknows69]

28. One could say the minutemen

the ones from 1775 that is, were a "grass roots" organization.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shadowknows69]

32. I suppose technically

Although I look at "grass roots" as being the reaction to oppression not usually the cause. I'm completely torn on the whole mess. I just want innocent people to stop dying.

[davidinalameda]

34. then maybe Hezbollah should have released those Israeli soldiers

and Lebanon should not allow them to maintain bases inside their borders

[Name removed]

47. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[samhsarah]

14. I guess they have to lob them.....

instead of flying the bombs over the border, since our taxes haven't bought THEM top of the line aircraft and precision guided missiles to bomb ambulances and fleeing children with. Aren't the "terrorists" in this situation all just a matter of which parent with the dead kid you are talking to?

[lastliberalintexas]

22. What a sad statement

"Aren't the "terrorists" in this situation all just a matter of which parent with the dead kid you are talking to?"

And unfortuntely very true. :(

[davidinalameda]

30. so you're comparing Israeli self-desense to terrorist acts

interesting

[samhsarah]

37. How many of the civilians killed in Lebanon so far have been children?

Last I heard it was something around 1/3. So you are saying that THEY are who Israel is defending itself from? Are they all terrorists? Or was it just that those ignorant kids turned a "blind eye"?

[treestar]

94. Sadly, I think the Israel can do no wrong crowd does look at it

that way. I've seen a Palestinian film that glorifies suicide bombers. The claim is that this is standard throughout the Arab culture, and that teh children are taught in school to hate Israel, Jews, and that Israel must be destroyed. So they are probably looking at it as killing the future terrorists.

Those who kill for these reasons tend to look at the enemy's children as less than human, too.

[stepnw1f]

102. Link TV is Really Good

if you have satellite. They had a program on with Israeli military dissenters who claimed the military was targeting civilians.

[shadowknows69]

57. The Lebanese probably see it that way

n/t

[ThomCat]

67. Israel is committing terrorist acts.

The "self defense" in this case is purely PR and propoganda. Israel has been violating borders, kidnapping people, bombing civilians and steeling resourced routinely.

Of course, if you buy into the myth that Israel is a saintly nation that only acts in self defense then you'll buy into everything else they feed you too.

[MGD]

78. Bullshit. Israel is responding to terrorist acts

"Israel has been violating borders, kidnapping people, bombing civilians and steeling resourced routinely."

Accusing Israel of kidnapping is like saying the FBI kidnapped Timothy McVeigh. Israel has responded "proportionally" to Hezbollah for the past 15 years and they were and are condemned for it. Now they are condemned for acting "disproportionately". Just exactly how are they suppsoed to respond to an illegal organization of criminal fanatical thugs ceaselessly struggling to destroy them?

[ThomCat]

83. Nothing Israel has done is proporional.

How is Lebanon supposed to respond to a neighbor consisting of criminal fanatical thugs ceaselessing struggling to destroy them and steal from them?

[MGD]

88. Israel complied with 1559!

Hezbollah then refused to disarm and started making demands on behalf of the Lebanese people i.e. Shebaa farms. Iran fucked Lebanon by giving birth to and then raising this Shia monster called Hezbollah.

[ThomCat]

95. They would be damned fools to disarm

with Israel on their border.

Israel is holding hundreds of Lebanese citizens hostage without any due process, and almost 10,000 Palestinians. They bomb civilians seemingly at random (like recently in Gaza), and they respect nothing but their own use of power.

If you and I were neighbors and you acted like Israel I wouldn't disarm either. But that would not be valid justification for you to keep coming on my property, stealing from me, and kidnapping and killing my family members. And if you kept doing these things, like Israel does, then your attacks would not be self-defense. Israel is the aggressor.

Israel has taken the concept of self defense to paranoid lengths, using it to justify becoming the biggest thug in the neighborhood.

[MGD]

105. A.) It wasn't their choice to make,

it was directed to the legitimate government of Lebanon to disarm and disband Hezbollah and they didn't. Instead, they allowed Hezbollah to grow stronger and bolder. Now they're paying a terrible price for their impotence.

B.)Implying that Israel is kidnapping is like accusing the FBI of taking Tim Mcveigh hostage after he bombed the E.R. Murrow building. It's like saying you were kidnapped by the local law enforcement agency after being caught driving drunk.

[ThomCat]

107. You're assuming that the people they've kidnapped

are guilty. Even Israel doesn't claim that. Given the high number of people they're holding, the lack of due process and the unwillingness to actually hold any trials it's doubtfull that they're guilty. The unwillingness to actually pursue the rule of law indicates that Israel knows they're not guilty.

It's nice that you can assume guilt as a way of making Israel suddenly innocent. However, just like we're rounding up innocent people in Iraq, Israel appears to be rounding up innocent people too, and for similar reasons. It's a terror tactic. Just look at their record with the Palestinians they've held.

[funnymanpants]

109. False on both counts

Almost every single reporter on TV pointed out that if Lebanon tried to disarm Hizbollah, a civil war would have resulted. Hizbollah grew out of Israel's illegal occupation in 1982, in which it killed thousands.

As far as the kidnapping goes, Israel kidnaps many innocent people, at least according to human rights groups. They hold 10,000 prisoners, most without charge, a practice condemned by human rights groups. If it is okay for Israel to bomb Lebanon because of kidnapped soldiers, is it okay for Israel to be bombed?

http://www.mpacuk.org/content/view/2348/1/

It's the wee hours of the morning, still dark outside. A guerilla force comes out of nowhere to kidnap a soldier. After hours of careful movement, the force reaches its target, and the ambush is on! In seconds, the soldier finds himself looking down the barrel of a rifle.

...

This description, you'll be surprised to know, has nothing to do with the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. It is the story of an arrest I carried out as an IDF soldier, in the Nablus casbah, about 10 years ago. The "soldier" was a 17-year-old boy, and we kidnapped him because he knew "someone" who had done "something."

[funnymanpants]

110. Please be more specific

>>What exactly has Israel been condemned for? They have not been condemned for acting proportionality.

Every human rights group that has looked at Israel--including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, B'Tsleem, a Palestinian Human Rights group, and the UN Human Rights Commission--have found Israel guilty of "deliberate killing" and "torture," to cite a human rights report by the UN, endorsed by something like 140 nations and only opposed by the US and Israel.

Most of Israel's actions are done to support its illegal occupation, so I hardly consider its actions self-defense.

[funnymanpants]

92. Yes, and so human rights groups

Every single human rights group that has looked at Israel's behaviour--including Amnesty Internaional, Human Rights Watch, B'tsleem (based in Israel), a human rights group based in the West Bank, and the UN Human rights commission have found Israel guilty of "deliberate killing" and "torture," to quote one human rights report released in 2000 and endorsed by 140 nations, with only Israel and the USA voting against.

Note that deliberate killing does not mean accidental killing in war or even the use of indiscriminate force. It means murder.

That's not to say that Hizbollah is not a terroist group, by the way, but almost all of Israel's actions are in response to shore up their illegal occupation.

[MGD]

52. Thank you.

terrorists with funding from Iran and Syria amounting to upwards of $200 million a year no less. They aren't a grass roots organization, their a state sponsored terrorist organization that has undermined a legitimate government at the behest of their state sponsors.

[TheMirrorMan]

15. "started social programs that helped people"

Al-qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas provide financial aid to families of suicide bombers, too.

Money, it's a helluva drug.

[Lindacooks]

19. Actually, what that proves is that the liberal philosophy WORKS.

If you help people instead of marginalizing them, denigrating them, suppressing and oppressing them, and spitting on them, the whole world becomes a better place. That isn't just a platitude; it's a philosophy that is quite effective.

[bling bling]

36. Is encouraging your own children to die a martyr good for society?

Apparently so, if you're a member of Hezbollah:

------

Hizbullah Widows Enjoy Honor, Comforts in Lebanon
Run Date: 09/14/03


BEIRUT, Lebanon (WOMENSENEWS)--Like many Shiite Muslim girls in southern Lebanon, Rima Naji was married early, at the tender age of 13. By 15 she had delivered her first child--a healthy boy--and by 19 her husband Sheikh Fadi Abboud was dead.

"He was martyred on the 10th of February 1995. He was 21 years old," she says. "Thank God he died according to the objectives of Hizbullah."

A member of Hizbullah or "Party of God," the Shiite Islamic resistance group that controls southern Lebanon, Aboud died in a commando operation against the Israeli army, which occupied the south from 1982 to 2000. His death was not extraordinary. During the lengthy occupation, scores of Lebanese were displaced, maimed and killed in a bloody guerilla war. When the Israeli army withdrew in May 2000, grinding their tanks out from bunkers across the south, Hizbullah--which is listed as a terrorist organization by the Pentagon--emerged victorious.

No Regrets About Husband's Fate
A staunch, pious woman veiled completely in black, Naji shows little regret about her ultimately fateful marriage.

"When I married him, I knew he followed the party. I knew I had a martyr at home," she says. Leaning closer, she confesses her ambitions for her sons, the youngest of whom was a nursling when Aboud died.

"When my sons tell me: 'I hope to become a martyr one day,' I say: 'I hope so too. I hope God chooses you as a martyr.'

Alarmed by U.S. Calls to Dismantle Hizbullah
Completely dependent on Hizbullah, women such as Zoorgoof are directly threatened by the United States' recent calls for Hizbullah to dismantle. Visiting Beirut in May this year, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell demanded Hizbullah disarm and that the Lebanese army be deployed to the Israeli border.

Since 2000, Hizbullah, which is backed by Syria and Iran, has controlled south Lebanon autonomously. This decision is ultimately condoned by Syria, which has occupied Lebanon since the end of its civil war, and views Hizbullah as a card to play in any future peace negotiations with Israel.

Dismantling the party that has a constituency of 500,000 supporters could only be done by force, says Hamzeh. "And this will mean a civil war. It doesn't seem that Hizbullah will just pack its bags and leave."

Hizbullah Budget Larger Than Government's
Hamzeh also estimates the budget of the group at over $1 billion a year, more than that of the Lebanese government. Fifty percent of this figure comes from Iran, says Hamzeh, which as a Shiite theocracy holds a spiritual veto over the party.

At present it appears the future of Hizbullah is ensured, not only financially but by the willingness of many of its women to offer up their offspring.

"God chose my husband to be a martyr and a Muslim, and that's a great honor," says Naji, enamored with the promises of glory outlined in the Koran. "I hope my children become martyrs and my father and brothers too. Inshallah," she says. God willing.

edited to add link: http://www.womensenews.org/article.cfm/dyn/aid/1527

[BurtWorm]

65. Speaking of dead children...

From the Ha'aretz op-ed piece:

"So much for the history of morality. Now, let's consider current affairs. What exactly is the difference between launching Katyushas into civilian population centers in Israel and the Israel Air Force bombing population centers in south Beirut, Tyre, Sidon and Tripoli? The IDF has fired thousands of shells into south Lebanon villages, alleging that Hezbollah men are concealed among the civilian population. Approximately 25 Israeli civilians have been killed as a result of Katyusha missiles to date. The number of dead in Lebanon, the vast majority comprised of civilians who have nothing to do with Hezbollah, is more than 300."

[MGD]

106. What exactly is the difference

between launching Katyushas into civilian population centers in Israel and the Israel Air Force bombing population centers in south Beirut, Tyre, Sidon and Tripoli?

There is only one difference that I can see, Israeli citizens have bomb shelters and Lebanese citizens do not. Were that not the case, those Kaytushas would be killing hundreds of Israeli civillians too.

[funnymanpants]

113. Highy doubtful

Kaytusha rockets are extremelly inaccurate so it is doubtful even without the bomb sheleters they could kill even dozens.

As Human Rights Watch points out, the fact that Hizbollah uses rockets it can't control, thus meaning they could kill civilians, constitutes a war crime. Just to point out that Human Rights Watch does condemn Hizboallah as well as Israel.

[Warren DeMontague]

46. Yeah, want to know what that "Grass roots" organization is asking for

in return for the two Israeli soliders it kidnapped, unprovoked, from inside Israel?

"Heroes" like Samir Kuntar.

Here's an excerpt from the 2003 Washington Post article by Smadar Kaiser, mother of the child Samir Kuntar Killed:

http://www.geocities.com/myjoy18/abbas.htm

I suggest you read those links.

For the record, I agree with the Ha'aretz piece, here. I think Israel has overreacted, I think the indiscriminate targeting of civilians is wrong, and I think this has been a horrible move not just from a human stand point but from a security one as well.

But that doesn't mean that Hezbollah aren't despicable terrorists, who are also ultimately responsible for holding southern Lebanon hostage and instigating this mess. Particularly since they were a "resistance movement" formed obstensibly to get Israel to withdraw from Lebanon- which they did, in 2000. So why the attacks on Israel?

I think we need a ceasefire, and an international force, but we also need Hezbollah to disarm and return the two soldiers. And the UN agrees with me.

[MGD]

53. "I think we need a ceasefire,

and an international force, but we also need Hezbollah to disarm and return the two soldiers."

There was a cease-fire; it failed. There is an international force in the region; it is impotent; Hezbollah was orderd to disarm some 6 years ago; they have spent the time between then and now amassing a vast arsenal of weapons which they now openly use against Israeli civillians. War is what happens when diplomacy fails and, as such, more diplomacy is not necessarily the answer.

[Warren DeMontague]

123. Great. Now I've got both sides yellin' at me.

I have friends and relatives in Israel. I understand the larger situation and I agree Israel was in its rights to do something- I just don't think this was the way to go about it. I think what appears to be the indiscriminate targeting of civilians is not just wrong, but counter-productive from a security standpoint as well. They're making enemies of people who didn't have a beef with them, previously.

[ThomCat]

68. "two Israeli soliders it kidnapped, unprovoked, from inside Israel"

What world are you living in? Unprovoked?

Israel has diverted their water, is making all kinds of threats about how they can use the remaining water that runs through their land, has routinely violated Lebanon's border, and that's just the stuff that we know about as a matter of absolute fact.

It is only unprovoked if you insist on ignoring everything that Israel does.

[Warren DeMontague]

122. And for the people who think the mere existence of Israel is a provocation

then no matter how many occupied territories they pull out of- like they did in Lebanon in 2000, like how they just pulled out of Gaza- there's nothing Israel can do short of "go away" that will satisfy them.

As it is-- "threats about hwo they can use the remaining water that runs through their land"- uh, what country doesn't do that, i.e. use the water that runs through their land?

Got any factual links to back up these provocations?

[ShortnFiery]

79. "unprovoked,"

:wtf: Israel is holding hundreds of Lebanese in it's jails without due process.

It was carefully planned by Israeli Leaders a year in advanced and provoked by it's indiscriminate imprisonment of Lebanese leaders.

[Warren DeMontague]

121. Really? Then how come they're asking for Samir Kuntar

who was given due process, tried and sentenced for bashing in a four year old girl's head with a rifle butt?

[MGD]

51. wha, is it time to wake up already?

"Hezbollah is in the government because they STARTED SOCIAL PROGRAMS that HELPED people."

Hezbollah is in the government because Iran and Syria are pumping this Terorrist group full of cash. In so doing, they are undermining the legitimate government and directly contributing to the current events.

"And I can't stand that casual tone you 'Israel, right or wrong' people have about 'a bit difficult to only target them'."

And I can't stand how easily this simple reality is ignored by some people who are all too eager to see this war as something other than what it is. Hezbollah fighters are using babies as human shields. The ease with which they sacrifice the innocent to their cause should be the end of any argument about who holds the moral high ground here and should strengthen our resolve to eradicate their evil kind from this earth.

"Why don't you take a look at some of the children who have been maimed and killed and then see if you can be so cavalier about it?"

To my knowledge, nobody except Hezbollah is indifferent to the plight of the innocent Lebanese civillians.

[ThomCat]

69. "To my knowledge, nobody except Hezbollah is indifferent

to the plight of the innocent Lebanese civilians."

You're joking right? Israel certainly seems indifferent. They're the ones deliberately bombing civilians AND civilian infrastructure. And they are the ones who opened up a supposed safe corridor for humanitarian aid only to bomb the end of that corridor.

How is it possible to maintain that illusion that Israel is innocent in the face of all the evidence to the contrary? Doesn't the real world begin to call to you at some point?

[MGD]

81. No I'm not joking

If Israel were unconcerned about innocent Lebanese civilians, the casualties could easily be in the hundreds of thousands by now. They have nukes for Christ's sake. What's more, Israel is lined up on the border and ready to fight Hezbollah face to face but Iran and Syria have made it clear that if they do that, they will enter the conflict. Because of this, Israel has no alternative but to use bombs.

[ThomCat]

84. So the fact that they could commit

even larger attrocities means that what they are doing now isn't an attrocity?

By that logic, murderers should be released because they didn't commit mass murder. We could empty our jails.

[MGD]

108. There has never been a war that wasn't an atrocity.

It should also be noted that the longer Hezbollah lobs missiles into Israeli cities, the less restraint Israel will feel compelled to show. This is how things get way the fuck out of control.

[ThomCat]

111. This works in reverse too.

The longer Israel keeps committing attrocities the more committed people will be to resisting Israel and fighting back at all costs.

Israel has been commmitting the most attrocities, and the largest attrocities, so the Palestinians and Lebenese have a lot of commitment right now. They are not going to trust Israel, or disarm because Israel says so. You don't put down your knife when the rabid dog growls at you.

[MGD]

126. I realize this. Like I said, "way the fuck out of control"

[treestar]

86. In fact, is it really that difficult to target them?

Why not approach it that way? Isn't their intelligence agency operational at all? I would think there is some possibility of even zeroing in on the weapons.

[Igel]

93. "Grass roots" isn't the right

term. Like many other groups that appear to be grass roots organizations after the fact, people went in to organize precisely such a group; they funded it, propagated it, and advised it. They helped it set up international funding sources, and provided it with material assistance.

Its charity work for a number of years involved taking Iranian funds and money from overseas Muslim charities and providing for the people; training preachers to propagate its message, with those supporting Hezbollah getting help. This is precisely what people hate when Christian charities do it: listen to a sermon, get food, with the implicit expectation of support for the organization--some "grass roots"!

"Grass roots" implies that the people self-organized, with no or nearly no outside influence.

[CHORONZON]

18. The question is efficacy not morality.

"when you have terrorists that hide among the populace
it's a bit difficult to only target them"

You've illustrated the precise reason that I think large scale invasions are an ineffective means of combating terrorist organizations. Targeting large numbers of people the way that Israel has will only increase the hatred of that nation in the region at large.

I'm not interested in labeling this conflict "justified" or "unjustified" or employing any other normative language. Value judgments obscure the point. My opinion is that a terrorist organization is far more like an organized crime syndicate than a foreign army, and that any strategic maneuver that ignores that subtlety will fail.

[hopeisaplace]

20. I completely agree with this statement you made,

"My opinion is that a terrorist organization is far more like an organized crime syndicate than a foreign army, and that any strategic maneuver that ignores that subtlety will fail"

But you know what, I think they know this. It's just so convenient politically to have
an endless "war on terror". It's easier to achieve whatever objectives they want to achieve
by using the words "war" everyday. JMO.


Edit: by "they" I mean any government that uses the word war.

[CHORONZON]

133. I don't doubt that you are right.

But I think this sort of logic needs to be used more often. I can only hope that the more things like this get said, the more people will consider them when they evaluate "war on terror", and related Orwellian nonsense.

[treestar]

87. Goes back to the schoolyard just like most of these Israel right at

all costs arguments.

I remember when the teachers would punish the entire class over something one kid in it did.

[Xeric]

23. I love the logic of your statement

I'm assuming then that if the U.S. government finds a so called "sleeper cell" of "terrorists" in your home town you won't mind if they drop some white phosphorus on you and yours and call you collateral damage? After all, it's for the greater good, right?

[davidinalameda]

33. if my city government was protecting those terrorists

while they were attacking others, then yes

the feds have a duty to protect their citizens from attacks

of course, the proper analogy would be the Canadians or the Mexicans protecting anti-American terrorists

it's like the US going into Afghanistan after 9/11 to take out the Taliban and get those responsible for the destruction of the WTC and thousands of lives

I would hesitate to say only the most hard-core pacificists would have not supported our going into Afghanistan

of course, there were others but

[Xeric]

39. Ah, the disconnect

This is the interesting part.
So you are claiming that you wouldn't mind you and your family being killed if you lived in a city that "protected the terrorists"? So you are willing to be a martyr for the cause? After all, there are no civilians. Either you're with us or against us.
"The feds have a duty to protect their citizens from attacks". Where have I heard that before? Kind of like the folks that write LTTE's claiming they have no problem giving up their freedoms and praising the Bush admin for the "war on terror". After all, freedom isn't free.
Now on to Afghanistan. There we are. Did we get the 'terrorists"? Uh no we didn't, did we? We didn't even get rid of the Taliban. We set up a puppet government that has advocated the same kind of a fundamentalist regime as the Taliban (whom we originally funded) BUT this regime is willing to protect our interests there in terms of oil pipelines. You had no trouble buying into the neocon propaganda that we were "bringing democracy" to Afghanistan it seems.

I have to admit I'm somewhat surprised that so many DU'ers have fallen for this part of the neocon conspiracy.

[truedelphi]

49. Thanks for pointing out the disconnect

Lately I have been too mad, sad, tired, frustrated to be logical.

Glad you could handle it so well.

[davidinalameda]

91. neo-con conspiracy

interesting

you are either for freedom from terrorist attacks or you're not

sounds to me like you're willing to sit back and let the terrorists kill your family without any retaliation

[stepnw1f]

117. "Either you're with us or against us."

Heil Bushler!!!

[orleans]

44. "if my city government was protecting those terrorists

while they were attacking others, then yes"

if someone thinks this would be acceptable i would venture to say they either have no children, or they have no heart

[LostinVA]

54. Yup n/t

[ThomCat]

70. I agree.

That is a truly heartless possition. And I'll bet it's being taken purely as a retorical device.

"It'll never really happen, but agreeing will bolster my argument so I'll agree."

The KKK still exists throughout the US, and they have a long history as a home-grown terrorist organization. Law enforcement in many towns, cities and states were historically uninterested in arresting these people. Should we have bombed and destroyed US cities because of this?

And that is still assuming that they are correct that Hezbolah is, in fact, nothing but a terrorist organization. The Nazis thought the French Resistance were terrorists. We routinely call local militias in Central and South America terrorists. It seems that whenever the people form a small army to resist a big one the small army is labeled terrorists.

I don't like ANY army, but people have a right to resist. Israel has been the occupying force. Israel has been the mass murder. Israel has been the theif of resources. Israel has been the destroyer of civilian infrastructure. If it wasn't for Israel's crimes there wouldn't be a Hezbolah.

[Bear down under]

129. Er, wouldn't that include the cities

in which the pilots who flew the planes on 9/11 trained? The American cities?
It transpired very quickly after the attack that these guys had been training in the US for months -- and that there were quite a few people in the intelligence/security agencies who knew they were there.

[brentblack]

59. Sleeper and active

Very big difference. If there was a terror cell in Alabama that was shelling my beloved Georgia and the Gov. of Alabama was shielding and protecting them-- then we bomb the crap out of them.

If there are people (like the the so-called terror cell from Miami) that are not actively doing anything (sleeper cells), then NO - bombing is not the answer. Once they boogie in public all bets are off.

Also, comparing Hezbollah and Hamas to sleeper cells is a bit understated and myopic.

War is rarely the answer, but it is an option that can only be dismissed for awhile when you are constantly attacked. As far as I am concerned, Israel has been restrained in their responses for 50 years - they have been attacked by multiple nations three times in the last 37 years. They have listended to heads of state call for their destruction while funding Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood and others. They have to try and negotiate peace with people that do not recognize their right to exist and call for their destruction. Israel loses no matter what.

I openly weep for all the peoples involved in this (and all) wars, but I stand strong with Israel.

[ShortnFiery]

80. I stand STRONG with what is most humanitarian ...

And continuing a war that could be ended a.s.a.p. is criminal on our part not to try.

No, Israel is doing wrong. The USA did wrong in invading Iraq and Israel is also committing war crimes.

[Moochy]

26. Individuals and states

In bringing out that tired old saw: "if it was his family who had been killed" I think that you intentionally muddy the waters by conflating a soverign tates exercise of military power with an individual's motivation for revenge.

"the Lebanese government has allowed Hezbollah to use their terrority to launch strikes against Israel and they are paying the price of turning a blind-eye to the murders of innocent Israelis"

Who is "they"? the government or the innocent people the Lebanese govt. allows Hezbollah to hide amongst?

on edit: clarity

[burrowowl]

10. Late breaking on CNN

U$ giving Isrealis bunker busterd.
This is called weapons testing.

[ThomCat]

116. Which will almost certainly be used

on bomb shelters where civilians are trying to ride out the storm.

[aaronbees]

12. Excellent analysis....

Particularly this line, to close the op-ed piece: "... maybe we will win this conflict on the military field, maybe we will make some diplomatic gains, but on the moral plane, we have no advantage, and we have no special status."

Thank you for posting this!

[madeline_con]

16. "Operation Grapes of Wrath"

Two groups of religious extremeists have hijacked Israel and Lebanon, and innocent peole are being killed!

[liberal_patriot_md]

21. From talking to people I know

The main reason people in the US take Israel's side has nothing to do with morality or facts or anything like that. They pick Israel because many feel that this escalation will bring about the End of Days, Judgment Day, Rapture, Left Behind scenarios that the fundies get woodies thinking about. They are egging Israel on to start the next World War hoping that it will make the Rapture come quicker. So basically Christians are rooting for more war and death out of selfish expectations about the End of the World. Not very Christian if you ask me.

[DallasNE]

25. Looking At The Picture Can Only Make You Sick

Anderson Cooper of CNN ventured into south Beruit today. Apartment building after apartment building is flattened along with small shops. Cooper also showed two clearly marked ambulances that had been shot up today. Indeed, the target select does not leave Israel with any moral high ground.

America's priorities are rather convoluted as well. The first priority was to rush additional munitions to Israel so they would not have to slow down their assult on Lebanon. Only after that was in place was there an attempt to evacuate American citizens from Beruit. No wonder there have been comparisons to Katrina.

And all of this has only hidden from view the carnage under way in Iraq, especially Baghdad. It was strange to see the pictures from Baghdad and Beruit on the same day. They were totally indistinguishable. Even the news commentator had to ask for clarification on which city each segment came from.

[Swamp Rat]

27. But Satan is

And his only berotten son.

[EVDebs]

35. Commondreams article; Larger Conflict Looms

http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0723-24.htm

[Just Me]

38. Neither morality or the rule of law or,....the ten commandments.

Those in charge were NOT victims of the holocaust. I have been in visitation with those victims.

They are in mourning at the,...well, the,...reminders of horror being waged by their own. :cry;

Insanity.

In spite of the horror, they advocated THE RULE OF LAW APPLIED TO EVERY ONE!!!!

In spite of the horror,...their own defy that which could have saved them.

I can't take this. Time to sleep.

[question everything]

41. Where are the stories from Arab newspapers

about the lack of morality on their side?

[rman]

42. Hezbollah is not acting on behalf of all Arabs.

Hezbollah has a minority presence in the Lebanese government, and presumably even fewer Lebanese support Hezbollah's terrorist actions.
The Israeli government however is acting on behalf of all Israelis, even though not all support its current actions.

[Chulanowa]

43. I was unaware that "Arabs" were the factor in this.

I thought it was Israel vs. hezbollah.

At least, that's what everyone keeps saying, isn't it?

[reincarnated]

48. Would it make you feel better? n/t

[truedelphi]

50. Well, for starters,

As of yesterday, the Israelis blew up the media in Lebanon. Not that too many there have time to read the papers or watch the news.

[Recursion]

119. Al-Quds and Al-Ahram both ran editorials

critical of Hezbollah. They're both fairly "mainstream".

[orleans]

45. interesting piece--thanks for posting

i don't understand why it is socially unacceptable to criticize israel...

why are they so special that we can criticize and bitch about every other country, any other people except the israelis?

the rest of the world is calling for a cease fire except us--of course the neocons want as much death and mayhem as possible in the middle east. so we can say america is wrong for not calling for a cease fire, hezbollah is wrong for fighting, but israel? oh, we can't say anything critical of them. wtf?

[LostinVA]

55. Because criticizing Israel in any way, no matter what they do, make you

antisemtic... and means you think Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth and that you advocated a modern-day Holocaust. Or so a scarily large amount of posters are saying.

To some, they should be the Teflon Country.

[brentblack]

60. Not Teflon

But...people need to take into account all the crap the Jews have endured (and continue to endure in a sea of animosity) and how, in the last 30 years, they have tried to give all the land that the other side has been saying is a requirement to peace. This is NOT a war about land or resettlement - it is about the extermination of the state of Israel and its inhabitants. This is the STATED GOAL of Hezbollah, Iran and a host of other groups involved, at some level, in this conflict. If you think it is only Hezbollah involved - please look closer, all the ususal suspects are involved - or will be. Israel did not start any of the 3 major wars they won last century. They have been attacked by Syria and Egypt twice - and these guys are not third rate armies.

Being critical of Israel is not anti-semetic, but refusal to acknowledge what they have to live with is moronic and blind. As an athiest, I have to mark down another stain on organized religion. of course, if we get rid of religion, humans will find another reason to fight.

My Grandfather was an Episcopal Minister for 40 years. In his 1st year at Seminary, a theology professor said, in his opening statements, that 'man is no damn good'. The longer I live and learn, the more I think he was right. Thank goodness for cats and dogs.

How long would we accept Mexico lobbing rockets into Brownsville? Personally, as a Atlanta Falcons fan...I would sacrifice Dallas and the Cowboys....just kidding, Bill Parcells.

[LostinVA]

61. There is no "but."

I'm TIRED of hearing "But Israel" the last two weeks. SICK of it. It makes not an iota of difference. The Israeli government has committed international war crimes, and they proudly announced this very thing yesterday.

The Mexico analogy is a strawman, and you know it -- it would be like a neo Pancho Villa doing it. And, who the hell cares???

And, back the FUCK off from me -- how dare you call me moronic and blind? Learn some manners.

[brentblack]

66. No debate possible

If you cannot recognize the problem they face, then yes you are being blind. I will retract moronic willingly as it is not my intention to insult anyone. I apologize. I also backoff of my so-called strawman analogy as it is not fully applicable.

Is the other side not commiting war crimes? Strapping bombs onto the bodies of children to kill civilians?

War is wrong, but defending yourself is survival. I cannot condemn Israel as long as they have proximate enemies that have as their STATED GOAL the destruction of Israel. If you say the long history of Israel and the aggression that they have faced for centuries matters not one iota - then I suspect there is something more in your opposition to this war. To ignore that is rather short sighted at best.

[ThomCat]

71. it's not that people don't recognize what Israel faces.

But that it's not a valid justification for what Israel has done.

Israel's situation is a very valid reason to have a strong military. It's not a valid justification for invading other people's lands, killing their people, and stealing their resources.

Once you stop defending yourself and become the terrorist nation you are responsible for everything you do.

[LostinVA]

72. Thanks, Thom n/t

[progressivebydesign]

76. Your description sounds scarily like America under Bush's watch. n/t

[ThomCat]

82. Yes, it is.

Which is just one more reason why a lot of people have a knee-jerk reaction in support of Israel. It's hard to condemn them without also condemning us. And vice versa.

[classysassy]

132. America's support of Isreal

no matter what they do is unjust and will someday will destroy this country for our blink support for the unjust policies of Isreal.

[treestar]

90. It is silly to punish others near them for their stated goal when

their stated goal is unreachable.

Unless you really think they can accomplish their stated goal, what is the point? There may be 10 people in France with the goal of destroying the US. So the US is entitled to bomb France into oblivion?

If these Arab countries really wanted to, as countries, or could, destroy Israel, they'd have done it by now.

The Lebanese army would have attached long ago, along with the Syrian army, the Saudi Arabian army, and the Egyptian army. For starters.

[brentblack]

96. Wars

"If these Arab countries really wanted to, as countries, or could, destroy Israel, they'd have done it by now.

The Lebanese army would have attached long ago, along with the Syrian army, the Saudi Arabian army, and the Egyptian army. For starters."


...and they (the countries , minus Saudia Arabia which is rather secular and capitalistic as far as goals go, you mentioned) have tried several times; everytime they were defeated. Iran is creating Nuclear weapons with, again, the stated goal of destroying Israel.

As for your strawman analogy about France, if the government if France were supporting these people and they were ACTIVELY trying to destroy us - then a military option is viable. Talk is not action. The so-called terror cell in Miami was just a smokescreen - they are only a danger to themselves. It is when a group is funded and supported by nation-states (That also verbally support their goals) that it becomes something more than talk.


All of war is a crime. However, if we let one group of people try to destroy another one AGAIN, then we are complicit.

Some things are worth fighting for, the lack of that feeling is tantamount to spiritual death...in my very humble opinion.

[funnymanpants]

98. What about Israel's attacks?

Israel attacked Egypt in 56 and Lebanon in 82.

Egypt did attack Irael in 73, but that was because Isael still held on to the Sinnai Penisular it caputred illegally in 56. Did you forget that?

In the war of 48, the Arab states attacked, but if you were an Arab you also would have attacked Israel. The UN promised Irael 55% of the land they wanted, though it only owned less than 10%. This was done through UN General Resolutin 181, which two ad hoc committess determined was illegal because the UN had no right to grant land to people. If another country came into the US and was going to take over 50% of it, you would fight, too.

Moreover, several times during the fighting the US and other countries called for a truce, but Israel did not abide because it had the superior military and wanted to capture more land than was granted by the UN. In the end it pushed its borders so that it got 88% of the land, much more than the UN granted it. In the '67 war (whose start is also in dispute: several generals admitted that the verbal threats by Arabs were empty and were used as a pretext for the war), Israel captured everything and has refused to grant any rights to the Palestinians living in the occupied territory.

[question everything]

130. Oh, please check your facts

Israel joined France and Britain in 1956 with attack on Egypt but quickly withdrew and UN forces were stationed between the two countries.

In 1967 Egypt kicked the UN and blockaded the straits of Tiran - an intentionally recognized act of war. Israel waited three weeks for diplomatic results that did not came and then attacked.

I am amazed at so much venom being directed at Israel without even checking the simple facts that you should be able to find at.. Wikipedia, for example.

Correction. I am no longer amazed. It is clear that most DUers have a pavlovian negative reaction to everything that Israel does.

Thankfully, the political leaders do show some maturity. With posts like the ones here we can kiss any elections winning good bye.

[Recursion]

128. Funny you should mention that...

The Lebanese army would have attached long ago, along with the Syrian army, the Saudi Arabian army, and the Egyptian army. For starters.

Umm... they did, 40 years ago. And 60 years ago. It was a disaster for the whole region and drove them closer to the Soviets.

[Ms. Clio]

103. Your own knowledge of history is sorely lacking

google Pancho Villa + the Pershing Expedition. While you're at it, look up the Comanches, the Yaquis, and raids from Mexico into the U.S. Southwest. The U.S. did not destroy Mexico City in retaliation.

The "long history" of the current state of Israel is about sixty years. Jews and Arabs in Palestine coexisted rather peacefully until the late nineteenth-century. The great pogroms were in European nations, particularly Russia, for the most part.

HTH.

[funnymanpants]

89. False

>>they have tried to give all the land that the other side has been saying is a requirement to peace.

This is absoutely and completely false. Have a look at the human rights reports. The Olso accords were signed in the early 90s and requred Isael to stop building settlements in the occpied territories. The Israelis then *doubled* the number of settlers. When it came time for a final agreement, Irsael said to the Palestinians, tough, those settlments are there to stay, making a real Palestinian country impossible.

Regarding the lobbing of rockets, the border has been relatively queit in the past six years. Hizbollah did provoke Israel, but Israel responded disproportionately.

You should know that Israel regularly kidnaps Palestinians and holds them without charges. It holds 10,000 Palestinian prisoners, most without charges, a practice condemned by human rights group. On June 24, it kidpnapped a doctor and his brother. So you could even claim Israel started the provocation. Should Israel be bombed back to the stone ages for its provocations?

>>Israel did not start any of the 3 major wars they won last century.

Which 3 major wars are you talking about? In 1956 Israel attacked Egypt. Ben Gurion (the father of Israel) met with France and Britain and outline an aggressive plan that would completely involve re-arranging the borders of other countries for Irael's benefit. Israel then attacked Egypt on the bogus grounds that Egypt had closed a port to Irael, an action completely legal. The idea was to get Britan and France to imediately invade as well and declare a cease fire, but then have possession of the Suez canal. The plan backfired and the US was very angry at Israel for their trick.

In 1982 Israel invaded Lebanon because some Palestinians in Britain killed an envoy. The Plalestinians in Britain had nothing to do with the PLO in Lebanon--in fact, they were sworn enemies. No matter. Israel invaded anyway.

As far as the crap that Israel has endured, it is nothing compared to the crap the Palestinians endure under Israel's illegal aggression. The Irael commander said in 1967 after the territories were captured "We shall treat them like dogs and see if they will leave."

[ThomCat]

97. The pro-Israeli people claim that only they know history

but they mostly know the sanitized mythology that countries teach their children. That isn't real history.

And the only way to support what Israel is doing right now is to ignore Israel's history.

[liberalpragmatist]

104. Egypt and Syria ARE third-rate militaries

Israel would crush the Syrian military if they were to fight it. And last time I checked, Egypt has been at peace with Israel for nearly 30 years. These armies haven't been threats for decades, and even at the height of the Cold War, the Israeli military was STILL easily the strongest in the Middle East. In '67 itself, although most Israelis genuinely feared a cataclysm, subsequently declassified intelligence and military reports from both Israel and the United States were clear that Israel would defeat the Arab armies quickly, whether Israel struck first or the Arab states struck first.

Most of us fully recognize that Israel has a right to defend itself. And it has a right to defend itself militarily. That's not at issue. As Henry Seigman, CFR fellow and former head of the American Jewish Congress, put it, "Despite bitter lessons from the past, Israel's political and military leaders remain addicted to the notion that, whatever they have a right to do, they have a right to overdo."*

And no, I'm not talking about the silly "proportionate/disproportionate" debate, which quickly refocuses on arcane theories of military strategy. I'm talking about the ineffectiveness of the current actions. As many, including those in the Israeli Knesset and Israeli military analysts are pointing out, Hezbollah is NOT weakening. Although it is popular for Israel-backers in this to argue that Israel needs to "destroy Hezbollah" even Israel's military leaders acknowledge that's impossible. Instead, military officials have talked of creating a buffer zone and "degrading" Hezbollah's capacity to attack. That's a worthwhile goal, but Israel's current strategy isn't getting it anywhere closer to that goal. Israel gambled that a large escalation would intimidate Hezbollah into stopping missile attacks. Instead, missile attacks have surged and the Israeli army is quickly getting stuck in a conflict it cannot win - a conflict that is needlessly reducing Lebanon to rubble again, destroying parts of Lebanon that AREN'T firing missiles at Israel, including much of Southern Beirut, and resulting in 500,000+ evacuations and over 300 (probably more) deaths. These could be justifiable if it were clearly accomplishing something in the greater good, but there is no evidence that's happening. And Israel is getting stuck with a radicalized, angry Lebanese population that was the most pro-Western country in the Middle East besides Israel.

What should Israel have done? More limited airstrikes targetting Hezbollah in the South, and perhaps even a blockade could have been employed. There could have been a couple days in which Israel threatened retaliation unless the soldiers were returned. There could have been a couple days break to allow relief workers access to refugees and bombing victims and to allow diplomatic solutions some time. Instead, Israel lashed out and has made the problem more difficult to solve. It now has, on its hands, a radicalized, angry population on its northern borders and a PR disaster.

* http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,1821621,00.html (The quote is from this article; it's a good, very balanced article that takes both sides to task, and whatever your views on what I have said, I would recommend you read it.)

[bling bling]

131. This is one of the best posts I've yet seen on the topic.

I've been rooting through post after post for days trying to find an analysis to help me understand the situation more fully to form my opinion on the matter. I have been thoroughly side-tracked, taken aback and turned off (to say the least) by so many of the radical posts with a one or two sentence argument against Israel boiling down to Israel a "terrorist" state controlled by the BFEE.

I appreciate your analysis. I found it very helpful. It's a shame Israel didn't consult someone such as yourself before this mess got out of control.

[liberalpragmatist]

137. Thank you

I'm no military strategist, and I hope I'm wrong and this all works out for the best. But I'm judging based on what I'm reading and seeing on the news. I'm also watching in horror as the Israel's aims keep changing from "destroying Hezbollah (air war only, 2 weeks tops)," to "degrading Hezbollah (with small ground incursions for a month)" to "occupying a buffer zone for an indefinite amount of time to keep Hezbollah a few miles away from the border."

A policy of revenge that is reliant entirely on military retaliation will never bring peace. This is as true of Israel and its neighbors as it is for every other country in the world. Particularly when a country is dealing with assymetric warfare against irregular forces, a total victory is not possible without meeting political conditions and using some restraint.

[LSK]

62. K&R

[twaddler01]

63. I agree, it's more than meets the eye

and much more complicated situation. Takes lots of research to get to the bottom of it, which is what I hope to do so I don't fall into an "ignorance" category...just don't know if the US is doing what needs to be done right now. Unfortunately, the Iraq war situation has taken a lot from us, and sadly it wasn't nessesary...

[ThomCat]

73. And now the reports that Israel is using CLUSTER BOMBS.

Up to 400 casualties, almost all civilian. There is no possible self-defense justification for using these damned things. And we're providing them.
x(

[blonndee]

77. Kind of hard to claim you're using "surgical strikes"

and trying not to kill civilians when you utilize those MFers in heavily populated areas.

[ThomCat]

85. But several people here certainly will.

:eyes:

You have to wonder about the hypocracy of people who support everything Isreal does, but claim everyone else are monsters.

[brg5001]

112. It's clear that we Jews have our wingnuts, too

Wow! Read through the entire thread. Obviously tempers are flaring and passions are high.

As a Jewish left-leaning libertarian my first instinct was of course to defend Israel's actions. But upon closer scrutiny, it's clear that many defenders of Israel's tactics are blaming ordinary Lebanese for that country's inability to control Hezbollah. Lebanon's civil war never really ended -- it's so Balkanized...in the sense that several groups have reached an armed truce. Is it right to rain bombs down on a civilian population because Hezbollah's fanatics are acting out? I think not.

If, in fact, the power and money behind Hezbollah is coming from Iran and Syria, then what does it prove to bomb the hell out of Beirut? Israel's over-the-top response appears to have played right into the hands of very people who want it wiped out. I know that Hezbollah uses its own civilian population as human shields. The human shields are by definition powerless victims, otherwise would they be human shields? Yes, there are crazies who can't wait to sacrifice their own children to destroy the "Zionist Entity". But to trot that out as if it justifies ANY response is really pathetic. Why not then just kill every man, woman and child in Lebanon and start over? And yes, that's sarcasm, by the way.

Clearly there have been outrages committed by Israel over the years, with its willfully inciteful settlement program, abrogation of due process rights. and the ill-conceived original invasion of Lebanon which ultimately empowered Hezbollah (along with all that Iranian and Syrian cash).

The whole culture of suicide bombing on the part of Islamic radicals is positively sick and disgusting. Hezbollah, the "Party of God" in Lebanon, and the Hamas organization in Palestine, have done nothing but incite violence and war -- that is obvious. But Israel doesn't get a pass for responding with ever more brutality and violence.

The behavior (and misbehavior) of all concerned just has me disgusted. The innocents are just as dead (or maimed for life) whether the punishment comes from a twisted suicide bomber or raining down from a US-made fighter jet with an Israeli pilot at the helm. I strongly disagree with the arrogant posts from knee-jerk defenders of Israel, but I am also annoyed with those who act as if Israel isn't the constant target of an organized conspiracy of fundamentalist Islamic lunatics who want it wiped off the map entirely.

Let's say that Israel decided to just fold its tent and bug out. Does anyone think that the remaining peoples would live in peace and harmony? I doubt it. But it's becoming clear that the Holy Land is an Unholy Mess. What, exactly, is everyone fighting for? I forgot.

[ThomCat]

114. Excellent post.

Welcome to DU.

I agree. If Israel didn't exist there would still be fighting in the middle east. But the fact is that Israel is currently the biggest bully there. That fact that someone else could step in and become the bully doesn't absolve the current one.

The fact that other nations would bully Israel just as badly if they could doesn't make it right for Israel to do it. And if someone gets the power, funding and international support to do it then I'll oppose their actions just as loudly.

[brg5001]

115. Thanks, ThomCat

I appreciate your insights as well, and am enjoying DU. It's an outstanding forum. Gotta go!

[funnymanpants]

118. Good post

Exactly. Hezbollah is going to gain from this. You defeat a terrorist group through politics, not through force. We didn't defeat the KKK by bombing the south. Likewise, we have terrorist groups in the US, but they are very weak because we have a democracy, more or less. Israel would benefit from fostering Lebanon's democracy, not destroying it.

One thing about the suicide bombers, though. The use of sucide bombers predates the state of Isreal if I am not mistaken. Also, the first Palestinian suicide bomber didn't show up until after the first intifidah, around 1991, I believe.

During the first intifidah the Palestinians mainly threw stones. The Israelis responded with bullets, which is why the world turned against them.

[BurtWorm]

120. Very worthwhile post. Thank you for it.

:toast:

Obviously Israel is not going to shut down the shop and send its people--where? To another diaspora?

I don't think peace will ever make a home in the Middle East until everyone stops thinking of it as Holy. (Holey is more like it.)

[CHORONZON]

134. Thank you.

Its always great to see someone who can stay rational despite having adequate reason to be provoked.

[NuttyFluffers]

135. "the Holy Land is an Unholy Mess"

by far, the coolest, bumper-sticker-worthy one-liner to come from a new member in the week, perhaps the last month.

:headbang: :yourock:

[Zhade]

125. ANTI-SEMITE ISRAEL-HATER!

Oh, wait...

[panhead1961]

136. This WAR brought to you by Proctor or and Gamble

On moral ground no war is just. I wonder what corporate whore is getting fat over this war, oh yeah it's The American Corporation.