« More Debunking of "That Girl Emily" | Main | George W. Bush and the NAACP »

The bombings will continue until morale improves

With much of the world pushing for a ceasefire in Lebanon, preferably brokered by the United States (because, after all, Israel is just a puppet of the US -- or are we their puppet? It depends on whose turn it is, I guess, and I lost my schedule), I believe it's time to reintroduce those fine folks to a few simple realities.

1) There are three parties with immediate concerns towards a ceasefire: Lebanon, Israel, and Hezbollah.

2) The government and military of Lebanon are not directly involved in the current fighting. Indeed, it can be argued that their unwillingness to get involved with the affairs taking place within its borders are a direct cause of the fighting.

3) Hezbollah has expressed no interest in a ceasefire, but rather has ratcheted up both its attacks and its rhetoric.

4) Hezbollah is not a nation-state, but rather a terrorist organization with literal barrels of blood on its hands -- a significant fraction of it American.

5) Israel has clearly stated its terms for a ceasefire from the instant they started shooting back:
A) The return of its kidnapped soldiers
B) A cessation of attacks by Hezbollah from Lebanon
C) The securing of Lebanon's southern region to prevent Hezbollah's return.

6) Neither Hezbollah nor any party with influence over them has shown the slightest interest in accepting or even discussing Israel's highly irrational and unreasonable position of "stop killing us, and we'll stop killing you."

7) As Hezbollah is a terrorist organization (which, it always bears repeating, had killed more Americans than any other terrorist group before 9/11, and still holds the #2 position), and it is the official position of the United States to not have any dealings with terrorist groups.

8) Especially when it comes to saving their asses from getting blown to bits by our ally for committing terrorist acts against that ally.

I'd like to see an international effort to rebuild and strengthen Lebanon, once they have been purged of the cancer of Hezbollah. Not only on humanitarian grounds and personal, sentimental reasons (I was born in Lebanon, New Hampshire, named after the region), but to avoid the power vacuum that will be created by the long-overdue destruction of Hezbollah. If the Lebanese government doesn't step up and firmly take control, the resulting chaos will prove an open invitation for Syria to once again intervene and "restore order" -- and that puts us right back where this whole sad story began.

But all that is contingent on the elimination of Hezbollah -- if not completely, then weakened to the point where the feeble Lebanese government can reassert control over its own territory and prevent its southern tier from being used as a terrorist staging ground.

So should Secretary of State Rice go to the Middle East and work on brokering a ceasefire? Absolutely. At her soonest convenience.

However, I understand that this week she's getting her hair washed. Next week doesn't look good, either, as she has a manicure scheduled, and some shoe shopping pencilled in... tell you what, Hezbollah: leave your phone number. We'll get back to you.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The bombings will continue until morale improves:

» Conservative Outpost linked with Daily Summary

» Pursuing Holiness linked with Breaking News: Israel and Syria sign armistice

» WILLisms.com linked with A Time For War And A Time For Peace

Comments (169)

Jay - Very good synopsis an... (Below threshold)
Brian The Adequate:

Jay - Very good synopsis and analysis. How much would you charge to go to Philly and talk some sense into my liberal aunt ahead of the family reunion in august?

This post just smacks of ra... (Below threshold)
Bill Metzger:

This post just smacks of racism.

You wingnuts just pick the side with the lightest colored skin, and that's who you support.

There's a racist under ever... (Below threshold)
bobdog:

There's a racist under every leaf, isn't there? Jessee Jackson told me so.

Most of them Joooos, however, do not deliberately murder civilians, Bill. Jay Tea's article may be dealing in more reality than you give him credit for. I don't see much in his post to disagree with. I guess that makes me a wingnut, too.

I'm sorry - I don't get it.... (Below threshold)
Sputnik:

I'm sorry - I don't get it.

I went back and re-read Jay's post...where's the racism that it "smacks" of? I just don't see it.

No, Bill, we pick the side ... (Below threshold)
Evan3457:

No, Bill, we pick the side of the legitinate country that's in the right, you pick the side of illegitimate barbarian terrorists that would kill you without a 2nd thought if you got in their way to the slightest degree. Or, at best, you humorously and childishly see them as having equivalent moral standing.

Metzger:Your post just smac... (Below threshold)
Xennady:

Metzger:Your post just smacks of idiocy.Many,many Isreali jews were driven out of other middle eastern countries and thus are at least as dark as any Lebanese Shiite.There are even a few who were rescued from Ethiopia a few years back-that's in Africa by the way.I would expect you proud enlightened members of the reality based community to already know all that and not embareass yourselves by making stupid webposts early in the morning-but thanks for the amusement anyway.

Metzger,Pray tell,... (Below threshold)

Metzger,

Pray tell, which side did you pick? And judging by the criteria which you have laid out so clearly and extensively, I guess which ever side you pick makes you a racist too.

Gee, I wonder what that makes us when we support East Indians against their Muslim aggressors? Wait a minute there! It couldn't be Islamic terrorism we're against, could it? Nah.

Smack the troll!... (Below threshold)
Xennady:

Smack the troll!

Geez, and I worried that my... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Geez, and I worried that my mention of Secretary Rice would provoke charges of SEXISM...

It just goes to prove you can't out-crazy the idiots.

J.

Bill Metzger:Th... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Bill Metzger:

This post just smacks of racism

Your post just smacks of an inability to read, analyze facts, and accept opinions other than your own.

George Bush March 8 2005: ... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

George Bush March 8 2005: Today I have a message for the people of Lebanon"All the world is witnessing your great movement of conscience. Lebanon's future belongs in your hands. And by your courage Lebanon's future will be in your hands.

The American people are on your side. Millions across the Earth are on your side. The momentum of freedom is on your side. And freedom will prevail in Lebanon"
With over a million of citizens demonstrating in Beirut, the government of Lebanon pushed the Syrian army out (Bush and Israel are always still very careful to only attack Syria verbally..It is after all a big enemy, on tha axis of evil and could fight back)...A year later, having done Bush's bidding , courageous Lebanon and its citizens has now suddenly become very are expendable for the west, having fulfilled its role as symbol of the truimph of demcracy for the Bush Republican administration.. It was only a propt after all. Now it can becone another failed state in what Bernard Lewis the neo-con guru advocated for the region 'the Lebonization of the Mid -East '
Today July 20, The Prime Minister of Lebanon: What kind of life is being offered to us now

"I will tell you what kind: a life of destruction, despair, displacement, dispossession, and death.

"What kind of future can stem from the rubble?

"A future of fear, frustration, despair, financial ruin and fanaticism."

That's the beauty of this, ... (Below threshold)
The Listkeeper:

That's the beauty of this, Steve... As soon as Hezbollah is gone, Lebanon will be able to get serious amounts of aid to rebuild.

Just look the other way, a... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Just look the other way, and sneer while our ally with heavy tacit US support bombs them back to the stone age ..Last years' poster child for democracy and courage is expendable because a couple of soldiers were kidnapped...Bush's root cause..for the conflict.stretching back ages. Anyone else ready to take on Syria and see the gratitude of the US?

Um... Steve, you might have... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Um... Steve, you might have missed the news, but Hizbollah committed several acts of war against Israel a little while ago, such as invading Israel, killing several of their soldiers, and taking two hostage. They did this from Lebanese territory, and the Lebanese government did nothing to stop it or fix it. And since then, Hizbollah has been launching wave after wave of missiles and rockets indiscriminately all across the northern part of Israel, killing far more civilians than military personnel.

Now, in their defense, there really isn't much they can do; Hizbollah IS the de facto government over southern Lebanon. Israel's actions are aimed at making sure Hizbollah can't do that kind of thing again.

Listkeeper's got it right: there will be a LOT of help for Lebanon to rebuild, once Hizbollah has been destroyed or damaged enough to loosen their stranglehold on Lebanon. Until then, though, a significant portion of any "aid" to Lebanon will end up going into more and more terrorist attacks.

Come on, Steve. Join us in supporting the side that's fighting terrorists.

J.

Steve Clickmore,Wh... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Steve Clickmore,

What did you think Bush was talking about when he said "Lebanon's future belongs in your hands. And by your courage Lebanon's future will be in your hands."?

Nations speak with one voice or they are not nations. Lebanon simply can't allow Hezbollah to attack Israel from it's territory and then claim they are not responsible. The people and government of Lebanon should have had the courage to take control of their southern territory and stop Hezbollah's attacks on Israel.

If Lebanon didn't have the military power to take and keep control of their southern territory they were obligated to seek help from the U.N. or a coalition of the willing, should the U.N. fail in it's chartered duty yet again. The same countries that liberated Iraq would likely be willing to help Lebanon liberate itself from Hezbollah.

Hezbollah has a powerful political lobby in Lebanon and substantial military force. The IDF has a powerful political lobby in Israel and substantial military force. If you think Lebanon is not responsible for the actions of Hezbollah, then to be fair, you can't hold Israel responsible for the actions of the IDF. Or are you one of those who has different rules for different nations?

Yo Steve:And Lebanon... (Below threshold)
SShiell:

Yo Steve:
And Lebanon is whose country? I hear "Lebanese officials" cannot access certain Hezbullah areas. So who is running Lebanon? Certainly not the Lebanese. And if not them - who? Hezbullah.

So the day Lebanon asserts itself in Lebanon, then you may find yourself with something of value - until then, keep pounding the Peoples Republic of Hezbullah back to the stone age. By the way, that's about 20 years worth when you are talking about Islamotards!

Exactly Jay lets fight terr... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Exactly Jay lets fight terrorists..full stop: not provide unnecessary ammunition for many more future terrorists..I am reminded what Condi Rice (ertswhile friend of the Lebanese people) who can't seem to find Lebanon on a map now, said in February " The United States, and the international community, stand with the Lebanese people as they work to reassert their independence and strengthen their democracy. We will not be deterred from supporting Lebanon's call for national dignity, truth, and justice."

I am sure you wouldn't agree that the only way to save a nation is to destroy it, echoing an earlier era, another controversial war. Even Dubya hopes the Lebanese government doesn't fall..but I am not sure the new Israel government is as circumspect or concerned.

I have avoided reading many... (Below threshold)
LibraryLady:

I have avoided reading many articles about the current situation because I am Lebanese-American and found the hatred of Lebanon so upsetting. Thanks JTea for more understanding. Most Lebanese HATE Hezbollah and the impact it has had on our country.

by the way, I am blonde, blue eyed and my Mom is red headed and green eyed, Lebanese come in ALL colours!

Good gosh, Steve, you mean ... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Good gosh, Steve, you mean the Islamists could get ANGRIER at us? That they've just been holding back up until now?

You're dead right, Steve. We need to stop blowing up Hezbollah immediately. As soon as we do, I'm sure they'll stop firing missiles and rockets into Israel, give back the two soldiers they kidnapped, and apologize for all the Americans they've killed over the years.

How could we all have been so blind?

J.

LibraryLady:I h... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

LibraryLady:

I have avoided reading many articles about the current situation because I am Lebanese-American and found the hatred of Lebanon so upsetting

as far as I've seen, there hasn't been hatered of Lebanon itself, but of Hezbollah which infests the country (and people who support them.)

But, Bill Metzger, isn't it... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

But, Bill Metzger, isn't it true that both Jews and Arabs are Semites? In which case, how would one tell which is lighter skinned?

Seems to me those who claim that being anti-Semitic means hating Jews and Arabs (b/c both are Semites) are providing cover against a charge of racism against the darker skinned, no?

Oooh look, another <a href=... (Below threshold)
RedStayteColluge:

Oooh look, another Jooo-Hating Moonbat!!

Steve,So what did ... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Steve,

So what did you think Rice meant when she said "We will not be deterred from supporting Lebanon's call for national dignity, truth, and justice."?

In the 21st Century every nation is responsible for the actions taken from it's territory. If a nation simply can't control it's territory because of an armed insurgency, then that nation is required to seek help, first from the U.N. and then from other nations.

So where was Lebanon's call to the U.N. for help in taking control of it's own territory before Israel took action to defend itself? Let's see that quote.

The world simply can't afford to let any nation allow an armed group to operate openly from it's territory and not be held responsible for that group's actions. To do so gives terrorists safe harbor in any nation they can bully into allowing them to operate from.

"We will not be deterred... (Below threshold)

"We will not be deterred from supporting Lebanon's call for national dignity, truth, and justice."

Bold, just like you put it. I only say this - Lebanon's call for dignity, truth, and justice didn't seem to extend all the way to their own back yard. Once they were rid of Syria's stranglehold, their timid acceptance of Hezbollah's presence, doing nothing, not even condemning their presence with words, implied a tacit approval of Hezbollah's use of their own territory and submission to not even being permitted access to their own national territory.

How many ways must it be said for you to understand?

I had always thought that t... (Below threshold)
stan25:

I had always thought that the American government's official policy was no negotiating with the terrorists and Hezbollah definitely qualifies at a terrorist group. It has also been the policy of the American government since the great liberal President Jimmy (peanut brain) Carter. Since when did the status of Hezbollah change from a terrorist organization to a legitimate government? Not in last 20+ years. This outfit has killed more people by terrorism than any other group, be they communists or Arab.

Of course the left in this country and around the world supports this organization and other groups, because they have the misbegotten idea, of what ever hurts the United States and its friends, is alright in their eyes.

Jay..The solution (if ther... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Jay..The solution (if there is one) to build upon the resentment of people like LibraryLady's anger to Hezbollah..not diminish it., by punishing those that are caught up as pawns in the conflict. .You are probably right in your scarasm an Israeli white flag, or unilateral cease-fire would only encourage Hezbollah as much as an unlikely military defeat would make them martyrs. Israelis of course, have been abominiated in the Arab world, even before the birth of Israel. And I suppose the IDF have the freedom of feeling they have nothing left to lose in terms of Islam public opinion, but the US is not in that position, yet.
Mac lorry... It seems Lebanon had already done alot as Rice acknowledged in one year.. To disarm Hezbollah is no easy task..40% of Lebanon's population support Hezbollah ..It had recently emerged from destrutive civil war lasting over 20 years..even Israel recently couldn't disarm Hezbollah in its last invasion, and 'the great powers in the UN' were unwilling to enforce UN resolution 1599...Lebanon is paying the price as the world's whipping boy, for its geographical location and mixed population and having expelled the Syrian army. last year. Would Israel be bombing Beirut if the Syrian army (about 14,000 of them) were still in place in Lebanon.?. We will have to see what emerges when this chapter is over? I don't thing much will have changed except that Lebanon will have deterioated and Lebanese public anger will now be directed almost exclusively at Israel ( I hope I am proved wrong) whereas last year's huge public protests were directed at Syria.

To Steve the cricket--what ... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

To Steve the cricket--what Syrian army? Thier "army" is worst than France's-thier tanks have no forward gears.

From <a href="http://www.jp... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

From jpost:

Hizbullah has created a "state within a state" in Lebanon and must be disarmed, Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora said in an interview published Thursday in an Italian daily.

Saniora told Milan-based newspaper Corriere della Sera that the Shi'ite group has been doing the bidding of Syria and Iran, and that it can only be disarmed with the help of the international community and once a cease-fire has been achieved in the current Middle East fighting.

"It's not a mystery that Hizbullah answers to the political agendas of Teheran and Damascus," Saniora was quoted as saying by Corriere. "The entire world must help us disarm Hizbullah. But first we need to reach a cease-fire."

So the Lebanise PM says Hizbullah is out of his control and they need help to get rid of them. The UN's doing it's usual "resolutions are only made of paper, no action" routine, so Israel has taken it upon itself to do it for them. They're not targetting Lebanese Civillians, they're targetting Hizbullah. However, civillians are inevitably caught up in this, especially with the terrorists putting them in harms way by blocking their escape, parking rockets next to their homes, etc.

Steve,No doubt Leb... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Steve,

No doubt Lebanon's situation is a tough one to be in. Yet if they want to be a sovereign nation, then they must control their own territory. If they are unable to do so on their own, then they are obligated to ask the U.N. or other nations for help. UN resolution 1599 is toothless, but if Lebanon specifically asks for U.N. intervention to help expel Hezbollah, they would get help. If not, then Lebanon would have a valid case against Israel bombing at least the northern half of Lebanon.

Interesting, I wasn't aware... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Interesting, I wasn't aware of Dana Olmert's protests until RedStayteColluge posted his/her link.

It was about this time that a journalist present discovered the identity of a young black-haired woman, who had made no effort to draw attention to herself: Dana Olmert, the Prime Minister's daughter and a long-time refuser and peace activist. She would have preferred to demonstrate as herself rather than her father's daughter. The media had other preferences, Yediot Aharonot placing her photo on its front page with the caption "Demonstrating against Papa". But... the sign she was carrying got into the front page, too: "Stop Murdering Civilians!"

If the Israeli Prime Minister's daughter is against the continued bombing of civilians and infrastructure in Lebanon, can we object to it without being labelled anti-semites? I doubt it, but anyway I agreed with Israel's strong response initially, but after a week it looks to be not just an attempt to strike a blow at Hezbollah, but also a punishment for the Lebanese people.

It's strange to me that so many people on this blog and other right-wing blogs loudly cheered the Lebanese when they threw out the Syrians and held fair elections, but are now cheering the inevitable destruction of that fledgling government (how they can survive this I cannot fathom). It seems the commitment to democracy in the Middle East takes a backseat when there's bombs that need dropping.

I'm all for killing as many members of Hezbollah as possible, but what good does destroying the civil infrastructure in Lebanon do? What good could possibly come from killing civilians in their homes? Does anyone believe that this will take support away from Hezbollah in Lebanon, rather than add to it? Or do you actually believe that after the Israeli military is finished Hezbollah will be no more?

Mac, read the post directly... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Mac, read the post directly above your last.

O.K. Mantits, a few questio... (Below threshold)
LJD:

O.K. Mantits, a few questions...

1.) Who tells Hezbollah about the cease fire, and who gets them to adhere to it?

2.) Why do you think Lebanon is being 'punished'? Could it just be the result of their failure to execute 1559, and that Steve thinks 40% of them SUPPORT Hezbollah?

3.) If 40% DO support Hezbollah, are we actually killing civilians, or supporters? Or does this just switch back and forth depending wether they're on offense or defense?

4.) If everything is so horrible in Lebanon, why do only 8,000 or so of 25,000 Americans choose to leave at (presumably) their own peril? If the Israelis are 'indiscriminately bombing civilians, why not more casualties?

No one is cheering the 'inevitable destruction' of Lebanon. THose are your words. We are cheering the Israeli willingness to do the unpopular (with the lunatic fringe) to secure their nation.

So little faith in democracy. You think a few bombs are going to make people who have tasted freedom regress to religious authority?

Lebanon had alread... (Below threshold)
Larry:
Lebanon had already done alot as Rice acknowledged in one year.. To disarm Hezbollah is no easy task..40% of Lebanon's population support Hezbollah

Kind of like how 33% of this country supports our dear leader. Too bad Israel isn't our neighbor so that they can come in and destroy our infrastructure in order to oust Bush.

Who tells Hezbollah abou... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Who tells Hezbollah about the cease fire, and who gets them to adhere to it?

I don't think anyone would need to tell them about a cease fire, in fact I don't think a cease fire is necessary. I say bomb the shit out of Hezbollah bases in the South. But Hezbollah doesn't control the Beirut airport. Hezbollah doesn't control the highways in northern Lebanon.

Why do you think Lebanon is being 'punished'? Could it just be the result of their failure to execute 1559, and that Steve thinks 40% of them SUPPORT Hezbollah?

Sure, it would have been a piece of cake for them to get rid of Hezbollah, they could have just waved their magic wand and poof! they're gone, right? Did you read the PM's quote above, where he admits they cannot defeat Hezbollah on their own?

If 40% DO support Hezbollah, are we actually killing civilians, or supporters? Or does this just switch back and forth depending wether they're on offense or defense?

This is the position that rankles me the most, all civilians are actually complicit and therefore "the enemy". You do realize that is the exact same position that terrorists take towards civilians, don't you?

If everything is so horrible in Lebanon, why do only 8,000 or so of 25,000 Americans choose to leave at (presumably) their own peril? If the Israelis are 'indiscriminately bombing civilians, why not more casualties?

I'd like to know where you get those numbers. I'd also like to note that I never wrote indiscriminately.

No one is cheering the 'inevitable destruction' of Lebanon.

I said of the new Lebanese government, not Lebanon. Do you think they will survive this? Who do you think will replace them if they don't?

So little faith in democracy. You think a few bombs are going to make people who have tasted freedom regress to religious authority?

So little knowledge of history in the Middle East.

Anyway, if you bother to respond again, please try to read what I wrote, you misrepresented it several times in your comment.

Last I checked, Bush wasn't... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

Last I checked, Bush wasn't indescriminately lobbing rockets at Israel.

What blows my mind is this. Hizbullah is trying to kill civilians. So is Hamas. That's their standard practice. They've been at it for years. Lob rockets at schoolyards. Try and hit refineries. Fire rockets into Arab Nazareth (wtf?). These people are going for maximum civilian casualties. They invade Israel, kidnapping soldiers to immediately use in attempted prisoner exchanges. If they were to free prisoners for the return of their soldiers, how long do you think it would be before another soldier was captured, and another prisoner exchange offered?

In contrast, Israel is precision bombing Hizbullah positions, ammo dumps, caches, and terrorists. They are also damaging the communications and transportation infrastructure in an effort to contain the terrorists in the battlefield. The pilots that fly these sorties are worried that they'll hit the wrong thing. They check, and double-check their targets to make sure they have it right.

How can you possibly be a Hizbullah/Hamas supporter?

Mantis,Ma... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Mantis,

Mac, read the post directly above your last.

Saw it before I posted, but it doesn't address the issue. Where was Lebanon's request to the UN for help in expelling Hezbollah BEFORE Israel was attacked? No need to look, there wasn't one. Lebanon is finally seeking help from the UN now that Lebanon is being held accountable for actions taken against Israel from Lebanese territory. Yet, I don't believe Lebanon has asked for help in expelling Hezbollah, only that there's a cease fire, and probably only that Israel cease fire.

If Lebanon wants to live in peace it must first go to war with Hezbollah. If Lebanon were actively taking the fight to Hezbollah they would find Israel, the U.S. and much of the world on their side.

mantis, It's my u... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

mantis,

It's my understanding the airport and northern highways were taken out to prevent Syrian reinforcements and supplies. Pretty standard practice in the military to try and cut your opponents supply lines, and we all know who backs Hizbullah.

Jay Tea,There is a... (Below threshold)
Bat One:

Jay Tea,

There is another aspect to the current war between Israel and Hezbollah, another party with immediate concerns... the United Nations.

Unknown to most people, and perhaps irrelevant to all, the UN has some 2000 UNIFIL peacekeepers stationed in southern Lebanon whose purpose, reportedly, is to protect the Lebanese civilians and the Lebanese-Israeli border from the militant ravages of Hezbollah.

This morning on Fox, Bill Hemmer was reporting from the northern Israeli border with Lebanon, and as he spoke of the 2 dozen border incursions in the past 6 years since the Israelis left southern Lebanon, and the tunnels dug beneath the border, the TV camera panned across one of the UN's watchtowers overlooking the border. The ironic futility of the UN was clearly obvious. With Israeli Special Forces troops and Hezbollah fighters going after each other beneath the UN outposts, not to mention the underground tunnels, and Hezbollah Kaytusha rockets and Israeli howitzer shells flying back and forth overhead, the total uselessness of the United Nations should be apparent to all.

Just as with nearly every other enterprise undertaken by the infamous blue helmet wearing peacekeepers world wide, the UNIFIL troops along the Israeli-Lebanese border have been all but invisible... and all but useless.

It's time we stopped kidding ourselves that the UN is anything but a hopelessly poor joke... a caricature of the force for good its founders intended 60 years ago.

If Lebanon wants to live... (Below threshold)
mantis:

If Lebanon wants to live in peace it must first go to war with Hezbollah. If Lebanon were actively taking the fight to Hezbollah

With what, exactly?

It's my understanding th... (Below threshold)
mantis:

It's my understanding the airport and northern highways were taken out to prevent Syrian reinforcements and supplies. Pretty standard practice in the military to try and cut your opponents supply lines, and we all know who backs Hizbullah.

Ok, fine, let's look at some of the other targets:

Jets attacked industrial targets including the country's biggest dairy farm. A drugs factory, packaging plant and paper mill were also bombed setting back for years Lebanon's fragile economic recovery.

Further south, where fighting is fiercest, at least 12 civilians were killed and 30 wounded in heavy bombing on the the town of Srifa. Ten were members of one family. Mayor Afif Nadji said: "This was a massacre."

Six people were killed in a raid on Nabatiyeh. More deaths were reported in Baalbeck, in the Bekaa Valley.

In total, 300 people - nearly all civilians - have been killed in the Lebanon and 1,000 wounded in the last eight days.

....

The massive Libanlait milk farm and processing plant, near Hosh el Sneid, in the Bekaa Valley was struck by at least five missiles, wrecking the £8.3million plant.

Sales and marketing manager Mark Waked, a British passport holder, said: "We were hit at exactly 3 am. The plant was completely destroyed.

"We distribute milk to the whole of the region. We've no idea why we were targeted. But I'm not leaving. Our duty is to stay here and rebuild." Wajid al-Bisri, vice-president of the Lebanese Association of Industrialists, said: "I think the picture will be much worse than we can possibly imagine when all this ends. It will take years to recover."

Israeli planes also hit a Christian district of Beirut for the first time.

The target was a truck-mounted machine used to drill for water. It is believed to have been mistaken for a missile launcher. Beirut airport runway was also bombed.

Paper mills, milk plants, water drills, are those all SOP too?

If Lebanon wants to live in... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

If Lebanon wants to live in peace it must first go to war with Hezbollah. If Lebanon were actively taking the fight to Hezbollah

With what, exactly?

At this point, Israel looks like the most likely candidate to help them if they ask. Roads, airports and infrastructure can be rebuilt. If the Lebanese could give the Israeli's more precise coordinates of the Hizbullah (Hezbolla? what is the accepted spelling?) locations, then casualties could be further minimized. Granted, it's extremely dangerous for them to out the local terrorist faction and most people keep mum for that reason. Hizbullah is a cancer that has infiltrated their country. They must be willing to do what they must to get rid of it. And no, there are no magic wands.

Israel won't accept a cease-fire until it's soldiers are returned and the rockets have stopped (rightfully so). I doubt that will happen.

Mantis:With wha... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Mantis:

With what, exactly?

The Lebanese Army I would think. But something is wrong here. Now that Israel is trying to destroy Hezbollah it would be the perfect time for the Lebanese Army to deploy against them. they don't have to be able to beat Hezbollah, as they now have Israel doing that, just put pressure on them. This would also help to keep civilians out of the way, as the Army could directly relay positions to Israel.

Instead, we get news today that the Lebanese Army will fight with Hezbollah if Israel invades with ground forces.

Something is wierd, and there are alot of mixed signals coming from that country.

Mantis Reagan had an idiot ... (Below threshold)
cubanbob:

Mantis Reagan had an idiot son and daughter, that Olmert does as well proves nothing. As for destroying infrastructure that argument is transparently bogus.
Hezbollah also uses the same infrastructure. Lebanon has to decide if it is Lebanon or Hezbollahstan. If it is Lebanon then they have to make strong credible action against Hezbollah. If not, then they will continue paying the price for enabling Hezbollah and for being Hezbollahstan.

mantis said:"I ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

mantis said:

"I agreed with Israel's strong response initially, but after a week it looks to be not just an attempt to strike a blow at Hezbollah, but also a punishment for the Lebanese people."

Israel is being relelentless in their attacks against Hizbullah directly, and against the infrastructure that Hizbullah uses, that's true. Israel's efforts to warn Lebanese citizens away from Hizzbullah positions has been well-dcoumented, and there is no evidence I am aware of that shows Israel is intentionally punishing Lebanese citizens in any way.

Yes, the people of Lebanon are paying a very large price for being such generous hosts to Hizzbullah, but that is matter of their own doing. The Lebanese government, from what I've read, understood exactly the type of monster that was in their midsts, but they were unwilling or unable to use their own army to root out Hizzbullah.

Fine, Israel will do it for them.

Lee (or should I say anti-L... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Lee (or should I say anti-Lee?),

I think I've been clear that I don't disagree with the Israeli goal of ridding Lebanon of Hezbollah, or more realistically striking a significant blow to the group while simultaneously sending the message to the Lebanese government that they must do more against Hezbollah. What I do disagree with is the manner in which some of the attacks are taking place, and the targets of those attacks.

First of all I do not believe that Israel will succeed in destroying Hezbollah. This simply will not happen and I don't believe that Israel is even claiming they can achieve it. So what effect will these attacks have? I worry that they will only serve to garner more support for Hezbollah among the Lebanese and more animosity towards Israel. If this is in fact the outcome than the actions of Israel will have been counterproductive and more likely to lead to future violence.

Please note that I don't think Israel should just hunker down and play defense; they are right to take the offensive against this enemy. I just think they have gone too far and will end up hurting their own interests.

Well, mantis, perhaps the I... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Well, mantis, perhaps the Israelis are imitating the Americans.

After all, they took out a baby-milk factory in '91, and we all know that it was a baby-milk factory because the workers' coveralls said so.

And we did take out a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan in '99, too.

Of course, whether there might be anything else at those sites is left unstated (and, frankly, unknown).

BTW, while dead civilians are a tragedy, whether they're Lebanese or Israeli, one has to ask: is any dead civilian going to be tantamount to destroying the government of Lebanon? You write I say bomb the shit out of Hezbollah bases in the South.

Does this mean that bombing southern Lebanese targets is okay---where surely there are Lebanese civilians there as well? Are their deaths somehow less meaningful to you? Do you think that hundreds of dead Lebanese in the south will somehow be acceptable, given that you posit that hundreds of dead Lebanese in the north will bring down the government?

Oh, and my very dated (1997) copy of The Military Balance lists the Lebanese army as fielding a force of 53K, including 300 main battle tanks---and the Hizb'allah militia as fielding a force of ~4000.

From the <a href="http://ww... (Below threshold)
mantis:

From the Jerusalem Post

While there is debate over the military's wherewithal, one thing seems clear: the chances of Beirut standing up to its thuggish stepbrothers are slim, at best. What's more, experts say, Lebanon's army - much as its government - may represent disparate and contradictory loyalties.

Lebanon - which has long been in the unenviable position of chafing under Syria's thumb - clearly sweats at the thought of confronting Hizbullah, which enjoys considerable backing from Syria and Iran. Any action on Lebanon's part against Hizbullah would be a direct result of the pressure that Israel continues to apply through its military operations - and would represent an enormous departure from politics as usual.

On Friday, four Israel Navy seamen were killed when the missile ship Hanit was hit by Hizbullah - which reportedly acted on information provided by the Lebanese army. With this in mind, can Lebanon's military be trusted to act as a protective force in the south?

According to Ephraim Inbar, senior researcher at Tel Aviv's Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, the Lebanese army's role in Hizbullah's attack on the Hanit is not at all surprising.

"A large percentage of the [Lebanese] population is sympathetic to Hizbullah," he said. "The army is not a cohesive force, and there is no strong political will. It's more of a symbol of sovereignty than an actual tool."

While the Lebanese military does have certain resources at its disposal - a naval fleet, for instance, and an infantry force that has been largely supplied by America in an attempt to bolster the country against Syria - it is not, according to sources, a force to be reckoned with.

Ok, that's all I'm going to paste, but do read the whole thing. The question is not really whether they have the equipment or manpower, which is debatable, but whether the military would even stay together if ordered to attack Hezbollah. In short, such action would at best severely weaken the Lebanese military and provide support to Hezbollah, at worst it would lead to civil war.

Heralder said "... we get n... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Heralder said "... we get news today that the Lebanese Army will fight with Hezbollah if Israel invades with ground forces."

Thanks for that news. That suggests Lebanon is and has been a willing host to Hezbollah all along. Israel may have to take the kid gloves off.

mantris: "First of all I... (Below threshold)
Lee:

mantris: "First of all I do not believe that Israel will succeed in destroying Hezbollah. This simply will not happen and I don't believe that Israel is even claiming they can achieve it. So what effect will these attacks have?"

The Hizubullah's presence in Lebanon will be lessened by Israel's actions. Israel seems firm in its resolve to clear Southern Lebanon of Hizbullah strongholds. After that's accomplished the Lebanese government will be (a) more incented to keep Hizbullah in check, and (b) in better position to police Southern Lebanon due to the reduced presence and "esteem" that Hizbullah will have.

I see this as strengthening, not weaking, the Lebanese government.

So, mantis, the issue isn't... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

So, mantis, the issue isn't really that Lebanon doesn't have the wherewithal to fight Hizb'allah, but instead doesn't have the will or the political ability?

If that were true, then the solution is for Israel to attack a handful of positions in southern Lebanon (and apparently have license to kill Lebanese civilians there), but go no further? What is so special about the Litani River that north of that is excessive, might bring down a (admittedly weak) government, but south of that is okay?

I'm not finding any news re... (Below threshold)
Lee:

I'm not finding any news reports that the "...Lebanese Army will fight with Hezbollah if Israel invades with ground forces.".

Anyone have a link? - thanks!

Instead, we get news tod... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Instead, we get news today that the Lebanese Army will fight with Hezbollah if Israel invades with ground forces.

Care to provide a link? I can't seem to find any mention of this.

Does this mean that bombing southern Lebanese targets is okay---where surely there are Lebanese civilians there as well? Are their deaths somehow less meaningful to you? Do you think that hundreds of dead Lebanese in the south will somehow be acceptable, given that you posit that hundreds of dead Lebanese in the north will bring down the government?

Southern Lebanon is what Hezbollah controls, so yes I think targeting Hezbollah in the south is justified. There will be civilian casualties no matter what, and that is regrettable but unavoidable, but by bombing the areas not controlled by Hezbollah, especially civil infrastructure and civilian businesses and factories, I believe Israel risks the consequence of the Lebanese government collapsing, yes.

Of course, whether there might be anything else at those sites is left unstated (and, frankly, unknown).

I'm not going to assume anything based on nothing. In any case do you think it will matter to the Lebanese people if the Israelis thought those were legitimate targets? Do you think it will matter when there is no milk in the country, when there are food and water shortages? Do you think it will matter when enough Lebanese decide that their government cannot protect them from Israel and cannot control Hezbollah? Don't you think many of them may even decide to support Hezbollah more, because hey, "at least they're fighting the people that are attacking us?"

Do any of you really believe the result of all of this will be less terrorism and more peace in the Middle East? If so please explain it to me as I am at a loss.

If that were true, then ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

If that were true, then the solution is for Israel to attack a handful of positions in southern Lebanon (and apparently have license to kill Lebanese civilians there), but go no further? What is so special about the Litani River that north of that is excessive, might bring down a (admittedly weak) government, but south of that is okay?

It's the nature of the targets as well. I think I've been clear about this.

Mantis: "I worry ... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Mantis:

"I worry that they will only serve to garner more support for Hezbollah among the Lebanese and more animosity towards Israel. "

This morning I heard one of the American evacuees blaiming the president for the Isreali air attacks. Some people will think what they are programed to think no matter what you do. Isreal has been blamed for so much, for so long, that I doubt they realy care much any more what the world thinks. The destruction of infrastucture in southern Lebanon has the stratigic importance of making it difficult for Hezbollah to operate in that area, since supplies and support will be difficult to obtain, with much of the civilian population gone. Also, in the future, when they find it necessary to bomb that area again there will be fewer civilians to worry about. Kind of like a giant bombed out buffer zone.

Oh one more thing about Hez... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Oh one more thing about Hezbollah. They are using civilians as human shields. They are currently preventing Lebanese people from moving north so that they can use these civilians as shields.

This is the despicable mark of these evil cowards. They are brutal towards Is civilians and use their own women/children as human shield. The condemnation of Hezbollah should be stronger and louder.

Looks like Bush has made some progress
http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/007554.php
Saudi Fatwa Against Hezbollah

The Arab rejection of Hezbollah and the war they started continues to grow, and the outrage appears to have reached the Wahhabi in the streets. An influential Wahhabi sheikh has issued a fatwa that forbids Wahhabis from supporting Hezbollah in any way -- including the offering of prayers:

This is lifted from a <a hr... (Below threshold)
Lee:

This is lifted from a commentary written by Claude Salhani, who is the International Editor at United Press International, as published on the web by the Middle East Times July 18, 2006.

Commentary: Sending army south uneasy task

[snipped for brevity]

One of the main reasons that the Lebanese government has been reluctant in sending the army into the south to replace Hizbullah is due to the fear that the army would quickly fracture along sectarian lines and plunge the country back into civil war, the specter of which is never too far removed from the minds of Lebanese politicians and civilians.

Here's an apercu of how things work in Lebanon.

In Lebanon, the army comes under the command of the president of the republic, a Maronite Christian. But in this case, the Maronite Christian president is Emile Lahoud and he takes his marching orders from Syria.

Syria, does not want to see the Lebanese army replace Hizbullah in the south. Why? Because although the army is technically under the command of the president, and the president is known to answer to Syria, the Lebanese army is not pro-Syrian.

And besides, the president would not have the authority to dispatch the army south without the approval of his government. And the current government includes Hizbullah members.

To complicate matters even further is the composition of most Lebanese army battalions. Rank and file tends to be for the most part Shias, while the officer corps is of predominantly either Christian or Sunni Muslim.

Now imagine the following scenario, where a Lebanese army battalion is ordered into an area in south Lebanon under the control of Hizbullah. They are given the order to eject Hizbullah. Among the 800 men in the Lebanese army battalion let's assume that a good 600 to 700 are Shias. Chances are, that a good percentage of those would probably have close family ties to the guerrilla fighters. What are the chances of the rank and file following an order from Christian officers to open fire on their relatives?

Mantis: "Do any o... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Mantis:

"Do any of you really believe the result of all of this will be less terrorism and more peace in the Middle East? If so please explain it to me as I am at a loss."

I will attempt to give you my opinion as to how this will help.

Many folks say that we lost the war in Korea and again in Viet Nam. I prefer to think that they were only battles in the fight against communism( the real war). In warfare it isn't necessary to win all the battles, in fact some are fought with no hope of winning, but to make the enemies price of victory higher than our cost of defeat. The Soviet Union payed such a high price for those victories and their defeats in Pakistan and else where, plus the cost of the arms race, that it finally colapsed.

This is only a small battle against global terrorism, but the terrorist, and the nations behind them, will pay an ever increasing price for each battle they choose to fight. Eventually those who now choose to support their efforts will begin to see the hopelessness of what they are trying to accomplish and support will wither away. The only way that they can win is kind of like in poker; the only way to loose a winning hand is to fold.

Hey guys, here's a link to ... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Hey guys, here's a link to that information:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153291959920&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

There's a small mention of this at the Jerusalem Post. It's a headline, but the story is only a paragraph, which reads:

The Lebanese Minister of Defense warned Israel Thursday that if IDF ground forces are sent into southern Lebanon, Lebanese troops will fight along with the Hizbullah against Israel.

Interesting article, Lee. <... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Interesting article, Lee.

So, let's carry the hypothesis further.

The Lebanese military cannot be used, b/c the Lebanese government does not have its loyalty. Therefore, the Lebanese government does not actually have control over the territory of Lebanon.

Hizb'allah, OTOH, does have control over the territory of the state of Lebanon, at least enough to set up camps, dumps, and rocket launch sites.

Israel, according to mantis, may only attack those sites in the south of Lebanon which will not affect the civilian population (b/c, after all, the Lebanese people won't care that the target was actually Hizb'allah, if it's their farms or roads that are being destroyed).

Israel cannot attack further north than, say, the Litani River (a somewhat arbitrary line, but a convenient geographical landmark), b/c the Lebanese people will then not support the Lebanese government, which can't protect them from Hizb'allah regardless of Israel's actions.

But Hizb'allah is no set of fools. So, what is to keep Hizb'allah from setting up its camps and dumps and launch sites among Lebanese civilian homes, factories, sites, etc.? So that Israel, if it chose to attack, would have to bomb, say, milk plants and printing plants? Indeed, what is to keep Hizb'allah from exploiting the civilian infrastructure, rather than setting up a separate military supply line, precisely to present such an unpalatable choice to the Israeli military planners already?

LO, Hizbollah has i... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

LO,
Hizbollah has its headquarters in Beirut itself where the police cannot enter.

Israel, according to man... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Israel, according to mantis, may only attack those sites in the south of Lebanon which will not affect the civilian population (b/c, after all, the Lebanese people won't care that the target was actually Hizb'allah, if it's their farms or roads that are being destroyed).

That's not what I said and you know it.

Mantis,Do... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

Mantis,

Do any of you really believe the result of all of this will be less terrorism and more peace in the Middle East? If so please explain it to me as I am at a loss.

Do you really believe Israel doing less would result in less terrorism and more peace in the Middle East? The force behind terrorism is Islam and Islam cannot be pacified. There's no need to worry about turning more Muslims into enemies, as they are all enemies of all non-Muslims by their own definition.

Muslims hate atheist more than they hate Jews or Christians. Islam gives defeated Jews and Christians the choice between converting to Islam or being treated like sub-humans. Defeated atheists are given the choice between converting to Islam or death.

Really, mantis? Th... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Really, mantis?

This is what you've written:

I say bomb the shit out of Hezbollah bases in the South.

So, it's okay to bomb southern Lebanon?

Paper mills, milk plants, water drills, are those all SOP too?

Apparently not, if the targets are things that will affect the Lebanese people.

Southern Lebanon is what Hezbollah controls, so yes I think targeting Hezbollah in the south is justified. There will be civilian casualties no matter what, and that is regrettable but unavoidable, but by bombing the areas not controlled by Hezbollah, especially civil infrastructure and civilian businesses and factories, I believe Israel risks the consequence of the Lebanese government collapsing, yes.

So, only bomb those areas that aren't controlled by Hizb'allah, and not any civil infrastructure and civilian businesses and factories.

I'm not going to assume anything based on nothing. In any case do you think it will matter to the Lebanese people if the Israelis thought those were legitimate targets? Do you think it will matter when there is no milk in the country, when there are food and water shortages? Do you think it will matter when enough Lebanese decide that their government cannot protect them from Israel and cannot control Hezbollah? Don't you think many of them may even decide to support Hezbollah more, because hey, "at least they're fighting the people that are attacking us?"

And don't bomb things that are likely to affect the Lebanese people, who will only be alienated if they can't get vital necessities like water.

So, Israel should bomb southern Lebanon, but only those targets that won't wind up making the Lebanese people think that their government cannot protect them from Israel and cannot control Hizb'allah.

That's NOT what you're saying mantis? Now I'm confused.

Correction: Only b... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Correction:

Only bomb those areas that are controlled by Hizb'allah, and not any civil infrastructure and civilian businesses and factories.

Mac,Go fight your ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Mac,

Go fight your war against all Muslims over at LGF. Those of us don't advocate the killing of over a billion people are talking.

Can we pretty much agree th... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Can we pretty much agree that the myriad of peace accords that have been presented and even implemented in the past have not had any lasting or positive effect? Can we then infer that in order for such a thing to happen, the terrorist groups that have every time undermined the peace process and cease fires need to be completely destroyed before one can be executed and held in place with any success?

Yeah, nice random comment f... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Yeah, nice random comment from me, not referring directly to what anyone said. Don't mind me. Heh heh

Heralder, No disagr... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Heralder,
No disagreement here. Unfortunately, the left is the home of modern anti-Semitism (and anti-Americanism). So our task to defeat the terrorists will be made harder. Hope the American Jewish community will wake up soon and leave the liberal left behind.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3278919,00.html
In Spain, anti-Semitism is new leftist trend

LO,First of all, y... (Below threshold)
mantis:

LO,

First of all, you claimed I said Israel may only attack such and such, as if I'm giving my permission. I was merely giving my opinion about what would be in Israel's best interests, strategically. I doubt they would want another Palestine right next door, and I see that as a distinct possibility if the military and/or government splits or collapses in Lebanon. I hold none of these opinions to be facts or absolutes, this is just what worries me. Israel may do whatever it damn well pleases.

Secondly, I criticized the bombing of civil infrastructure and businesses in the north, I never said they should only bomb areas of the south that will affect no civilians, in fact I admitted the fact that civilian casualties are unavoidable.

Thirdly, I never said anything close to this:

And don't bomb things that are likely to affect the Lebanese people

As the only way to do that would be to bomb completely empty areas, and what would be the point of that? Anyway, I'm not even against strategic bombing in the north, as long as the target is legitimately terrorist in nature. It seems there have been a good deal of targets bombed which were not.

Excuse me for not taking the posture of "bomb everything you can" and instead encouraging some discretion. I, quite simply, don't want to see these events lead to more support for Hezbollah, and therefore more terrorism. Maybe I should just take the stance that all Muslims are evil, like Mac.

Can we then infer that i... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Can we then infer that in order for such a thing to happen, the terrorist groups that have every time undermined the peace process and cease fires need to be completely destroyed before one can be executed and held in place with any success?

I agree with that. The question is how do we achieve it? I don't believe superior firepower will wipe out the terrorist groups so prevalent in the ME.

Mantis, Excuse me fo... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Mantis,
Excuse me for not taking the posture of "bomb everything you can" and instead encouraging some discretion. I, quite simply, don't want to see these events lead to more support for Hezbollah, and therefore more terrorism. Maybe I should just take the stance that all Muslims are evil, like Mac.
-------------------------------------------------
Nice dodge and diversion from a main point of an argument. But I must give you an award for cleverly disguised rhetoric. No one was saying "bomb everything you can". IS has taken enough cautions to warn civilians of their attack. The one you should strongly and repeatedly condemn is Hezbollah for using civilians as human shields.

How would you propose to deal with Hezbollah now? A ceasefire? Stop bombing if they use civilians as human shields? The Hiz headquarter is in Beiruit itself.

Secondly, I criticized the ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Secondly, I criticized the bombing of civil infrastructure and businesses in the north, I never said they should only bomb areas of the south that will affect no civilians, in fact I admitted the fact that civilian casualties are unavoidable.
--------------------------------------------------
How do you know that these structures are not used by Hizbollah or their allies in Syria for supply?

Mantis:I agree ... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Mantis:

I agree with that. The question is how do we achieve it? I don't believe superior firepower will wipe out the terrorist groups so prevalent in the ME.

I agree that superior firepower alone cannot do it...but coupled with support within the countries of origin, said terrorist groups will not be able to hide amongst the population.

Originally I was thinking Lebanon could be a perfect example of such a thing happening, but with the various links and information that has been posted in this thread, I'm not so sure Israel has a large enough body of inner support in Lebanon that I originally had thought.

Part of this overall war (including places like Iraq and North Korea) need to be two-pronged. One is for the people, the other for the terrorists...obviously the latter gets the pointy end.

Unfortunately, it seems nigh impossible to convince a majority of the public anywhere in a middle eastern country that ridding themselves of these murderers are in their best interest...we have an 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' pathology going on there...which largely finds it's origin in Islam. Any attempt made to target terrorists is translated by the 'spiritual leaders' as an attack on Islam, which makes the common man rally to the cause.

The situation at times seems hopelessly complex, and if the Iraqi army can get Iraq under control (in which they seem to have made significant progress) than that will be some hope and example for the future.

The question is how do we a... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

The question is how do we achieve it? I don't believe superior firepower will wipe out the terrorist groups so prevalent in the ME.
------------------------------------------------
Properly applied Bush doctrine is the short term and long term solution to terrorism. You need enough firepower to at least significantly weaken Hiz for example. Then build up democratic institution. And we still need superior fire power to keep bad actors like Syria and Iran at bay while allowing countries like IRaq, Lebanon to become stronger.

The roadblock is the left 's anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism. They will do whatever they can to cause problems for us. So at least in the PR war, we as AMericans should try to thwart their propaganda. Start condemning outlets like CNN, NYT, etc...

Heralder, Looks li... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Heralder,

Looks like Bush has made some progress. I am pleasantly surprised by this. The Arabs fear the ruthless Iranian more than the IS or US now.

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/007554.php
Saudi Fatwa Against Hezbollah

The Arab rejection of Hezbollah and the war they started continues to grow, and the outrage appears to have reached the Wahhabi in the streets. An influential Wahhabi sheikh has issued a fatwa that forbids Wahhabis from supporting Hezbollah in any way -- including the offering of prayers:

I condemn the NYT! May a th... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

I condemn the NYT! May a thousand bed bugs( or chiggers if bed bugs aren't willing) infest their shorts.

"Properly applied Bush d... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Properly applied Bush doctrine is the short term and long term solution to terrorism."

"Looks like Bush has made some progress. I am pleasantly surprised by this. The Arabs fear the ruthless Iranian more than the IS or US now."

Bush is keeping his hands in his pockets and his mouth shut, which is precisely as much "Bush doctrine" as this situation calls for. The only reason there is hope that Israel will prevail is the fact that Bush has remained on the sidelines!

Keep him there. I'm not saying the U.S. should remain on the sidelines, just that Bush should keep his moronic mouth shut, and stay out of the way.

Send him over to Europe and let him grope a few world leaders for a while - that'll keep the chimp entertained...

/rant

LoveAmerica Immigrant,... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

LoveAmerica Immigrant,

Good news, and rather unprecidented as well. As far as it being a direct result of U.S. foreign policy in the region, I'd likely attribute it more to the fact that the Saudis are Arabs and the Iranians are Persians, and their intrests very much collide.

Whereas Gaddafi's (sp?) sudden change of heart about his weapons program I think could be directly attributed to our foreign policy in the region.

This talk of suitable bomb... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

This talk of suitable bombing targetst reminds me of the halycon days of "shock and awe" I cannot remember where I have lifted most of this from but nevertheless.."With the knowledge that Hezbollah was actually born under Israeli occupancy of Lebanon to fight the Israeli Defense Forces,( after going in to clean up Palestinain sanctuaries,) it is a hypocritical demand to expect the hopelessly weakened Lebanese government (now without many roads and bridges and military bases, bombed by Israel) to do in a couple of days what the Israeli government could not do in their 18-year occupation of Lebanon." Just as a fractured Iraq appears to resseemble the old Lebanon, this could well be the future of Lebanon which becomes an Iraqi jungle of violence and sectarian strife ..Iraq and perhaps Lebanon again.. Putin was right if this was Bush's idea of exporting democracy, he can have it for if a functioning country(even one rule in part by the Hezbollah becomes a failed state like Iraq fanaticism wiill thrive. The Hezbollah which was a mature political organization (not only a terrorist organization) with an Islamist ideology had learned (very quickly) to co-exist with other political agents in Lebanon will become even more fanatical, and a similar religious hell in Iraq, may occur in Lebanon..Only it will be Christian against Shiite.

As far as it being a dir... (Below threshold)
mantis:

As far as it being a direct result of U.S. foreign policy in the region, I'd likely attribute it more to the fact that the Saudis are Arabs and the Iranians are Persians, and their intrests very much collide.

More likely it was influenced by the fact that the Saudis are Sunni, Iran and Hezbollah are Shia.

Heralder, Agree wit... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Heralder,
Agree with you on the point about the Saudi. I just threw in the point about Bush to see how long Lee can keep silent about it. And he doesn't disappoint.

Bush can stop the Israel offensive right now. But he is playing his card with Iran right now. Yup, not bad for such a chimp.

Mantis:More lik... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Mantis:

More likely it was influenced by the fact that the Saudis are Sunni, Iran and Hezbollah are Shia.

That as well. Perhaps both are factors?

Lee:Your disrespec... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Lee:

Your disrespect for your president is beyond belief.

Heralder, if you re... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Heralder,
if you read the article, the Captain made those points already. Maybe it is an unintended consequence of our effort in Iraq. It shows that the terrorists are failing in Iraq when they have to target Iraqui civilians.

Ali's fatwa reveals a deep distrust and anger against the radical Shi'ites of Iran and their support of organizations that kill other Muslims, specifically in Iraq. Hezbollah being an agent of the non-Arab Iranians, the Sunnis have split on their support or opposition for the terrorists in southern Lebanon. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt hold rallies in their support while the Wahhabi Sunnis in Saudi Arabia issue fatwas against them. The conflict shows that the damage done in Iraq has reverberated through the Islamic world, and that the Iranian-backed militias there have isolated Teheran even further from the Arabic peoples.

That as well. Perhaps bo... (Below threshold)
mantis:

That as well. Perhaps both are factors?

Perhaps, but I don't know the degree to which the ethnic differences create conflict between the Arabs and Persians. After all, Iran supports Hezbollah, which is mostly an Arab organization. However, they give this support thru collusion with Syria, which is predominantly Sunni. It seems the one thing that crosses ethnic and religious boundaries is hatred of Israel.

I suppose, in light of these complex alliances, one could conclude that these Sunni Arab countries (Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt) are probably more motivated by their friendly relations with the US, and are merely continuing their hands-off policies concerning Israel, which have helped them economically in recent years.

Does anyone besides me thin... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Does anyone besides me think "pucker puss" (lee lee) has a very bad case of BDS? Or is it that he is just a ignorant f'word faced dumb^%$?

In any case, looks like our... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

In any case, looks like our effort in Iraq is paying off so far when it comes to isolating Iranian and its proxy Hiz from the Arab world. This is unprecedented.

LoveAmerica Immigrant:... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

LoveAmerica Immigrant:

In any case, looks like our effort in Iraq is paying off so far when it comes to isolating Iranian and its proxy Hiz from the Arab world.

Unfortunately, what the Captain is saying is that by terrorists targeting and killing Iraqi civilians, terror groups have helped isolate themselves from some of the Arab world (which I agree with)..but that doesn't speak of our progress in Iraq unless our progress is being measured by how many innocents die to IEDs.

I do, however, believe that progress that is being made in Iraq is reverberating throughout certain parts of the middle east, but in most cases I think it's more subtle and long term. Alot of positive reactions will take time, something virulent anti-war types would do well to note.

Anyone notice how the UN ha... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Anyone notice how the UN has not asked Hezballah to start a unilateral ceasefire? Why not?

Anyone notice how the UN hasnt said that Hezballah is using excessive force against Israeli civilian occupation?

Anyone notice how the UN has not insisted that Hezballah disarm IAW its own resolution?

Yet the UN has asked Israel for a unilateral ceasefire

Yet the UN has condemed Israel for excessive force

The UN proves yet agian what fools they are and what a tool of terrorists they are.

I eagerly await the call for sanctions against Israel for their actions while no such call for sanctions against Syria, Hezballah or Iran will be forthcoming.

Heralder, Signific... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Heralder,
Significant change (especially cultural one) take a long time. This first crack is truly a suprise for me personally. I would have expected a standard denunciation of Israel.

To be more precise, we have to add other factors as well. AMerica and Europe have experienced first hand terrorism. Also Is withdrew from South Lebanon and Garza. This exposed the farce of peace talks.

retired military,T... (Below threshold)
mantis:

retired military,

The "I haven't heard about therefore it they never said it" assertion doesn't wash.

Here's the most recent statement from Annan

Hizbollah's provocative attack on July 12 was the trigger of this crisis. It is clear that the Lebanese Government had no advance knowledge of this attack. Whatever other agendas they may serve, Hizbollah's actions, which it portrays as defending Palestinian and Lebanese interests, in fact, do neither. On the contrary, they hold an entire nation hostage, set back prospects for negotiation of a comprehensive Middle East peace.

I have already condemned Hizbollah's attacks on Israel, and acknowledged Israel's right to defend itself under Article 51 of the UN Charter. I do so again today. I also condemn Hizbollah's reckless disregard for the wishes of the elected Government of Lebanon, and for the interests of the Lebanese people and the wider region.

...

Both the deliberate targeting by Hizbollah of Israeli population centres with hundreds of indiscriminate weapons and Israel's disproportionate use of force and collective punishment of the Lebanese people must stop. The abducted soldiers must be released as soon as possible and, in any event, the International Committee of the Red Cross must be granted immediate access to them. The Government of Israel must allow humanitarian agencies access to civilians. And the democratically elected Government of Lebanon must be urgently supported in its hour of crisis.

Not asking for unilateral ceasefire.
Did condemn Hezbollah's attacks on civilians.
How about Hezbollah disarming?

From Haaretz:

The United Nations is working toward a new diplomatic arrangement between Israel and Lebanon that will be based on implementation of Security Council Resolution 1559, calling for the disarmament of Hezbollah, the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty, and the deployment of the Lebanese army to southern Lebanon.

Maybe you should find out what people have actually said before condemning them for not saying it.

I see the 101st fighting ke... (Below threshold)
Larry:

I see the 101st fighting keyboardists are all out en force today.

The roadblock is the left 's anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism.

Funny. Who is "the left" and can you provide any evidence of anti-Semitism or anti-Americanism on the part of the left?

So far it seems like Israel's attempt to avoid targeting civilians is:

1. Bomb infrastructure including roads and bridges surrounding known militants (including Beirut, where Hezbollah is a minority).

2. Then drop leaflets on those areas warning non-militants to get out and hope that they all fall in the ditches where roads and bridges used to be trying to escape.

Is that about right?

A question: Does Israel plan to assist Lebanon in rebuilding its shattered infrastructure after it has "succeeded" in crippling or wiping out Hezbollah's military capability? Or is this just a way to ensure that the previously surging Lebanese economy is no longer a threat to Israel's dominance of the region.

Another question: Why, as a developed, technologically advanced democracy does Israel require the BILLIONS of Dollars in foreign aid we provide every year? More of our tax dollars than go to some states in our own country.

An even better question:</p... (Below threshold)
Larry:

An even better question:

Knowing that they are in violation of U.N. mandate, and knowing that the continued presence in the Shebaa Farms area of Southern Lebanon grants relevance and legitimacy to Hezbollah, why does Israel not simply disengage as they did from Lebanon in 2000?

Another question:

As Israel has stated openly they knew that Hezbollah was stockpiling missiles, and the current operation had been in the works for upwards of a year if not more, why did they not ask the U.N. and the world to put pressure on Hezbollah and Lebanon to end this, and to make concessions on the Shebaa Farms area as a compromise?

Again, how many of you think that Israel will use some of the BILLIONS of Dollars that we send their way every year to help Lebanon rebuild after the current operation? I, for one am hoping that they do.

If they don't, they can expect more of the same. Has the military solution EVER worked against terrorism? The actions being taken by Israel are the equivalent of England destroying Northern Ireland's infrastructure in response to the years and years of IRA attacks.

Larry, Here is the ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Larry,
Here is the most recent news
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3278919,00.html
In Spain, anti-Semitism is new leftist trend

http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=6111
Left-Wing Anti-Semitism on the Rise

Why don't you ask Iran and other oil-rich Arab countries to spend their billions to help build a decent country for the Palestinians and Lebanese? If these countries become functional democracies, we would be happy to send our money their way.

Is is doing the Lebanese and the rest of the world a favor by dealing a severe blow to the cancer of Hiz.

If you are willing to wage PR war by strongly condemning the Hiz/Hamas/Syria/Iran, then we may have a better chance to defeat these terrorists quicker. The prop from the leftist Spanish PM is certainly not helpful.

Larry apparently is unaware... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Larry apparently is unaware that the Shebaa farms issue is seen, by the United Nations, as a done deal, with the territory in question considered Syrian.

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

They note:

The disputed territory was not apparently mentioned by the Lebanese government after the 1967 Six Day War or the 1973 October War as an occupation issue and appears to have arisen only as a result of the Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon in May 2000.

Apparently, Larry has little problem w/ Israel freely handing over other people's territory. Of course, by that logic, Israel would also be justified in annexing Shebaa farms, or the Golan Heights. Is that where you stand, Larry?


And, of course, Hizb'allah will end its conflict with Israel, once Shebaa farms is returned. Never mind little things like declaring that they want the end of Israel. That's just something that people like Larry know doesn't really mean anything.

But then, the UN, which Larry points to, has done such a wonderful job in Lebanon, from UNIFIL's inception to present. And the UN has been so helpful in stopping things like suicide bombings, rocket attacks, etc.

Larry,An... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

Larry,

Another question: Why, as a developed, technologically advanced democracy does Israel require the BILLIONS of Dollars in foreign aid we provide every year? More of our tax dollars than go to some states in our own country.

Talk to Carter. We give similar billions to Egypt so that they stay peaceful with Israel.

I don't care for that "Solution" either.

why did they not ask the U.N. and the world to put pressure on Hezbollah and Lebanon...
The same UN who's been photographed having tea with the Hezbollah guerillas? Who's sitting on the border Right Now with rockets and planes flying around them. Who's been shown to do absolutely jack that was meaningful here. And besides, the UN's been historically rather rough on Israel. Displaying maps of "Palestine" where there's no Israel on the map and such.
LO, BTW, the UN cor... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

LO,
BTW, the UN corruption is deep and wide: the oil-for-food bribery and the Congo sexual abuse of refugees. The UN was also so successful in building Bosnia and Kosovo into functional democracies.

Larry:An even b... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Larry:

An even better question:

Knowing that they are in violation of U.N. mandate, and knowing that the continued presence in the Shebaa Farms area of Southern Lebanon grants relevance and legitimacy to Hezbollah, why does Israel not simply disengage as they did from Lebanon in 2000?

That's not a better question, that's a ridiculous question. Why doesn't Israel withdraw from Lebanon like they did in 2000? Because they'll end up in 2012 like they did in 2006...that's why. The question answers itself, Larry.

Someone that wants you dead and has dedicated their existence to the ending of yours, doesn't go away when you ignore them.

Another question:

As Israel has stated openly they knew that Hezbollah was stockpiling missiles, and the current operation had been in the works for upwards of a year if not more, why did they not ask the U.N. and the world to put pressure on Hezbollah and Lebanon to end this, and to make concessions on the Shebaa Farms area as a compromise?

This question is on par with the first. The U.N. has issued a resolution demanding
Hezbollah to disarm. They didn't. No one cared, except Israel, but then that was before they crossed the border, killed Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two others.

Again, how many of you think that Israel will use some of the BILLIONS of Dollars that we send their way every year to help Lebanon rebuild after the current operation? I, for one am hoping that they do.

A destroyed and governmentally ineffectual Lebanon does nothing to help Israel or the region. I'm willing to say that they will put money into rebuilding infrastructure.

If they don't, they can expect more of the same. Has the military solution EVER worked against terrorism?

Has the diplomatic solution ever worked against terrorism? No. Bowing to their demands and being cowed by their tactics only serves to validate their dispicable murderous ideology.

But by all means, carry a strongly worded letter to a Palistinian terrorist....the pain will only be momentary if you're close enough.

The actions being taken by Israel are the equivalent of England destroying Northern Ireland's infrastructure in response to the years and years of IRA attacks.

No. That's a poor analogy. Can you draw me up a list of absolute parallels to back up this comment?

Our billions of dollars to ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Our billions of dollars to Is seem to be better spent than the trillions of dollars we spent to protect Western Europe during the cold war.

Let me rephrase, and in the... (Below threshold)
Larry:

Let me rephrase, and in the process state that I regard Front Page as largely "rightist" propaganda.

Please provide evidence of anti-Semitism or anti-Americanism on the part of the American mainstream "left". Don't bother quoting Farrakan or any loony radicals either, unless you're willing to sit down here and hash out the definition of "left" for these purposes. I have
to admit that I'm a bit taken aback by the Spanish PMs comments. However, anti-Semitism can rear its head on the "left" or the "right" as it has historically - do don't use this as some kind of indictment of the "left".


"Why don't you ask Iran and other oil-rich Arab countries to spend their billions to help build a decent country for the Palestinians and Lebanese? If these countries become functional democracies, we would be happy to send our money their way."

This is a non-sequitir, and unfortunately not the way the world at large works. While I agree that this might be a fruitful endeavor, where does our Administration stand on this? This would require that the Israelis and Palestenians actually sat down and agreed on borders. I don't think either side is willing to do that right now.
It's a non-sequitir because I made no mention of the Palestenians in my question. I asked whether Israel would use their resources and those we give them (the non-response to my comments on why we send so much tax revenue to Israel is duly noted) to rebuild LEBANON'S infrastructure and foster positive relations in the purported absence (or existence in a weakened state) of Hizbollah.

Finally, on the PR war - I'm all for it. But don't go equating my viewpoints or that of the broader American "left" with the anti-Semeitc views of the Spanish PM. You're being disingenuous, if so.
Good luck getting this administration and the neocon hawks to support this PR campaign though. They've got too much money to be made selling weapons to Israel and maintaining a state of perpetual warfare in the middle east. Is it any wonder that anti-American sentiment is so easily inflamed there?

Larry:They've g... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Larry:

They've got too much money to be made selling weapons to Israel and maintaining a state of perpetual warfare in the middle east.

So when oil skyrockets because of perpetual warfare that helps us how?

As far as the U.S. maintaining a state of perpetual warfare, that's absolute tripe. If our entire economy was propped up by he sale of arms to Israel than I'd be more inclined to entertain this accusation.

It's a non-sequitir because... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

It's a non-sequitir because I made no mention of the Palestenians in my question. I asked whether Israel would use their resources and those we give them (the non-response to my comments on why we send so much tax revenue to Israel is duly noted) to rebuild LEBANON'S infrastructure and foster positive relations in the purported absence (or existence in a weakened state) of Hizbollah.
--------------------------------------------------
Israel is using the billions of dollars to fight the Hiz terrorists, who have killed hundreds of AMericans, for us. They are sending Iran a strong signal for us. Also they are doing Lebanon a favor by hopefully removing the cancer of Hiz.

If you are so concerned about Lebanon, ask the Europeans like France, Spain ... to contribute to the fund to rebuild Lebanon. Most of these European countries depend upon our military protection during the cold war and even now. AT the same time, they spout anti-American propaganda (ie selling us out) for Arab oil and buying off the terrorists from attacking them.

I have given you another article about the anti-Semitism of the American left if you care to read.

Larry, Fine if you ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Larry,
Fine if you don't want to believe frontpage. But then don't tell me these leftist propaganda. Fair enough? I can treat your posts as leftist propaganda, using your own standard.

That's not a bette... (Below threshold)
Larry:
That's not a better question, that's a ridiculous question. Why doesn't Israel withdraw from Lebanon like they did in 2000? Because they'll end up in 2012 like they did in 2006...that's why. The question answers itself, Larry.

Someone that wants you dead and has dedicated their existence to the ending of yours, doesn't go away when you ignore them.

Heralder, you display the stunning lack of ability to grasp complex scenarios typical of rightists on this site. The premise, for the final time, is that once this concession is made, and Hezbollah no longer has political legitimacy or relevance, Israel will have shown good faith toward a RECOGNIZED NATION in Lebanon. Should unprovoked attacks continue, Israel will have more bargaining power with the government and the non-radical-Mulim population of Lebanon to isolate and eradicate the extremist population itself. Should this fail, they could work together withe the Lebanese government in a much more realistic endeavor to do so. Instead, they continue to bomb innocents and expect them to utilize their non-existant power to force Hezbollah out themselves.

This question is on par with the first. The U.N. has issued a resolution demanding Hezbollah to disarm. They didn't. No one cared, except Israel, but then that was before they crossed the border, killed Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two others.

So only Israel is allowed to selectively ignore or interpret U.N. resolutions requiring action on their part? See U.N. resolution 425, far predating the resolution of which you speak (1559). The U.N. has explicitly stated that Israel's continued presence in the Shebaa farms area is a violation of international law, yet Israel flouts this.
I agree that Hezbollah is to blame for the latest conflagration, however my entire point is apparently lost on you. Israel should live up to the standards expected of a western democracy and abide by the resolutions of the U.N. of which it is a member if it expects the same of its neighbors. This would be not only a good faith first effort on their part, but a guage on the Lebanese willingness to abide by their part or assist Israel in its strategic interest of disarming and disbanding/delegitimizing Hezbollah.

A destroyed and governmentally ineffectual Lebanon does nothing to help Israel or the region. I'm willing to say that they will put money into rebuilding infrastructure.

I sure agree. And I sure hope you're right, but I somehow doubt it.

Has the diplomatic solution ever worked against terrorism? No. Bowing to their demands and being cowed by their tactics only serves to validate their dispicable murderous ideology.

But by all means, carry a strongly worded letter to a Palistinian terrorist....the pain will only be momentary if you're close enough.

Of course it has. See the IRA example for a great example of how diplomacy and PR affected a significant role in the defeat of a terrorist organization.
Here's another interesting point. Let's use the Shebaa Farms dispute as an example. It is not only the terrorists who want Israel out, is it? Yet since there happen to be terrorists who demand that they leave, Israel is not able to leave because that would indicate that they are being cowed by terrorists? Does that kind of logic lead anywhere other than the perpetuation of the current situation?
The situation with the Palestinians is due in large part to the fact that neither side will sit down and negotiate in good faith on creating eithe r a two nation solution, or a binational secular state (which would contradict Israel's quasi-theocratic Zionist origins). Until then, you have dudes with bombs sneaking onto buses and disproportionate Israeli mass targeting of refugees in response, and vice versa, ad infinitum.

No. That's a poor analogy. Can you draw me up a list of absolute parallels to back up this comment?

To start, they are neighboring countries. Second, the IRA enjoyed about the same level of popular support and government representation that the rightists here purport Hezbollah to have within Lebanon. Third, both took part in community activities in order to bolster a more moderate image and garner popular support. What else?

The situation with the Pale... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

The situation with the Palestinians is due in large part to the fact that neither side will sit down and negotiate in good faith on creating eithe r a two nation solution, or a binational secular state (which would contradict Israel's quasi-theocratic Zionist origins). Until then, you have dudes with bombs sneaking onto buses and disproportionate Israeli mass targeting of refugees in response, and vice versa, ad infinitum.
---------------------------------------------------
Larry, why you keep spouting leftist anti-semitism propaganda?

The Palestinians have Gaza and most of the west bank now. They can build on what they have as a country.

I hope the American Jewish community would wake up to the anti-Semitism displayed by people on the left like Larry.

Apologies for the messed up bl... (Below threshold)
Larry:
Apologies for the messed up blockquotes above.
So when oil skyrockets because of perpetual warfare that helps us how?

As far as the U.S. maintaining a state of perpetual warfare, that's absolute tripe. If our entire economy was propped up by he sale of arms to Israel than I'd be more inclined to entertain this accusation.

You tell me that skyrocketing oil is not good for big oil. Higher prices lead to higher profits for the people with close ties to big oil. Furthermore you fail to grasp the big picture yet again. We're not just talking about arms sales to Israel. We're talking about propping up the VAST military industrial complex that comprises the DoD, civilian contractors, and a great deal of heavy industry in general. I can't seem to find a decent source for it, so I'll defer to you, but I'd be willing to bet that the DoD contracting industry is a humongous part of our economy. After the U.S.S.R. went away, they all said "Uh-Oh!"

If you are so concerned about Lebanon, ask the Europeans like France, Spain ... to contribute to the fund to rebuild Lebanon. Most of these European countries depend upon our military protection during the cold war and even now. AT the same time, they spout anti-American propaganda (ie selling us out) for Arab oil and buying off the terrorists from attacking them.

Most of this statement is diversionary at best, and downright wrong at worst. Diversionary because it's not Europe destroying Lebanese infrastructure, nor is it Europe getting the vast amounts of DIRECT economic aid that Israel receives from us. I find it hilarious how you neocons are willing to say things like: "We fought Vietnam and Korea not to "win" but to bankrupt the commies", and then turn around and question why we were willing to spend so much money defending and/or garrisoning western Europe during the cold war. Were the same ends not accomplished? Nevermind that many European nations built up impressive arsenals, aircraft fleets, and armies of their own without our assistance.
Additionally, what does rhetoric emmanating from various European "leftists" have to do with the situation from our perspective? I couldn't care less! The fact that you make mention of it simply proves that the neocon philosophy makes it easy for you to simplistically conflate unrelated phenomena in order to advocate for the casual use of military force, even in a preemptive manner.

Let me close by reiterating that I too believe that Hizbollah is a scourge on the world, and a terrorist, criminal organization that should be wiped out. I just don't think the current campaign of MASSIVE escalation by Israel will accomplish this goal. This is why I question whether this is truly the goal of Israel.

Larry, why you kee... (Below threshold)
Larry:
Larry, why you keep spouting leftist anti-semitism propaganda?

The Palestinians have Gaza and most of the west bank now. They can build on what they have as a country.

I hope the American Jewish community would wake up to the anti-Semitism displayed by people on the left like Larry.

Please, LAI, point me to ANYTHING that I have said which can be categorized as anti-Semetic.

The paragraph to which you responded simply outlined a couple of the historically suggested solutions to the current impasse over a two state or binational state solution.

I think my use of the word "Zionist" to accurately describe the source of the rift regarding the Binational secular proposition scared you.

Perhaps you should do some research on Israel's origins (pre British Mandate) and look up the definition of "Zionism".

Please stop flinging the word anti-Semetism around as if you understand its definition.

MantisI have heard... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

I have heard Annan call for Israel to do a unilateral ceasefire. You linked a call for both sides to stop. No such call for Hezballah to do so unilaterally.

Annan has condemned Hezballahs attacks on Israel. I havent seen him say squat about Hezballah deliberately targeting Civilian areas only that they started the current fight. I have seen him say that Israel's response was excessive. Hmm over 1200 rockets fall on Israel in (deliberately targeted) civilian areas and Annan says that Isreali response is over the top when they have attacked only military targets or targets which would support Hezballah being resupplied. I dont see him condeming the deliberate targetting of civilians at all.

By the way name one war where a side one by utilizing a balanced and measured response? War is WAR. Both sides have acknowleded they are at war. This isnt a playground with a scuffle between 3rd graders.

"The United Nations is working toward a new diplomatic arrangement between Israel and Lebanon that will be based on implementation of Security Council Resolution 1559, calling for the disarmament of Hezbollah, the restoration of Lebanese sovereignty, and the deployment of the Lebanese army to southern Lebanon"

Oh yes I missed how well the first UN resolution worked so well that they are going to try to do it again. I see it said they are working towards but umm no details. Is that the same way they were working towards this when they passed 1559 what was it 3 years ago???

Sorry but good intentions count for squat when your track record has shown that your good intentions mean squat and oh by the way rockets are falling on your civilians.

The UN threatens sanctions and the bad guys keel over laughing begging them to stop as the laughter is killing them. Yep the threat of UN resolutions have them shaking in their boots I can see it now.

Sorry but I look at RESULTS and ACTIONS.

The UN has shown NO RESULTS and all the actions are talk. You cant talk a bully to death. You beat the hell out of him. The only way for Israel to be free of Hezballah is to destroy Hezballah. Before you condemn that statement remmber that Israel wasnt founded to destroy Hezballah, but Hezballah was founded to destory Israel.

I believe Annan has also condemned Syria for their part in this. I umm didnt see a call from Annan to stop sending weapons to Hezballah. Have you got a link to that? Didnt think so. Have you seen a call from Annan to Syria to use their influence with Hezballah to stop? I havent either. Funny I did see Annan call on israel to do a unilateral ceasefire though.


If Hezballah laid down their arms and didnt attack Israel anymore there could be a chance for peace in the Middle east. If Israel laid down their arms and didnt attack Hezballah there would be a bloodbath. Do you disagree with this statement?

Why not look at facts instead of through rose colored glasses. Look at actions instead of what people say they will do when the past has shown that to be inadequate at best.

*anti-SemEtism = anti-Semit... (Below threshold)
Larry:

*anti-SemEtism = anti-Semitism

guess I should get the spelling right if I'm going to say that others can't define it. :(

Most of this statement is d... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Most of this statement is diversionary at best, and downright wrong at worst. Diversionary because it's not Europe destroying Lebanese infrastructure, nor is it Europe getting the vast amounts of DIRECT economic aid that Israel receives from us. I find it hilarious how you neocons are willing to say things like: "We fought Vietnam and Korea not to "win" but to bankrupt the commies", and then turn around and question why we were willing to spend so much money defending and/or garrisoning western Europe during the cold war. Were the same ends not accomplished? Nevermind that many European nations built up impressive arsenals, aircraft fleets, and armies of their own without our assistance.
Additionally, what does rhetoric emmanating from various European "leftists" have to do with the situation from our perspective? I couldn't care less! The fact that you make mention of it simply proves that the neocon philosophy makes it easy for you to simplistically conflate unrelated phenomena in order to advocate for the casual use of military force, even in a preemptive manner.
-------------------------------------------------
I notices that you are trying to divert attention from the point of billions of dollars of aid to Is. I have shown you how Is has put it to good use for us.

You are the one who is trying to divert attention: Hiz is the one who is destroying Lebanon right now. The Europeans today cannot get themselves together to proclaim that Hiz a terrorist organization. They are providing the propaganda cover for Hiz, which brought havoc to Lebanon. Hiz can simply release two kidnapped soldiers and disarm. Europe had contributed to the destruction of Lebanon due to their policy wrt Hiz.

If Europe has such a fine fleet, why didn't they take care of Serbia (Nato is mainly US and BRitish airplanes, do you know that?)?

How would you propose to wipe out Hiz? Sit and talk with them while they blow up Is women and children? This is why I question whether this is truly your goal.

Look, people: the situation... (Below threshold)
Larry:

Look, people: the situation entangling Israel, Hezbollah, Syria requires the use of your faculties of reason:

Oh yes I missed how well the first UN resolution worked so well that they are going to try to do it again. I see it said they are working towards but umm no details. Is that the same way they were working towards this when they passed 1559 what was it 3 years ago???

Would "the first resolution" be U.N. 425? Because that calls for Israel's withdrawl from the Shebaa Farms region. It predates 1559, and Israel ignored that portion of it.

1559 calls for Syria to end its military presence in Lebanon by withdrawing its forces and to cease intervening in internal Lebanese politics. The resolution also called on all Lebanese militias (including Hezbollah) to disband.

See This Link for details of the SELECTIVE response enacted by the concerned parties, AS A RESULT OF ISRAEL'S unwillingness to comply with U.N. 425.

What part of this don't you understand?

Please, LAI, point me to AN... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Please, LAI, point me to ANYTHING that I have said which can be categorized as anti-Semetic.
--------------------------------------------------
Either you are ignorant (and simply spouting leftist propagandist) or you are a propagandist. It is foolish to propose a binational state with the Palestinian goal of destroying the nation of Is. The two state solution is the best for the survival of the Jewish people in Is. The binational state is a strategy to overwhelm the country of Is with Arabs. THis is standard propaganda from the Palestians bending on the destruction of Is.

You are either willingly or unwillingly participate in such a propaganda scheme for the destruction of the Jewish state.

HEre is a summary of the new anti-semitism
(disguised as anti-Zionism)
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=4858

How would you prop... (Below threshold)
Larry:
How would you propose to wipe out Hiz? Sit and talk with them while they blow up Is women and children? This is why I question whether this is truly your goal.

I'm ignoring your complete and utter fascination with the EU not labelling Hezbollah a terrorist organization, and ignoring your attempts to draw me into (another) discussion about Bosnia. What is it with you and Europe, anyway? Geez.

I have answered your question above in blocks MANY TIMES. Read up this thread or scan the threads from the past few days for an answer. Please stop attempting to parrot my language back at me, i.e. diversion, my real goals, etc. It shows that you'
re searching.

I'm ignoring your complete ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I'm ignoring your complete and utter fascination with the EU not labelling Hezbollah a terrorist organization, and ignoring your attempts to draw me into (another) discussion about Bosnia. What is it with you and Europe, anyway? Geez.

I have answered your question above in blocks MANY TIMES. Read up this thread or scan the threads from the past few days for an answer. Please stop attempting to parrot my language back at me, i.e. diversion, my real goals, etc. It shows that you'
re searching.
------------------------------------------------
Just to point out your leftist hypocrisy wrt aids to Is and aids to Europe. We spent trillions of dollars on Europe (Marshall plan and during the cold war) while they are backstabbing us even now. Look at France and Spain for an example.

Answer my points if you can. Don't pretend to be smart when you simply spout leftist propaganda.

Larry, Why do you ... (Below threshold)
Lurking Observer:

Larry,

Why do you insist on giving away Syrian territory? Why do you insist on having the Israelis give land to someone other than the owners?

The same UN whose resolutions you cite have consistently said that Shebaa farms is Syrian territory.

It would seem that you have a rather selective reading of the UN resolutions, which leaves me wondering what else you might be selective about (e.g., how the Taba proposals, which Arafat turned down, would have gained an independent Palestinian state, or how you insist that somehow Hizb'allah's legitimacy is tied solely to Shebaa farms, as though a call for the destruction of Israel is justified by their refusal to turn the place over---to the Syrians).

retired military,Y... (Below threshold)
mantis:

retired military,

You claimed to have not heard a bunch of things and to have heard others. You offer no links to what you profess to have heard (demand for unilateral ceasefire), and choose to ignore the statements which directly refute your contentions about what the UN "has not called for". Then you go on with a bunch of talk about actions and results instead of talk, as if your initial post wasn't entirely about talk. You're far too dishonest to debate with.

Larry, BTW if you c... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Larry,
BTW if you cannot see the ridiculousness of Europeans refusing to label Hiz as a terrorist organization, then it is lost. They don't even have the courage to do that or they simply don't care about the suffering Lebanese people. They are selling them out to buy favor from Hiz. THey have a responsibility in the suffering of the Lebanese people as well. Why don't you question them? They should pay for rebuilding Lebanon given their despicable behavior so far.

mantis,Go... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

mantis,

Go fight your war against all Muslims over at LGF. Those of us don't advocate the killing of over a billion people are talking.

As if you have a choice. Islam has a long history that you would do well to learn. As with any religion, movement or political party, only a small percentage of the people control the agenda and motivate the masses. That's why Israel goes after the leaders whenever possible and that's the key to keeping Islamic terrorists on the defensive.

mantis,You claimed t... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

mantis,
You claimed to have not heard a bunch of things and to have heard others. You offer no links to what you profess to have heard (demand for unilateral ceasefire), and choose to ignore the statements which directly refute your contentions about what the UN "has not called for". Then you go on with a bunch of talk about actions and results instead of talk, as if your initial post wasn't entirely about talk. You're far too dishonest to debate with.
--------------------------------------------------
Mantis,
You are far too dishonest to debate with. You know what retired military meant. You simply tried to score a cheap point. If you don't know that Anan and UN is corrupt (oil-for-food, Congo sexual abuse), then you are lost. Their words meant nothing. I don't see demand for UNILATERAL ceasefire by Hamas. IF you want to play with words, ANAN demanded BILATERAL ceasefire. He should have ask Hiz to UNILATERALLY and immediately return two kidnapped soldiers, stop attacking IS civilians, and immediately agree to disarment.

Either you are ign... (Below threshold)
Larry:
Either you are ignorant (and simply spouting leftist propagandist) or you are a propagandist. It is foolish to propose a binational state with the Palestinian goal of destroying the nation of Is. The two state solution is the best for the survival of the Jewish people in Is. The binational state is a strategy to overwhelm the country of Is with Arabs. THis is standard propaganda from the Palestians bending on the destruction of Is.

You are either willingly or unwillingly participate in such a propaganda scheme for the destruction of the Jewish state.

So let me get this straight: by bringing up the binational state as one of the proposed solutions, and stating why it would fail (the fact that it directly contradicts the Zionist goal of a mandated Jewish majority in Israel), I am somehow anti-Semitic? I'm losing interest here, LAI.

I'm rather uncomfortable with any theocracy, but I'm also willing to consider the two state solution as far as it brings peace. However, since you're in the mood to throw accusations of racism around, how much do you know about race relations in Israel right now?

Good God. I read your article in the American "Thinker" and it was horrible. The author defines anti-Semitism as advocating for the genocide of Jews, whereas the standar definition is: Hatred, prejudice, oppression, or discrimination against Jews or Judaism. Actually, the term is usually spelled with a capital "S" in "Semitic." Semites originally meant the descendents of Shem, which include both Jews and Muslims in the Middle East. Now, the term is used mainly to refer to Jews. Alan Dershowitz, in his book "The Case for Israel" defines anti-semitism as "taking a trait or an action that is widespread if not universal, and blaming only the Jews for it."
Furthermore, he goes on to call the Anglican Church anti-Semite because it called for the divestment of its members in Israel as a protest for how Israel is managing its occupation of Gaza and the West Bank. Really pathetic reasoning on display there. The author, James Lewis, frequently makes reference to "the left" or "the hard left" in America as being anti-Semitic, yet cites absolutely no sources to back this up. Are we to take his word on it? Finally, his ultimate premise - that being anti-Israel (more on this below) is the same as being anti-Semitic - which it most definitely is not.
Now, on being "anti-Israel" - as I've stated before, while I have misgivings about the legitimacy of any racist theocracy, I don't question Israel's "right to exist". I believe they are as historically entitled to share the land there as the Palestinians are, and I recognize the boundaries set forth in 1948. I am, on occasion, anti-Israeli-occupation-policy as I am right now, and I think that better sums up the opinion of "the left" and many on "the right" as well.

So stop boring me with your labored reasoning, and stick to the point. If you are too lazy to research the roots and ramifications of this conflict, then please refrain from making blanket statements on subject matter you don't understand.

LarryI'm rather unco... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Larry
I'm rather uncomfortable with any theocracy, but I'm also willing to consider the two state solution as far as it brings peace. However, since you're in the mood to throw accusations of racism around, how much do you know about race relations in Israel right now?
--------------------------------------------------
If you mean that Is is a theocracy, then you really don't know what you are talking about.

Please stop the distraction about research etc... You are too lazy to read what I sent you.

I can see Arabs enjoying full Is citizenship in Is right now. Can the Jews live safely anywhere in an Arab country?

Digging further in the wiki... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

Digging further in the wiki links I found this:

On May 22, 2000, Israel completed its withdrawal from the south of Lebanon in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 425 [1]. The UN certified Israel's pullout [2]. The January 20, 2005 UN Secretary-General's report on Lebanon explicitly stated: "The continually asserted position of the Government of Lebanon that the Blue Line is not valid in the Shab'a farms area is not compatible with Security Council resolutions. The Council has recognized the Blue Line as valid for purposes of confirming Israel's withdrawal pursuant to resolution 425 (1978). The Government of Lebanon should heed the Council's repeated calls for the parties to respect the Blue Line in its entirety." [3]

So, looks like the followed the letter of the law in Resolution 425, and the UN said they satisfied it.

Larry:Heralder,... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Larry:

Heralder, you display the stunning lack of ability to grasp complex scenarios typical of rightists on this site.

Why Larry, thanks for the ignorant and unfounded generalization of my character. It's been tried before my friend, but it never seems to make you any smarter. Funny how that works eh?

The premise, for the final time, is that once this concession is made, and Hezbollah no longer has political legitimacy or relevance, Israel will have shown good faith toward a RECOGNIZED NATION in Lebanon. Should unprovoked attacks continue, Israel will have more bargaining power with the government and the non-radical-Mulim population of Lebanon to isolate and eradicate the extremist population itself. Should this fail, they could work together withe the Lebanese government in a much more realistic endeavor to do so. Instead, they continue to bomb innocents and expect them to utilize their non-existant power to force Hezbollah out themselves.

Larry, I understood you the firt time you tried to make it sound sensical. I appreciate the effort of explaining it again.

Concession. A concession will not make Hezbollah invalid, and it will not magically solve this situation. Those terrorists exist for the sole purpose of expelling Israel from Lebanon, so why would the movement continue to fight Israel, after it's complete withdrawal? Shebaa Farms, which are considered by the UN as part Syria are not part of Lebanon.

So why is the organization still around?

Well, because they want Israel destroyed, not out of Lebanon (which they have been). They have said as much. So tell me where conceding to their demands would get Israel?

As far as Hezbollah being a "RECOGNIZED NATION", When they have their own country they can be a recognized nation. Then, when they attack Israel they will bear the full consequence of their actions, rather than have people like you reward them for their efforts.

It's been proven that Lebanon simply doesn not have the power over it's own government and army to expel or disarm Hezbollah, so don't count on other people to do the job, because it won't get done. Ask the UN.

So only Israel is allowed to selectively ignore or interpret U.N. resolutions requiring action on their part? See U.N. resolution 425, far predating the resolution of which you speak (1559). The U.N. has explicitly stated that Israel's continued presence in the Shebaa farms area is a violation of international law, yet Israel flouts this.
I agree that Hezbollah is to blame for the latest conflagration, however my entire point is apparently lost on you. Israel should live up to the standards expected of a western democracy and abide by the resolutions of the U.N. of which it is a member if it expects the same of its neighbors. This would be not only a good faith first effort on their part, but a guage on the Lebanese willingness to abide by their part or assist Israel in its strategic interest of disarming and disbanding/delegitimizing Hezbollah.

My point is not lamenting the fact that only one side follows UN resolutions, it was highlighting the fact that you cannot count on the UN to enforce it's resolutions, and therefor asking them for yet another resolution regarding the subject will not help Israel in any way.

It's rather like taking asprin, hoping it will cure cancer.

Of course it has. See the IRA example for a great example of how diplomacy and PR affected a significant role in the defeat of a terrorist organization.

And it only took 79 years!

Here's another interesting point. Let's use the Shebaa Farms dispute as an example. It is not only the terrorists who want Israel out, is it? Yet since there happen to be terrorists who demand that they leave, Israel is not able to leave because that would indicate that they are being cowed by terrorists? Does that kind of logic lead anywhere other than the perpetuation of the current situation?

No, it doesn't. Perhaps if Hezbollah tried negotiation instead of murder to set the stage for contact, the situation wouldn't continue to escalate? One can simply not risk empowering a viscious group of people who want you dead.

The situation with the Palestinians is due in large part to the fact that neither side will sit down and negotiate in good faith on creating eithe r a two nation solution, or a binational secular state (which would contradict Israel's quasi-theocratic Zionist origins). Until then, you have dudes with bombs sneaking onto buses and disproportionate Israeli mass targeting of refugees in response, and vice versa, ad infinitum.

I have to repeat this: The problem with negotiation with both Hamas and Hezbollah is not that they want their own state, or they missed their ice cream shipment, they want Israel destroyed, they continue to say it, but not too many actually listen.

To start, they are neighboring countries. Second, the IRA enjoyed about the same level of popular support and government representation that the rightists here purport Hezbollah to have within Lebanon. Third, both took part in community activities in order to bolster a more moderate image and garner popular support. What else?

Maybe the IRA's goals as opposed to Hezbollah? I don't see that as minor, and it is a driving factor in this conflict.


BTW if you cannot ... (Below threshold)
Larry:
BTW if you cannot see the ridiculousness of Europeans refusing to label Hiz as a terrorist organization, then it is lost. They don't even have the courage to do that or they simply don't care about the suffering Lebanese people. They are selling them out to buy favor from Hiz. THey have a responsibility in the suffering of the Lebanese people as well. Why don't you question them? They should pay for rebuilding Lebanon given their despicable behavior so far.


Again, I'm ignoring your bait on the Marshall Plan, and just how exactly they're stabbing our backs now.

Just tell me one thing, and I'll try to refrain from laughing: what favor could the EU possibly hope to gain from Hizbollah?


Why do you insist on giving away Syrian territory? Why do you insist on having the Israelis give land to someone other than the owners?

The same UN whose resolutions you cite have consistently said that Shebaa farms is Syrian territory.

And lurking observer, I have addressed that very point above. Regardless of whether the U.N. resolution states that the land belongs to Syria, both Syria and Lebanon both claim that it belongs to Lebanon. Furthermore, tell me just how this distinction would affect the results of an Israeli withdrawal. No matter which way you slice it, Israel is being obstinate for reasons on which I'm not clear. Can you help? I won't hold the fact that your handle is a misnomer against you.

Larry, How do you ... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Larry,

How do you get the quote blocks that you have set up? Now that we're dealing in longer posts mine would be easier to read if I did it that way.

Larry,Just tell me o... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Larry,
Just tell me one thing, and I'll try to refrain from laughing: what favor could the EU possibly hope to gain from Hizbollah?
-------------------------------------------------
Please don't attack us. We are on your side. We are against Is and America too. The terrorists attacked and Spain wag its tail.

France stabbed our back at the UN together with Russia, China for Saddam 's oil money. France was quick to condemn Is. Now Spain is joining them. In front of your eyes and you don't see it, amazing.


I am surprised that you don't know these simple stuffs. Probably because you are so deep into these anti-semitic leftist propaganda.

Concession. A conc... (Below threshold)
Larry:
Concession. A concession will not make Hezbollah invalid, and it will not magically solve this situation. Those terrorists exist for the sole purpose of expelling Israel from Lebanon, so why would the movement continue to fight Israel, after it's complete withdrawal? Shebaa Farms, which are considered by the UN as part Syria are not part of Lebanon.

See answer above. Syria and Lebanon both agree that it is Lebanon's territory now. And yes, I know that this may be a ploy to rationalize the continued existence of Hezbollah, but AGAIN, how does it hurt Israel to pull out, and thereby DELEGITIMIZE Hezbollah? Doesn't it make EVEN MORE SENSE this way? For God's sake, this is getting old.

My point is not lamenting the fact that only one side follows UN resolutions, it was highlighting the fact that you cannot count on the UN to enforce it's resolutions, and therefor asking them for yet another resolution regarding the subject will not help Israel in any way.

Yes, I know that it's the pet cause of the righties to disband the U.N. I also know that you hypocritically call out some nations for ignoring U.N. mandates and not others. But you're right, the U.N. hasn't had much luck in enforcing any of the mandates that affect Israel.

No, it doesn't. Perhaps if Hezbollah tried negotiation instead of murder to set the stage for contact, the situation wouldn't continue to escalate? One can simply not risk empowering a viscious group of people who want you dead.

In principle, you're absolutely correct. But the anti Israeli sentiment is always going to exist in certain segments of the Arab population. Hezbollah has gone so far as to say that they are not anti-Semite and that they strictly advocate the establishment of an Islamic theocracy in its place. Where does that leave us? How does leaving EMPOWER them? It WEAKENS them, by showing that you are reasonable and that they are not. It delegitimizes them by taking away their reason to war, and makes them stand out as criminals with nothing to fight for and no rationale for the use of violence.

I have to repeat this: The problem with negotiation with both Hamas and Hezbollah is not that they want their own state, or they missed their ice cream shipment, they want Israel destroyed, they continue to say it, but not too many actually listen.

And I have to repeat this: Hamas and Hezbollah are minorities in their respective "states", whose legitimacy is only bolstered by Israeli tactics, when in fact Israel should be making moves to marginalize them. Destroying the homes of innocent civilians and their infrastructure does exactly the opposite. Put yourself in the shoes of a Lebanese Christian, Druze, or Muslim who is not affiliated with Hizbollah (i.e. the majority) and you just lost your home and your economy and infrastructure is now crippled. Who are you going to hate? Should the whole country be demolished to root out every last Hezbollah militant?
I repeat my hope that Israel pays for and/or assists with the rebuilding.

Hizbollah's goals vs. the IRA
Unfortunately, that's irrelevant to the point being made here. Suppose the IRA did advocate for the destruction of the U.K. and/or England. Would that have then made it OK for England to demolish N. Ireland's infrastructure in order to destroy or debilitate the IRA. I think the answer is the same. Thoughts?

Again, from the wiki you li... (Below threshold)
Thrush:

Again, from the wiki you linked, Larry:

Despite verbal pronouncements by Syria that the area does belong to Lebanon, Syria has so far refused to cooperate with the UN's and Lebanon's request to officially delimit and demarcate the border, not just in the Shebaa area but over its entire length. The Syrian government does not recognize the independence of Lebanon, Jordan, or Israel de jure, believing them to be properly part of Greater Syria.

Syria has refused to label the Sheeba Farms as Lebanon in writing. I guess verbal statements are no good for the UN, so the blue line stays. Thus, Israel satisfied Resolution 425. That Greater Syria is some spooky stuff in this day and age, obliterating 3 other countries.

(You can do block quotes by using <blockquote>Content here</blockquote> which draws the nifty box indented in.)

Heralder, To use q... (Below threshold)
Larry:

Heralder,

To use quoteblocks it's text without the spaces obviously.

France stabbed our back at the UN together with Russia, China for Saddam 's oil money. France was quick to condemn Is. Now Spain is joining them. In front of your eyes and you don't see it, amazing.


I am surprised that you don't know these simple stuffs. Probably because you are so deep into these anti-semitic leftist propaganda.

And, as expected you offered no answer whatsoever. Do you really think that Europe operates in fear of any terrorist attack at all times? That is a laugh. Again, what do they gain by appeasing Hizbollah? Are they sending aid?

Furthermore, it is you that reads too much wingnut propaganda. The "oil for food" scandal was far from what it was cracked up to be, but you have the benefit of labelling anything that disputes Rush, Hannity, Coulter, Malkin, Beck, etc. as "leftist propaganda" instead of REALITY, which is what it is.

And since we're on the topic of Iraq again, what threat did Saddam pose to us? Maybe none? Maybe that's why France didn't jump in on this one? But then, who friggin' cares about France Goddamnit. Stick to the friggin subject for a change.

Don't bother, Larry, that w... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Don't bother, Larry, that wingnut's screwed so tight his threads are stripped.

He sure can tell you about the simple stuffs though.

So now we're down to Syrian... (Below threshold)
Larry:

So now we're down to Syrian rhetoric and their unwillingness to demarcate the land, a condition not present in U.N. 425. Furthermore, here's an excerpt from an article on this land. Hence, Israel must still withdraw in order to comply. Really though, I mean, what would be in conflict supposing Israel just "moved back".

Fact is, my point remains undiluted. Israel should simply pull back and begin working toward peace in earnest. If that involves an eventual conflict with Syria (far more justified than destroying Lebanon) then so be it.

During the 1967 Six Day War Israeli forces seized a piece of Lebanese territory called the Shebaa Farms, a 25 square kilometer area consisting of 14 farms located south of the Shebaa, a Lebanese village on the western slopes of Mount Hermon. Since Lebanon was not a participant in the Six Day War, UN representatives were biased for Israel, pointing out that the 1923 Anglo-French demarcation and the 1949 Armistice line clearly designated the area as Syrian territory. The UN backed Israel and certified its pullout from Lebanon.

However, Lebanese and Syrian officials insisted that Syria had officially given the territory to Lebanon in 1951. Lebanese officials pointed to the fact that a number of residents in the area have land deeds stamped by the Lebanese government.

Lebanese army maps published in 1961 and 1966 specifically pinpoint several of the Shebaa Farms, including Zebdine, Fashkoul, Mougr Shebaa and Ramta, all of which are designated as being lebanese. Lebanese Ministry of Tourism maps also show the Lebanese-Syrian border running west of the Shebaa Farms. Syria has officially acknowledged the Farms are Lebanese.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said the Israeli-occupied Shebaa Farms belong to Lebanon. Assad told a news conference in Paris before ending a state visit to France, Beirut and Damascus will demarcate their countries' border at Shebaa Farms after Israel withdraws from the region. They will then submit a new map to the UN.

how does it hurt I... (Below threshold)
Thrush:
how does it hurt Israel to pull out, and thereby DELEGITIMIZE Hezbollah?
It seems to be lost on you that the rocket attacks and kidnappings in Gaza and the Lebanese border were carried out from the territory that Israel pulled out of. Namely, pulling out costs Israel it's Security Buffer, which limited the range of the rockets into the interior of Israel to some degree. If Israel pulled out now, Hizbollah would claim credit for that act, and use it to generate support. While yes, this technically invalidates the purpose of Hizbollah that they claim, I really doubt they'll all just go home, and instead revert to "supporting the palestinian cause" or some other equally thin justification to keep mucking with Israel.

The UN has never been Israel's friend, and there's some rumor that they're suggesting Israel might be charged with War crimes for "targetting civilians". Oddly, no mention of Hizbollah or Hamas being charged likewise.

The other amusing thing about your oft linked wikipedia post on Resolution 1559 is the Lebanese Response section on the bottom that basically says "What? Hizbollah is with us. They're not a foreign force at all."

Hamas and Hezbollah are minorities in their respective "states", whose legitimacy is only bolstered by Israeli tactics, when in fact Israel should be making moves to marginalize them.
I'm not sure if you're up on current events, but Hamas is now the democratically elected government of Palestine (Gaza, etc).
Assad told a news ... (Below threshold)
Thrush:
Assad told a news conference in Paris before ending a state visit to France, Beirut and Damascus will demarcate their countries' border at Shebaa Farms after Israel withdraws from the region. They will then submit a new map to the UN.
Why does Israel have to pull out first? We're talking map lines here...
And, as expected you offere... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

And, as expected you offered no answer whatsoever. Do you really think that Europe operates in fear of any terrorist attack at all times? That is a laugh. Again, what do they gain by appeasing Hizbollah? Are they sending aid?
------------------------------------------------
Larry, more diversion. I gave you an answer why Europe is afraid and you don't like it. You and I can agree that Hez is a terrorist organization to be wiped out. Why the Europeans are so afraid of labeling them a terrorist organization? Don't give me this diplomacy thing.

Yup it looks like Europe is operating in fear of terrorism and afraid to fight it. Remember the Denmark cartoon. They are afraid of Iran and want its oil too. Hiz is simply an Iranian proxy.

Do you know there is document linking Saddam and AlQ now? Are you trying to divert attention. ANd you don't know how deep French involvement in the oil-for-food program? Do you know that France wipe out the airforce of Ivory Coast for mistakenly killed 8 of their soldiers. This is after the IC gov had apologized. If you don't want to face these facts, then not much else I can do for you (or Mantis for that matter).

Larry, going back to the su... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Larry, going back to the subject you care about: Is has put our aid into good use by taking care of Hiz for us and the Lebanese. Also send a good message to Iran for us. So stop complaining OK? If you want to complain about our allies, you should try the European first, especially the leftists there. Hope you get the point

Thanks guys, for the info o... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Thanks guys, for the info on the block quotes.

Larry:

See answer above. Syria and Lebanon both agree that it is Lebanon's territory now. And yes, I know that this may be a ploy to rationalize the continued existence of Hezbollah, but AGAIN, how does it hurt Israel to pull out, and thereby DELEGITIMIZE Hezbollah? Doesn't it make EVEN MORE SENSE this way? For God's sake, this is getting old.

As far as who owns Shebaa farms, I think Thrush covered it.

I'm not sure we can agree Larry. How it can hurt Israel from pulling out is that Hezbollah will use it as a clarion call: "We defeated Israel, they are running scared. Next time we want something, kidnap some Israelis and lob a few rockets, they'll cave in a week."

I think we've already been over what they want.

Pulling out may legally (if you can call their charter legal) delegitamize Hezbollah, but how this would make them stop wanting the Israelis dead, or their many supporters to not think this was a victory? Furthermore, I would not count on the "international community" or the UN to step in and do anything after Israel pulled out, because the only way you're going to get rid of Hezbollah is to destroy it, not issue resolutions.

Yes, I know that it's the pet cause of the righties to disband the U.N. I also know that you hypocritically call out some nations for ignoring U.N. mandates and not others. But you're right, the U.N. hasn't had much luck in enforcing any of the mandates that affect Israel.

I don't feel the UN needs to be disbanded, just overhauled. As it is now, throwing paper at a problem fails to solve it pretty much every time, unless that problem is a math equation.

It delegitimizes them by taking away their reason to war, and makes them stand out as criminals with nothing to fight for and no rationale for the use of violence.

It's hard to stand out as a criminal when you can convince people that your war is holy by the mandate of Allah. Violence is in no short supply, and Hezbollah and Hamas have no problem using it to get their way, nor do their supporters believe that it's wrong....until retaliation, then they're victims.

I understand totally what you're saying, and technically it really does make sense, I just don't feel that it's a viable means to end the conflict with Hezbollah, Hamas, or any other terrorist organization, because of their greater goals.

And I have to repeat this: Hamas and Hezbollah are minorities in their respective "states", whose legitimacy is only bolstered by Israeli tactics

Hamas was elected into government! Minority? Hezbollah, according to numbers that I've read (which could be complete conjecture, I'll need to look some more) enjoys 40% approval in Lebanon, and they have "officials" in the government. How can widely approved of groups be called minorities?

Put yourself in the shoes of a Lebanese Christian, Druze, or Muslim who is not affiliated with Hizbollah (i.e. the majority) and you just lost your home and your economy and infrastructure is now crippled. Who are you going to hate? Should the whole country be demolished to root out every last Hezbollah militant?

Good question. It depends on who you are, some have openly blamed Hezbollah and others have openly blamed Israel. Others still have just roundly lamented the war as a whole and want peace at any cost. I hope it comes to them, and soon.

Unfortunately, that's irrelevant to the point being made here. Suppose the IRA did advocate for the destruction of the U.K. and/or England. Would that have then made it OK for England to demolish N. Ireland's infrastructure in order to destroy or debilitate the IRA. I think the answer is the same. Thoughts?

It would not have then made it OK, but it may have been neccesary, or even accidental. If the only way to remove the IRA from Ireland was to cut it out like a tumor, then that's what would need to be done.

If the Irish knew the existence and militarization of the IRA and it's attacks were going to bring fire directly to their homes (since they launch their rockets next door) and yet still did nothing to stop this group, then they would have to live with the results.

This in no way saying that they had it coming, just that they refused to take control of their own fate.

Heralder ...I think the com... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Heralder ...I think the comparison with the IRA is worthy...Eventually the IRA did lay down their arms and disband the military wing , Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams was welcomed into the White House,.. he and a few others were elected to Westminiter. The IRA was just as extreme in its day about the Queen and her ministrers( a number of whom they assassinated) even more than the Hezbollah are about Israel etc.. But the British always tried to deal with other root causes of the conflict. not just something that happened two weeks ago. They had a special political minister for Northern Ireland and deputyminister who seemed to understand the area-one of the weaknesses I sense with Bush administration is that they don't have a cabinet minister of rank Rice, Rumsfeld or Bush who seem to understand the regional conflicts..It is simply fighting terrorists..it could be in Timbuctou. for all that it mattered..it might be if you accept this right wing criticism of Bush that he is growing soft. Prominent hawks like Max Boot and Cakewalk Ken Adelman are upset that their favored tactic,bomb today for a brighter tomorrow no longer commands the respect it once did in Washington.

Larry"Would "the f... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Larry

"Would "the first resolution" be U.N. 425? Because that calls for Israel's withdrawl from the Shebaa Farms region. It predates 1559, and Israel ignored that portion of it."
"See This Link for details of the SELECTIVE response enacted by the concerned parties, AS A RESULT OF ISRAEL'S unwillingness to comply with U.N. 425.

What part of this don't you understand?

"

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

"On May 22, 2000, Israel completed its withdrawal from the south of Lebanon in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 425 [1]. The UN certified Israel's pullout [2]. The January 20, 2005 UN Secretary-General's report on Lebanon explicitly stated: "The continually asserted position of the Government of Lebanon that the Blue Line is not valid in the Shab'a farms area is not compatible with Security Council resolutions"

To umm quote yourself

"what part of this do you not understand?"

Try to not be so selective in your understanding.

Larry said " Please stop attempting to parrot my language back at me,"

Well Larry if you would actually make valid points maybe folks wouldnt point out how assinine you sound.

-------

Mantis

Look at your own link.

1. It says that the Lebanese army would patrol southern Lebanan.

Really? How? They have done such a great job the last 2 years.

2. It would enforce UN 1559 and disarm Hezballah.

Really? How? Who is going to disarm Hezballah? Has someone asked Hezballah if they will give up their weapons without a fight? Who is going to make sure they are disarmed? The UN. (cue laughter here). Who will verify? Who will collect the arms? The US? yeah I can see Hezballah giving us their weapons? France? Germany? Russia, How about China? I got it. Iran and Syria will oversee it I am sure that Hezballah will agree to that.

You might as well say "The UN has come up with a resolution to make the earth stop rotating on its axis." It would have about the same effect.

As far as not finding direct quotes to what I heard on TV from Annan's mouth I'm sorry but who appointed you the arbitrar of this discussion again? I can find quotes on the internet where Hillary is the devil incarnate. That would umm proof what.

In short, the UN is an ineffective useless tool of dictators who obey or dont obey what ever they want to and then hide behind the UN when they are in the losing end of a fight.

It is great to talk about "The UN this and the UN that". But when push comes to shove the only time the UN has any muscle behind it is when US troops are involved. Last time the US got involved with UN resolutions it was called Iraq. Let the UN try to enforce its resolutions without the US this time and oh yeah lets see how effective they are. After all it cant do any worse now can it.

For those who are against I... (Below threshold)
retired military:

For those who are against Israel here let me ask a simple theoretical question.

What will happen if the UN tells Israel theyhave to stop (resolutin cant pass without the US) and Israel tells them to go pound sand? What happens then?

After all Israel is only doing what Hezballah has done. And what has the UN done against Hezballah? Nothing.

Israel will only be doing what Saddam did. And what did the UN do against Saddam. Oh yeah pass more resolutions.

So what will the UN do?

The answer is absolutely nothing. Except talk. That is why the UN wont do anything. They know that their absolute impotence will be shown not only by the terrorists but by Israel as well.

Retired military absolu... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Retired military absolutely nothing...you are wrong, the UN devoted 20 minutes to the issue today. The meeting began at 11:25 a.m. and concluded at 11:50 a.m..just in time for lunch see special security council meeting


Retired military absolu... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Retired military absolutely nothing...you are wrong, the UN devoted 25 minutes to the issue today. The meeting began at 11:25 a.m. and concluded at 11:50 a.m..just in time for lunch see special security council meeting


Steve,I still beli... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

Steve,

I still believe England and the IRA are not wholly comparable to the issue with Israel and Hezbollah. Certain parallels can be drawn, absolutely, but I feel the main difference in independence vs destruction is too much to compare relative solutions.

Also, as I said before, it only took them 79 years to lay down their arms. Even then, the group continued to fracture, spawning different wings with more extreme goals.

Naturally, you can't throw paper at this and expect it to solve itself, nor can you throw bombs...but perhaps a little of both in the right order could do accomplish a lasting peace.

retired military,W... (Below threshold)
mantis:

retired military,

We can get into a conversation about the effectiveness of the UN if you want; I imagine we would agree on a lot. That doesn't change the fact that your first post was about what the UN has and has not said, and it was entirely fabricated. I was merely pointing that out. That you won't even admit as much and change your entire argument (even so far as to say who cares who said what? as if you weren't the one who cared in the first place) reveals a lot about how honest you would be in a real debate. Good night.

Btw the first post-Syria elections in Lebanon were in May 2005, so it has been one year, not two.

Mantis"That doesn'... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

"That doesn't change the fact that your first post was about what the UN has and has not said, and it was entirely fabricated. I was merely pointing that out."

Gee nice to know that you are such an expert on what I have and have not heard Annan or the UN say. Tell me are you inside my ear drum?

Your statement is laughable at best. In short, you choose the typical liberal mime. That your truth is the only truth.

Bottom line is this.

The UN is totally impotent in this matter unless Israel or the US empowers them to do something. Isreal isnt in the empowering mood and I think Bush is teaching the UN (and some other terrorist loving folks a much needed lesson).


Now lets see.

Unilateral ceasefire -
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8780.doc.htm
"Secretary-General Kofi Annan this morning called for an immediate cessation of hostilities to prevent further loss of innocent life, allow full humanitarian access to those in need and to give diplomacy a chance to work.
"


My original Post

"Anyone notice how the UN has not asked Hezballah to start a unilateral ceasefire? Why not?"

Have you shown me anything where Kofi has asked Hezballah for a unilateral (meaning their side only ceasefire?)

Didnt think so.


My original post

"Anyone notice how the UN hasnt said that Hezballah is using excessive force against Israeli civilian occupation?"

Can you please show me where the UN has said this in ref to Hezballah? They have stated that Israel is using excessive force but not Hezballah. They have said "bad boy Hezballah" but nothing about excessive force.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2006/sc8780.doc.htm

"While Hizbollah's actions were deplorable, and Israel had a right to defend itself, the excessive use of force was to be condemned"

Gee Hezballah is a bad boy but no mention of excessive force against civilians for Hezballah. However Israel response is excessive.

From my original post
"Anyone notice how the UN has not insisted that Hezballah disarm IAW its own resolution?"

We have seen from you own link that they want to set this up and talk about it. They havent CALLED ON HEZBALLAH TO DISARM. And as I pointed out so eloquently above even if they did the question is HOW TO DO IT? I didnt see a resonse from you as of yet. Please share your plan with us oh great one.

From my original post.

"Yet the UN has asked Israel for a unilateral ceasefire

Yet the UN has condemed Israel for excessive force

"

Well number 2 is really easy. See above. Link provided and all.

As for the UN calling for Israel to do a unilateral ceasefire.
Sorry but I cant seem to find a transcript for everything I have heard Annan say over the course of the last few weeks.

I will be waiting for that apology for the "entirely fabricated" statement you made. Not that I expect it to be forthcoming. We all know that facts dont matter simply what the left believes is right.

Mantis BTW<... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

BTW

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=annan+israel+%22unilateral+ceasefire%22+Hezbollah&btnG=Search

"British Prime Minister Tony Blair also rejected calls for Israel to declare a unilateral ceasefire"

"The idea of a 72 hour "unilateral" ceasefire on the part of Israel"

I wonder who was doing the call for a ceasefire.

Hmm maybe elements of the UN??

Tell you what. Why dont you read through everything the UN has said on this subject and prove that UN hasnt called for Israel to do a unilateral ceasefire. Dont let the facts get in your way now.


"Secretary-General Kofi ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

"Secretary-General Kofi Annan this morning called for an immediate cessation of hostilities to prevent further loss of innocent life, allow full humanitarian access to those in need and to give diplomacy a chance to work."

I don't see the word Israel in there. Hostilities means both sides, chuckles. No call for unilateral ceasefire so far. Let's keep going, shall we?

Have you shown me anything where Kofi has asked Hezballah for a unilateral (meaning their side only ceasefire?)

No, I pointed out that he called for bilateral ceasefire. He didn't call for unilateral ceasefire from either side, and you still have not backed up your claim that he did.

Can you please show me where the UN has said this in ref to Hezballah?

Already did. From my above post:

the deliberate targeting by Hizbollah of Israeli population centres with hundreds of indiscriminate weapons...must stop

Oh wait, the word excessive isn't in there, so it must not count, right?

We have seen from you own link that they want to set this up and talk about it. They havent CALLED ON HEZBALLAH TO DISARM. And as I pointed out so eloquently above even if they did the question is HOW TO DO IT? I didnt see a resonse from you as of yet. Please share your plan with us oh great one.

The did call for it and you know it. How to do it is more complicated, but that was not at all the substance of your post, which merely claimed they didn't call for Hezbollah to disarm. Btw I like how you describe your own writing as eloquent. Classy.

I will be waiting for that apology for the "entirely fabricated" statement you made. Not that I expect it to be forthcoming. We all know that facts dont matter simply what the left believes is right.

You have yet to back up a single assertion, so no, no apology for you.

"British Prime Minister Tony Blair also rejected calls for Israel to declare a unilateral ceasefire"

That's great. Now back up your assertion that the UN called for the unilateral ceasefire, and you may have a leg to stand on.

MantisStatement 1.... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

Statement 1.

I said unilateral but I meant bilateral for both sides on that one statement. I said the Kofi called on israel to have a unilateral ceasefire and as I stated I cant find the transcript of everything he has said on this matter. Shoot me for not being able to provide proof of everything I have head Kofi say on this matter.

Statement 2.

So you agree with me stating that he hasnt called for Hezballah to do a unilateral ceasefire. Nice to see you coming around

Statement 3.

I didnt say that Kofi didnt say they needed to stop. I said that Kofi hasnt said anything about Hezballah bombing of civilian centers as being excessive. I, unlike some, accept that fact that Hezballah and Israel are war. That means things like civilians die, infrastructure gets blown up , etc. Some of it is regrettable and some of it happens no matter how much you try for it not. Hezballah is targetting civilians deliberatly. Kofi said "bad boy" but Kofi has also said that Israel's response was excessive when all Israel is doing is targetting military assets. My statement was more so towards Kofi's ridiculous assertation that falls in line with the left's view that everything needs to be fair and anything that isnt equal is wrong. Sorry you missed the irony of the statement but hey there is no accounting for your education. Kofi still hasnt said that anything that Hezballah is excessive. Bad yes, but nothing "Excessive". Hey you are the one that wants exact quotes with links to back them up.

Statement 4.

Show me where (since you like exact quotes with links pleae provide one) where the UN has stated since this conflict started that Hezballah MUST DISARM IAW with their own resolution. Not "we are going to discuss it", not it would be nice to see" but "Hezballah must disarm IAW their own resolution". Then show me where this is nothing more than spit in the wind. I asked you for your plan. You cant even provide that. Hey you are the one that is asking for links to exact quotes. Got one for me? I still havent seen it.

Statement 5

Going by your standard of exact quotes with links if you look up the word entirely you will find it means "pertaining to the whole". So once again you are mistaken.

Statement 6.

Whereas I couldnt find "The UN called for Isreal to do a unilateral ceasefire" that still doesnt change the fact that I heard Kofi say it. Whereas I cant find "exact proof" to your satisfaction you have shown that you like most liberals will only read into things what you want to see and only if it agrees with your own view of the world.

So now that we have dissected my original statements to death how about you provide that plan that the UN will follow to disarm Hezballah since your beloved UN has a resolution to do so. Saying it and doing it are 2 differnt things and all the good intentions from the UN will only get more Israelis killed while they continue to say "bad boy" to Hezballah and "stop you are being" to Israel.


MantisStatement 1.... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

Statement 1.

I said unilateral but I meant bilateral for both sides on that one statement. I said the Kofi called on israel to have a unilateral ceasefire and as I stated I cant find the transcript of everything he has said on this matter. Shoot me for not being able to provide proof of everything I have head Kofi say on this matter.

Statement 2.

So you agree with me stating that he hasnt called for Hezballah to do a unilateral ceasefire. Nice to see you coming around

Statement 3.

I didnt say that Kofi didnt say they needed to stop. I said that Kofi hasnt said anything about Hezballah bombing of civilian centers as being excessive. I, unlike some, accept that fact that Hezballah and Israel are war. That means things like civilians die, infrastructure gets blown up , etc. Some of it is regrettable and some of it happens no matter how much you try for it not. Hezballah is targetting civilians deliberatly. Kofi said "bad boy" but Kofi has also said that Israel's response was excessive when all Israel is doing is targetting military assets. My statement was more so towards Kofi's ridiculous assertation that falls in line with the left's view that everything needs to be fair and anything that isnt equal is wrong. Sorry you missed the irony of the statement but hey there is no accounting for your education. Kofi still hasnt said that anything that Hezballah is excessive. Bad yes, but nothing "Excessive". Hey you are the one that wants exact quotes with links to back them up.

Statement 4.

Show me where (since you like exact quotes with links pleae provide one) where the UN has stated since this conflict started that Hezballah MUST DISARM IAW with their own resolution. Not "we are going to discuss it", not it would be nice to see" but "Hezballah must disarm IAW their own resolution". Then show me where this is nothing more than spit in the wind. I asked you for your plan. You cant even provide that. Hey you are the one that is asking for links to exact quotes. Got one for me? I still havent seen it.

Statement 5

Going by your standard of exact quotes with links if you look up the word entirely you will find it means "pertaining to the whole". So once again you are mistaken.

Statement 6.

Whereas I couldnt find "The UN called for Isreal to do a unilateral ceasefire" that still doesnt change the fact that I heard Kofi say it. Whereas I cant find "exact proof" to your satisfaction you have shown that you like most liberals will only read into things what you want to see and only if it agrees with your own view of the world.

So now that we have dissected my original statements to death how about you provide that plan that the UN will follow to disarm Hezballah since your beloved UN has a resolution to do so. Saying it and doing it are 2 differnt things and all the good intentions from the UN will only get more Israelis killed while they continue to say "bad boy" to Hezballah and "stop you are being" to Israel.


BTW sorry for double post. ... (Below threshold)
retired military:

BTW sorry for double post. Also to ensure that noone wants links to my last post I meant to say "stop you are being excessive in your response" rather than "just stop you are being".
:)


BTW one way I can see Hezballah disarming to the UN is to have their spokesman say "Hezballah has been dissolved. While Kofi passes out drinks in NY and pats himself on the back the next day you will see Syrian headlines "Group calling itself "sword of allah" formed in Lebanan. Calls for destruction of Isreal".

Kofi's response - "Hey we disarmed Hezballah and Sword of Allah hasnt attacked anyone yet so we cant do anything about them".

For those too dense to see through this I wasnt being totally serious with my above statements but I dont put something along that line ultimately happening.

BTW Mantis

I dont think that even if Israel beats Hezballah and Syria (UN or no UN) that it will buy lasting peace in the Middle East. It will slow down things a bit but there will always be someone there to stir the pot and fuel tensions. Sometimes the end in the short term isnt what matters. It is the fight and the long term result which matters and those results may not be written for 100 years or more. But you cant have a hand in writing that end result if you roll over and give in to people who want to kill you today.

Someday Soon Israel will be... (Below threshold)

Someday Soon Israel will be able to help Lebanon become free of the stranglehold of Hezbollah. Hopefully the Lebanese people will eventually appreciate being liberated as the Japanese and Germans do now.

Whereas I couldnt ... (Below threshold)
Larry:
Whereas I couldnt find "The UN called for Isreal to do a unilateral ceasefire" that still doesnt change the fact that I heard Kofi say it. Whereas I cant find "exact proof" to your satisfaction you have shown that you like most liberals will only read into things what you want to see and only if it agrees with your own view of the world.

Are there not transcripts? Come on man. I have been following this pretty closely and don't remember hearing this.

As usual we're now having a... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:

As usual we're now having a debate about the debate itself. Getting back to (or at least closer to) the subject of this thread, here's an interesting quote.

Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah apologized for an attack that killed two Israeli Arab children in northern Israel, saying the youngsters were "martyrs for Palestine."

I'm not sure, but I think that's a first; a terrorist group apologizing for killing children. Probably crocodile tears, but it raises the bar for Israel on the propaganda front in this conflict. Also, it's clear that the standard for being a martyr has been lowered to the point of being meaningless, at least the way Hezbollah is using it.

As for this conflict, I don't see any resolution coming anytime soon. Hezbollah is proving to be a much tougher military opponent than Israel has faced before and neither side dares show weakness or anything the other side views as weakness. Israel may be forced to launch a large scale ground invasion into Lebanon to root out Hezbollah's strong points that can't be destroyed from the air, at least not with conventional weapons. Such a ground invasion will raise the political stakes in this conflict, particularly if Lebanon sides with Hezbollah. Should Lebanon make that mistake, all of Lebanon becomes a legitimate target for Israeli bombs. With much of it's infrastructure under attack, Lebanon may ask Syria for help. If Syria makes the mistake of openly entering Lebanon to fight Israel... well you see where I'm going. Bush needs to let it be known that if Syria goes into Lebanon, the U.S. will invade Syria from Iraq, and we won't be coming as liberators, or even as occupiers, but as destroyers.

LarryIt is like st... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Larry

It is like standing on the deck of the Titanic and having an argument on the size of the hole that the iceberg gave you.

"It's 55 feet long"

"I saw no such measurement"

It adds nothing meaningful to correct the situation. The exact same way the UN adds nohting meaningful to correct the situation.

a. The UN cant enforce a ceasefire (at least not without the US)

b. The UN cant even get a binding resolution without the US.

c. Even with a binding resolution the UN cant disarm Hezballah unless Hezballah wants to disarm. Are they going to send in troops? (read that as US soldiers with blue helmets) That is laughable as countries will just say "Hey Israel is doing it for us now for free and we dont have to put our soldiers lives in danger". They may not say that in front of a camera but it will definitely be what they are thinking.

This does nothing but show the UN that hey the good guys can play the rules the same way the bad guys can and they are impotent to do anything if the major players refuse to play along. The UN already knew this but it is becoming more and more obvious to joe six pack now.

retired military, ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

retired military,
Don't worry about mantis. He is trying to deflect attention from running out of args. At least we all can agree that the UN is useless and corrupt. Its human right commission includes a bunch of dictators, that are anti-Semitic and anti-American. That 's why the left loves the UN.

Mantis is more clever than Larry. So I wouldn't stoop to his level of constantly calling people stupid to mask his own or to call him a moonbat screwed so tight the the stripes have been worn out. He is simply too dishonest to debate (using his own terminology). He will resort to personal insults when he runs out of argument. He is clever but he is definitely dishonest. Just follow this thread for the same tactic he used here.

http://wizbangblog.com/2006/07/19/bush-vetoes-stem-cell-bill-world-keeps-spinning.php

This shouldn't be a surpris... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

This shouldn't be a surprise. It is simply the latest evidence of the propaganda the liberal media is propagating on behalf of the terrorists

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/362d249f-0ed7-44d8-9705-cb631751112a

The paper's inability to use the word "terrorist" even once in association with the terrorist group that has launched more than 1,200 rockets and missiles at civilians over the past eight days --and which murdered 241 American Marines and soldiers in their Beirut barracks in 1983, is astonishing and disgustin

Whereas I couldnt find "... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Whereas I couldnt find "The UN called for Isreal to do a unilateral ceasefire" that still doesnt change the fact that I heard Kofi say it. Whereas I cant find "exact proof" to your satisfaction you have shown that you like most liberals will only read into things what you want to see and only if it agrees with your own view of the world.

Heh, so you want me to prove a negative, a logical impossibility, show you that Annan didn't say what you can't prove he said, and I'm the one who only believes that which agrees with my view of the world? Sure thing pal.

So now that we have dissected my original statements to death how about you provide that plan that the UN will follow to disarm Hezballah since your beloved UN has a resolution to do so. Saying it and doing it are 2 differnt things and all the good intentions from the UN will only get more Israelis killed while they continue to say "bad boy" to Hezballah and "stop you are being" to Israel.

See here is the whole problem with your reasoning. You come out saying that the UN said this, but they didn't say that, making it all up because you assume that's what the UN said and didn't say. (You don't merely hear only the things you want to hear, as you accuse me erroneously, you imagine you hear them when they aren't even said.) When you are shown what the UN actually said and didn't say, you shift gears and ask for how the UN will solve the problems in the Middle East, as if these were the same thing.

You call it my "beloved UN" and such and ask me to speak for them. I can't speak for the UN, they do that fine themselves, in fact that's mostly all they do. They are not my "beloved UN". I think the UN is a bloated, ineffectual organization that has made itself so by allowing so many nations whose aims are opposite to its charter to join and have a vote. And you are correct, they have no ability to enforce their resolutions, to execute their plans for peace, all they have is talk. That is the interesting thing here, is that you chose to attack their talk instead of their actions, when talk is all they have. If you had come in here and written, "Who cares what the UN says, they can't get anything done in the first place, they have no workable plan to do anything. They're just a bloated, corrupt joke," I wouldn't have disagreed one bit.

I'll let you in on a little secret. I'm not here to defend the United Nations, or Kofi Annan, or the Democrats, or anybody. I'm here to point out your bullshit. Stop slinging it (especially when 2 minutes of googling can disprove it), and I'll leave you be.

MantisYou are trul... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Mantis

You are truly comical. Just because someone cant find something they heard on TV on the internet then in your mind it doesnt exist (if it is against what you want to believe). That's hilarious.

What about all the crap you can find on the internet that isnt true or is contradictory at best (sorta like your logic). You leave the assumption that because you can find on the internet that Bush bombed the WTC and Bush didnt bomb the WTC that they are both true. After all if you can find it on the internet it must be true. It is linked and therefore you believe.

As for attacking the UN's talk and not their actions are you sure you havent read my posts? Maybe I can provide you an internet link to this thread and you can then find belief and self fulfillment.

Keep up that logic.

I guess you cant fight the logic that the UN is as impotent as your arguments. Keep on living in that dream world where internet links are the determing factor of your belief system.

As for bullshit, bring it on google boy. You go running around behind your internet links and I will continue to live in the real world.

Here is the proof of Mantis... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Here is the proof of Mantis 's dishonesty and his tactic of distration from the point. He is trying to dissect the word that somehow he can score a cheap point and use personal insult when he runs out of argument.

If mantis wants to dissect the word, then he couldn't show that the UN demands a UNILATERAL ceasefire from Hezbollah. He didn't even credit RM with that even. He is only interested in personal insults to cover up his lack of args. He is too dishonest ot have a debate as I mentioned above. Yet he didn't disprove the main point of RM in bold below.

I will bookmark this thread as another example of Mantis 's dishonesty. He is not even honest enough to admit what he is doing.

Retired Military
Anyone notice how the UN has not asked Hezballah to start a unilateral ceasefire? Why not?

Anyone notice how the UN hasnt said that Hezballah is using excessive force against Israeli civilian occupation?

Anyone notice how the UN has not insisted that Hezballah disarm IAW its own resolution?

Yet the UN has asked Israel for a unilateral ceasefire

Yet the UN has condemed Israel for excessive force

The UN proves yet agian what fools they are and what a tool of terrorists they are.

What about all the crap ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

What about all the crap you can find on the internet that isnt true or is contradictory at best (sorta like your logic). You leave the assumption that because you can find on the internet that Bush bombed the WTC and Bush didnt bomb the WTC that they are both true. After all if you can find it on the internet it must be true. It is linked and therefore you believe.

The UN puts press releases and transcripts of conferences and events on their website. The news media documents what they say in press events. I looked for your "unilateral ceasefire" quote. I googled the UN site, I searched google news, I checked the general google search. Nada. If Annan had actually said what you claim, it would have been recorded somewhere. You can't even point to when or where you heard it, you're just sure you did, all evidence to the contrary.

I don't believe things just because they are linked. I just don't believe you because you can't back up your shit, which you're full of.

I just don't believe you b... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I just don't believe you because you can't back up your shit, which you're full of.
--------------------------------------------------
Another proof of his tactic of using personal insults to cover up his dishonesty. He didn't even try to address RM 's main point below

The UN proves yet agian what fools they are and what a tool of terrorists they are.

Mantis couldn't back up his claim (or his bullshit using his own terminology) that the UN demands UNILATERAL ceasefire from Hezbollah.

Mantis couldn't back up ... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Mantis couldn't back up his claim (or his bullshit using his own terminology) that the UN demands UNILATERAL ceasefire from Hezbollah.

Never made that claim, knucklehead.

mantisNever made tha... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

mantis
Never made that claim, knucklehead.
-------------------------------------------
Thanks for proving my point again your tactic of personal insults to cover up your dishonesty.

Now you are too dense to understand your own argument. SO let me explain slowly to you.

You claim that RM 's post is full of shit and nothing in it was true. ONe of the thing in his post was "UNILATERAL ceasefire from Hezbollah". IF this is not true, then the UN must have demanded "UNILATERAL ceasefire" from Hezbollah.

Time to be honest and own up to your own "shit" arg (just use your terminology here).

His contention was that the... (Below threshold)
mantis:

His contention was that the UN demanded unilateral ceasefire from Israel but not Hezbollah. I pointed out that they did not demand unilateral ceasefire from either, but rather bilateral ceasefire. Thus his post is bullshit, and so are yours.

Mantis, You are too... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Mantis,
You are too dense and too dishonest to have a debate. I copied his post here for you to see again. You claimed that nothing in his post was true. And he said the UN has not asked Hezballah to start a unilateral ceasefire. If this is not true, then the UN must have asked Hezobollah for a UNILATERAL ceasefire.

Time to be honest and own up to your own "sh*t" arg. And stop spouting "sh*t".


Retired Military
Anyone notice how the UN has not asked Hezballah to start a unilateral ceasefire? Why not?

Anyone notice how the UN hasnt said that Hezballah is using excessive force against Israeli civilian occupation?

Anyone notice how the UN has not insisted that Hezballah disarm IAW its own resolution?

Yet the UN has asked Israel for a unilateral ceasefire

Yet the UN has condemed Israel for excessive force

The UN proves yet agian what fools they are and what a tool of terrorists they are.

Ok, LAI, I'll try to explai... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Ok, LAI, I'll try to explain so you can understand, but I don't have much hope. The point of RM's post was pointing out the hypocrisy, or favoritism towards Hezbollah, of the UN. He claimed they said things about Israel's reaction and did not say things about Hezbollah's attacks. It boils down to they said A but not B. I pointed out that in each case either they didn't say A, or they did in fact say B. Thus the entire premise of the post is false, and built on fabrications. This is what I meant and that much is very clear if you read my posts and were intellectually honest. You, of course, are not, and now you think you've got an Oh Snap! moment because some of the statements he made were true and you think I claimed every word of his post was false. I was talking about his premise and his conclusion, in addition to pointing out the things he made up. It's not that hard to understand if you try.

Anyone notice how the UN has not asked Hezballah to start a unilateral ceasefire? Why not?

Why should we notice that? Oh,

Yet the UN has asked Israel for a unilateral ceasefire

No they haven't. Contention 1, the UN asked Israel for unilateral ceasefire but not Hezbollah. False. They asked for neither. They did in fact ask for bilateral ceasefire.

Anyone notice how the UN hasnt said that Hezballah is using excessive force against Israeli civilian occupation?

Yet the UN has condemed Israel for excessive force

Contention 2, the UN criticized Israel's reaction while giving Hezbollah a pass. False. They condemned the Hezbollah aggression in it's entirety. They criticized Israel for reacting excessively.

Anyone notice how the UN has not insisted that Hezballah disarm IAW its own resolution?

Contention 3. False. I have pointed to where they did insist that Hezbollah disarm per the resolution.

The UN proves yet agian what fools they are and what a tool of terrorists they are.

Well, this may very well be true, but not based on RM's premises, which all proved false.

Feel free to go on trying to catch me in some literal nitpick if you like, but you know very well what I was saying. I'm done with you.

Mantis, I must admi... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Mantis,
I must admit that you have a fair arg here.

I must admit that you ha... (Below threshold)
mantis:

I must admit that you have a fair arg here.

Will wonders never cease?

Googleboy (aka mantis) said... (Below threshold)
retired military:

Googleboy (aka mantis) said " just don't believe you because you can't back up your shit, which you're full of.
"

Ahh mommy the bad googleboy said a bad word and he is scaring me. Make him stop mommy.

Listen googleboy, it's okay if I call you google boy right, I mean I can call you link boy if you prefer, just let me know.

Just because I heard something on TV that isnt on google doesnt mean it doesnt exist (except in your world I guess).

You will notice I didnt use quotes in my original post sorry I couldnt write down from memory word for word what was on the TV set but I have better things to do. So therefore my statements were general in nature and werent meant to be taken as verbatim quotes. I know it is hard for your liberal mind to comprehend this expecially since it makes you look like an ass but hey its an improvement for you. BTW I looked up what you said on google and couldnt find it. Following your premise it is then unworthy of contention and is false.

1. The UN hssnt asked hezballah for a unilateral ceasefire. You havent shown otherwise. I never said that they havent called for a bilateral one. Only that they called on Israel to do so and not hezballah. At least not in the TV broadcasts I heard. Now just becuase I cant google the fact that the UN didnt ask hezballah for a unilateral ceasefire does that in your warped logic mean that they did? Yeah whatever.

2. I never said the UN didnt condemn hezballah for their actions. I said they condemned Israel as being over the top. In short my statement they said "bad boy Hezballah" but condemned Israel for their level of response. Again this goes to the liberal meme that if one side does something more than another than it is unfair and over the top. Only liberals are stupid enough to think you can fight a war like this. There would never be a winner. Of course liberals think you cant have a winner in playground games so you sure as hell cant have a winner in a war. Heaven forbid that. Ooops broken the liberal golden rule (thou shall not mention heaven).

3. At the time of my writing the UN hadnt done this. As far as I know they still havent called for hezballah to disarm (unless you consider 1559). They said we are going to discuss it, we are going to talk about it, but I havent seen them specifically call for it. And once again even if they do as I think we both agree it is just talk with no action to back it up. It is ridiculous for anyone to stand up and say "Hezballah will disarm". As I stated they might as well say "Earth stop spinning" it has the same result.

As far as the UN being fools and tools being based on false premise. Even if the truth is based on false premises (which I am not conceding that my statement was) it is still by definition TRUE (unless you cant find a link to it on google for nitwits too look at and base their beliefs on).

If you continue with your potty mouth your mother may decide to wash it out with soap.

Googleboy said "I'm done with you."

http://www.ojar.com/view_8344.htm

"Dont go away mad, just go away"

Dont go away mad just go away.

Mantis, You do have... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Mantis,
You do have a fair arg. But on RM 's behalf, the UN did show favoritism to Hezbollah by making moral equivalency of the two sides. Hezbollah made a UNILATERAL attack on IS without any provocation. So the UN should make a demand of UNILATERAL cease-fire from Hezbollah. The UN did make constant demand on Is to agree to unilateral ceasefire before. His general point is correct. YOu simply took advantage of the wording of his post to score cheap personal insults. I think that is the key point of his post. I hope you are honest to acknowledge that.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy