Why Negotiate?

We negotiate only when we believe that we can achieve better results negotiating than not negotiating. Negotiations are a means, not an end. They can be a good or a bad idea. I recalled that as I heard Israel criticized for not negotiating with Hamas or Hezbollah. What good can come from that?

Negotiations are frequently used as offensive weapons or subterfuge. The losing side calls for negotiations as a way to avoid defeat. Terrorists and revolutionaries use negotiations as a way to divide their enemies and create doubt among them. (Dictators and killers can be very charming, as Che and Fidel showed us, and let's not forget uncle Joe or that sweetie Mao) This is what Hamas or Hezbollah are doing now and they dupe plenty of people, the same sort that would have praised Stalin or hailed "peace in our time". Hamas and Hezbollah have stated that their goal is to destroy Israel. What concession can Israel make? Is there a point to negotiation or will better results be achieved w/o them until conditions change? If Israel’s existence is not something that Israel will negotiate away and if the stated goal of Hamas or Hezbollah is to destroy Israel, on what basis can they talk?

(There is also the problem of unequal or inappropriate negotiations. The obvious case of this is N. Korea’s demand for bilateral negotiations with the U.S. This is the principle of the hot potato. Someone throws a hot potato in your lap and if you work with it, it becomes your problem. A good negotiator does not accept other people’s hot potatoes.)

You cannot always achieve optimal results. Sometimes you just have a bad situation. Sometimes negotiations can improve that situation, sometimes not, and sometimes negotiations can make things worse. Negotiations with Saddam produced negative results. British and French negotiations with Hitler made the situation very much worse. Jews learned this lesson the hard way. Negotiation with people whose goal is to kill you and everyone related to you is not a good idea. Hitler stated his goal clearly in "Mein Kampf". Appologists said he didn't really mean it. Hamas and Hezbollah state their goal just as clearly. When will we learn to take such threats seriously?

I am disturbed by the threat of war in the Middle East. But let's be clear about who is responsible. It is Hamas and Hezbollah along with the Syrians and Iranians. We are faced with an ideology that uses terrorism as a preferred tactic. We are in the same boat as the Israelis. They just are closer to the storm.

This is what Bush and Rice have to say. You can also see Rice on the Sunday morning talk shows.

Posted by Jack at July 16, 2006 9:41 PM
Comments
Comment #168106

Good post. As a Viet Nam vet I can relate to the question Why Negotiate? For over 12yrs all it was, was talk, talk, talk, nothing accomplished except 50,000 dead american soldiers. You CAN NOT NEGOTIATE with people who are set on one thing. Take for example Hamas and Hezbollah they are trained from a very young age to hate Jews, Christians, and Americans in general.

Posted by: KAP at July 16, 2006 10:10 PM
Comment #168108

Jack,

“It is Hamas and Hezbollah along with the Syrians and Iranians.”

Hamas and Hezbollah are only agents in this fight. They may be the actors but someone else wrote the script, so to speak.
You can’t get the type of hardware that these two groups are using against Israel with money from a bake sale.

Israel theoretically has the premiere intelligence agency on the planet.
Why aren’t they dealing with the puppeteers, instead of the puppets?

Posted by: Rocky at July 16, 2006 10:17 PM
Comment #168109

I just hope Israel does the job. If they do not obliterate Hezbollah, it will give hope and stregth to other groups who would terrorize their citizens. Negotiating would yeild a similar statement. Usually the WWII analogies bother me as being horribly out of context, but “peace in our time” seems to be a perfect analogy for those who would negotiate with Hamas or Hezbollah today.

Posted by: Kevin23 at July 16, 2006 10:19 PM
Comment #168112

You can’t negotiate with terrorists! Israel has proven that they’ve made steps towards the peace process; moving out of Lebanon; pulling out of Gaza; and yet, the palestinians just use that terroritory to strike Israel (yet again). This has to stop and it’s about time that Israel does what they know how to do and that’s destroy evil aggression. They’ll start with Hezbollah, then Iran and Syria. The talking is over; the muslims had their chance and now they’ve started a war and Israel will finish it…

Posted by: rahdigly at July 16, 2006 10:26 PM
Comment #168114

Sometime verbal negotiations don’t work. Israel is negotiating the right way now, I just hope the US(bush and rice)doesn’t pull it’s usually bs and tell them to stop and talk to hamas and hezbollah, or they will stop the support.

Posted by: KT at July 16, 2006 10:41 PM
Comment #168117

Insanity.

Most people readily recognize what is wrong with an Islamic State, yet cannot recognize what is wrong with a Jewish State. What on earth are you thinking?

According to UN Resolution 1559, Lebanon is a sovereign country, and Israel has the responsibility for observing Lebanese borders.

The US vetoed the UN resolution condemning the Israeli violation of Lebanese soveignity.

In the G8 negotiations, only Britain & the US used language approving the Israeli bombing. France, Germany, and Russian condemned it.

Negotiations? Always a good idea. How on earth will killing dozens of innocent Lebanese civilians and eight Canadian citizens help? What are you thinking?

Personally, I think the idea of a democratically elected Hamas in the Bantustan of Gaza is utterly unworkable.

When Israel is a secular state, and the rights of all citizens are recognized, then and only then should we even consider supporting that side. Same goes for Iran.

In the meantime, we need to advocate oberservation of international law.

Oh. By the way. If the Israelis would stop stealing land belonging to other people, they might not find themselves in this situation.

Posted by: phx8 at July 16, 2006 10:59 PM
Comment #168119

Jack - you make some valid points and observations. But, If you do not negotiate, then what is the alternative?

With terrorist groups you cannot negotiate, nor can you win militarily. Israel has been fighting for decades and is no closer to victory.

So what is left?

Posted by: Stefano at July 16, 2006 11:27 PM
Comment #168120

Homer,
The history of Israel did not start in 1967. Read up on the history of Zionism.

Stop making excuses.

There is a long history of provocations by both sides. Hezbollah did not kidnap two Israeli soldiers just for grins. They do not fire missiles into Israel just because they do not have their own Fourth of July.

The fact is, the Israeli response is to Hezbollah is disproportionate.

Most Israelies support this current course of action. They want to go for it, and finish the job, whatever the hell that means.

Incredibly, the US is supporting this Israeli course of action.

Israeli missilies and bombers are not heading for Cairo precisely because of a series of successful negotiations conducted by Jimmy Carter, the Camp David Accords. We basically bribe each side billions of dollars every year not to attack each other.

But given their enmity, I suppose one side may end up exterminating the other. The Israelis can take todays signals as a go-ahead to blow away Arabs at will.

I would be happy to see the US act as a neutral intermediary, and encourage negatiations. I am very upset to see US take a side. I am not willing to support one side or the other in a conflict.

It is not your fight, Homer, and is it my fight.


Posted by: phx8 at July 16, 2006 11:29 PM
Comment #168124

The only thing to negotiate is how to kill Israel. The talking has been so much that those who were involved are blue faced. There is nothing to talk about.

Go Israel!!!!!!! (7)

Down with Hamas!!!!!! (6)

Down with Hezbollah!!!!!! (6)

Down with Anti_Semitics!!!!!! (6)

Posted by: tomh at July 16, 2006 11:37 PM
Comment #168125
According to UN Resolution 1559, Lebanon is a sovereign country, and Israel has the responsibility for observing Lebanese borders.

Even when bombs are being lobbed from Lebanon into Israel? Sounds like an act of war to me. You’re calling us insane?

Oh. By the way. If the Israelis would stop stealing land belonging to other people, they might not find themselves in this situation.

Here’s how it goes. Israel gets attacked. Israel defends itself and takes land. Israel gives back land. Israel gets attacked again. Ad infinitum. Even Hitler did not get so many second chances. By the way, I think Hitler *did* show that sometimes negotiation is simply not possible. This is EXACTLY what happened with Lebanon! Israel had it and then withdrew. Now they are being bombed.

Another case in point. In 2000 Clinton offered to create a Palestinian state from parts of land in the Gaza strip, Jerusalem, and the West Bank. But the offer was refused. The new Palestinian state would have been entirely contiguous except for Gaza, and even Gaza was going to be connected to the West Bank via an elevated superhighway and railroad so that Palestinians could commute and be free from Israeli checkpoints. This deal was the real thing. A GOOD deal. The offer gave the Palestinians a capitol in a shared Jerusalem.

But they don’t want that. They want death to Israel and that’s the only thing that will satisfy them. I have no sympathy or patience left for these countries.

Posted by: Max at July 16, 2006 11:39 PM
Comment #168126

Correction, the last line should read “and it is not my fight.”

Stefano,
First, you can negotiate with terrorists. Depends on the terrorists. Depends on the situation. The US does it all the time.

Second, define “terrorists.” Need to negotiate? Drop the term. Or, define a small group that way, and negotiate with everyone else.

For example, Hezbollah is a Shia group. The political party is represented in the Lebanese government through democratic elections.

Is the Lebanese government too weak to control its southern border? Syria used to do that for us. Remember? Here is a thought:

Israel withdraws from Lebanese and Syrian territory. Hezbollah, with the active participation of Iran, agrees to recognize the right of Israel to exist as a constitutional republic, with a seperation of religion and state. Iran does the same. Lebanon does the same.

The US opens its checkbook. Instead of spending $2 billion a day on Iraq, we withdraw, and divvy up that $100 between the various states, footing the cost of transitioning governments.

It is a goal. One step at a time.

Negotiating is defined as delivering adequate satisfaction in exchange for obtaining what you want.

Posted by: phx8 at July 16, 2006 11:42 PM
Comment #168128

Ack! Another correction: we spend $2 billion per week, not per day, in Iraq. The actual number is $267 million per day in Iraq.

Max,
The Palestinians should have taken the Oslo Accords, I agree. There are a lot of things that should have been done differently in that region, no doubt about it. There is a lot of blame to go around, and the Palestinians probably own a disproportionate share.

But nevertheless, it is not a matter of national security for the US to back a jewish state, islamic state, or the Vatican for that matter.

The US needs to be part of the solution, and I am absolutely positive violence will have nothing to do with a solution, unless one group or the other becomes part of a “final solution.”

We need to prevent that, not participate!

Posted by: phx8 at July 16, 2006 11:48 PM
Comment #168129

Israel I would say is well within its rights to defend theirselves one can only take so much, i would hope if Mexico was lobbing rockets into Texas, we wouldn’t sit around and debate if we should roll the tanks across the border.

Israel is a hornet’s nest thoguh that has been prodded one too many times with a stick, instead of throwing the missles at their army Hezbollah are targeting cities. So my opinion would be if the Leboneese goverment can;t take care of their infestation, perhaps it is time for an exterminator to come in and clean house, if the citizens were up in arms enough they would get rid of the ppl that are causing their cities to get bombed, but their goverment is ineffectual and allows others to fight for them.

The time of the RPG terrorist is drawing to a close thoguh Israel has a new defence system just about ready for use.

Trophy defence system

“The Trophy active protection system creates a hemispheric protected zone around the vehicle where incoming threats are intercepted and defeated. It has three elements providing – Threat Detection and Tracking, Launching and Intercept functions. The Threat Detection and Warning subsystem consists of several sensors, including flat-panel radars, placed at strategic locations around the protected vehicle, to provide full hemispherical coverage. Once an incoming threat is detected identified and verified, the Countermeasure Assembly is opened, the countermeasure device is positioned in the direction where it can effectively intercept the threat. Then, it is launched automatically into a ballistic trajectory to intercept the incoming threat at a relatively long distance.”

(the video is amazing)

I would think if they could put that on a mobile armor unit.. then it should be able to be adapted to building defence shortly also. That would be a thumb in the eye for most of the fire a missle and run away types.


Posted by: RHancheck at July 16, 2006 11:52 PM
Comment #168130

Phx8

So how or what do you negotiate for? The enemies of Israel have repeatedly said that they only want Israel wiped off the map. That is the reason they exist. So there is nothing to negotiate for or with. Talk is over. Let Israel go and do what she needs to do to protect herself.

Posted by: tomh at July 16, 2006 11:56 PM
Comment #168133

I am so sick of the Far Right’s War on Everything. The solution is always violence. Why go through all the trouble of getting along, when you can just bomb the shit out of everyone and everything?

Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 12:21 AM
Comment #168134

Tomh,
Negotiation is providing the other side satisfaction while obtaining what you want.

I see no reason why the US should ally itself with Israel in a Hundred Years War against Islam. That is insanity, that is diplomatic ineptitude, that is incompetent foreign policy, and that is where we are headed.

Today the US suggested Israel was right to defend itself by invading Lebanon. That is crazy. It did not work two decades ago, and there is no reason to expect it to work today.

Instead, I would be willing to see the US back off, re-assert its neutrality, and broker a peace. Provide the Lebanese government with the funds and troops to bring law and order to the south. Bring in peacekeeping troops from, say, Iran. Now that would be a twist. Let the Iranians become invested in a peacekeeping process.

Until then, insist on observance of international law, condemn terrorist attacks and invasions of other countries (gag), and take advantage of our Soft Power.

In the long run, it is much more effective than military force.

Heaven help us, though, the US government is in grossly incompetent hands.

We are so screwed.

Posted by: phx8 at July 17, 2006 12:31 AM
Comment #168135

JayJay
This has absolutely nothing to do with Far Right. We are talking about defending against somebody who wants to kill you. All of that is not necessarily you JayJay it is third person. If your next door neighbor hated you enough to threaten to kill you and in the process killed your dog, then your cat, then a member of your family and the heat is getting hotter for you, then when the confrontation occured would you be a pacifist?

Posted by: tomh at July 17, 2006 12:34 AM
Comment #168137

On MSNBC, Pat Buchanon is saying almost exactly what I said earlier. We should be exerting leadership, demanding Israel respect UN resolution 1559, demanding Israel respect Hamas & Hezbollah as democratically elected entities, and demanding Hamas & Hezbollah behave as such.

Kind of strange, agreeing with Buchanon.

What the heck is the Bush administration doing? Let us hope cooler heads prevail. Perhaps some other nation can exert leadership which leads to peaceful relations.

Heaven help us.

Posted by: phx8 at July 17, 2006 12:53 AM
Comment #168140

phx8
Glad to see you on the side of goodness and light! If only Hitler had finished the job, then, why those long suffering arabs (who came up with the yellow star idea BTW)would have no one to blame for their crappy ecomomies, terrible education and health systems, murderous rampaging militias bent on killing anyone not “pure” enough or devout enough for them…ad infinitum. Yes, its the darn fault of those rotten jews to think they had a right to exist in their ancestral homeland. What were they thinking! Perhaps they should lay down, and have phx8 run the tank over their naked skulls. That would show them.

In the meantime, go Isreal, God Bless and kick some ass. The bad guys deserve it, and then some.
HHH

Posted by: HardHatHarry at July 17, 2006 1:19 AM
Comment #168141

Btw…our government is in great hands. Sure, our leader looks like a chimp and is inarticulate, but W and friends are right on track. So there.
Besides, liberals don’t believe in heaven, so don’t count on it helping you.
HHH

Posted by: HardHatHarry at July 17, 2006 1:22 AM
Comment #168142

phx8-

Israel has citizens living on that land. They have every right to protect their citizens. Maybe they should abandon more settlements, and they’ve put that on the table and, at great expense, left parts of the west bank. But how on earth is it a good idea to do so only in response to terror attacks? If they do start giving concessions it should be when both sides are face to face and on as level a playing field as present circumstances can allow.

Allowing a bunch of rag-tag militias with rocket propelled intimidate a powerful government is insanity. The attacks by Hezbollah must be seen as state sponsered unless Lebenon puts some troops down there to nip it in the bud. If Iran and Syria are supplying them with advanced weapons, then they are waging war themselves, as sovereign states. I can’t see how Israel is supposed to act “proportionately” without putting their own military in serious danger. Military rules are different, and that is the only thing you can expect when you are a state and you threaten another state who has a military - a military response.

So I would love to know what diplomacy can offer at this point other than showing Israel you can get something by attacking them. Oh, and no nation on earth can legitimately say they own their land. They all took it at some point from somebody. So that argument is just lame.

I am not a big fan of the Iraq war either, but lets face it, when its citizens are being threatened, a good nation will come to their aid. The first step for anyone in that region is to leave Israeli innocents alone. Then the world can pressure Israel again, hopefully in a more meaningful way than they did at camp david last time, to give some real concessions that can allow for better trade and mobility over time. But the reality is that there is hate on both sides, and Israel has every excuse they can legitimately be expected to need to use force. What else would you need? Or are you taking a hardline stance that Israel needs to give back all the land they stole from Canaanites after the exodus, go back to Egypt and beg the Pharoah for their non-paying jobs back? Because the only people who are taking this stance are blowing up innocent people. Pretty extreme if you ask me.

Posted by: Kevin23 at July 17, 2006 1:25 AM
Comment #168146
This has absolutely nothing to do with Far Right. We are talking about defending against somebody who wants to kill you. All of that is not necessarily you JayJay it is third person. If your next door neighbor hated you enough to threaten to kill you and in the process killed your dog, then your cat, then a member of your family and the heat is getting hotter for you, then when the confrontation occured would you be a pacifist?

tomh,

If my neighbor tried to kill me, I would defend myself and family with all necessary force. Then I would find out what I did to make my neighbor so angry that he wanted to kill me. Then I would try to improve myself so that my next neighbor would want to defend me, rather than kill me.

Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 1:52 AM
Comment #168145

HHH,
“Perhaps they should lay down, and have phx8 run the tank over their naked skulls.”

That comment represents you very well. Hope you are proud.

Keep cheering for the killing, Harry. As you say, “go Isreal, God Bless and kick some ass.” Lots of innocent people are already dead, both Israeli & Lebanese. Cheer louder, Harry. Maybe the innocents will hear your cheers from your heaven.

Kevin23,
It is impossible to turn back the clock. Still, I see no reason why the US cannot back a foreign policy which broadly encourages secular governments, republics which protect the rights of individuals of all faiths, and keeps church and state apart. It is a long term goal.

It is an especially necessary goal in the Middle East, where none of the countries formed through natural, organic political processes. All of the nations of the region came about as the result of western nations drawing borders to suit western needs.

Today, we are being maneuvered into a position of joining Israel in a long war against Islam.

Kevin, we are the most powerful country in the world, not just militarily, but also in terms of our economy, and once upon a time, morally, when we advocated Human Rights and observation of international law.

We can be that way again, and exert real leadership. Unfortunately, we keep going further and further down the wrong road. As the situation becomes worse and worse, the ideas of people like me become less and less achievable, because we are committed to staying a disastrous course.

The way to control Hezbollah is not through violence and invasion, which has zero chance of succeeding. Instead, we need to follow through on a difficult course, and encourage their democracy to control its own territory. If necessary, we shouled arrange to pay for security, and perhaps seek help from regional powers.

Address underlying causes, not symptoms.

Posted by: phx8 at July 17, 2006 1:52 AM
Comment #168147
Yes, its the darn fault of those rotten jews to think they had a right to exist in their ancestral homeland. What were they thinking! Perhaps they should lay down, and have phx8 run the tank over their naked skulls. That would show them.

HHH,

So, what you are saying is that if Native Americans thought they had a right to exist in their ancestral homeland, you would gladly lay down your arms and hand over your claimed property?

Besides, liberals don’t believe in heaven, so don’t count on it helping you.

Did you learn that in church?

Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 1:59 AM
Comment #168148

JayJay…

You admit you would protect your own, but you deny that Israel has the same right as a sovereign nation to defend herself against unprovoked rocket attacks killing several of her citizens and a territorial invasion in which 8 soldiers were killed and 2 kidnapped.

You are a hypocrit. Israel was given the right to their land by the international community. I can’t believe a liberal like you doesn’t get behind that and back it, since the international community (UN) is your preferred way to deal with ANY OTHER problem: Iraq, Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan….)

You are a hypocrit, but you cannot see it. No surprise, hypocrits never can.

NAC

Posted by: NAC at July 17, 2006 3:06 AM
Comment #168150

JayJay Snow,

What would you do if your neighbor hated you because of your religion or skin color? How would you change that? If your neighbor kidnapped your child because of color or religion, what then? How would you have negotiated with Hitler?

JayJay and phx8,

If hamas and hezbollah truely wanted peace and not war all they would need to do would be to return the soldiers they kidnapped. And don’t even start with an exchange of prisoners. That would just lead to more kidnappings by terrorists to get their way.

Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 3:13 AM
Comment #168151

A PHX8

I understand your frustration and fear, I was a once liberal myself, until Moore and Dean stole my party and changed what it stood for.

Look, when you are up to your neck in alligators, you better forget for a while that your objective is to drain the swamp. You don’t negotiate your presence while they attack you! You defend yourself!

Israel is right and responsibility to go after those who attacked without provocation on her part. Why can’t you see that?

There is no negotiating with Hezbollah or Hamas until they agree that Israel has a right to exist and can take control of their own people who disagree.

NAC

Posted by: NAC at July 17, 2006 3:14 AM
Comment #168155

I am always perplexed by the liberals defense of Arab terrorists. Jews can teach any minority in America, or the world for that matter, what true oppression and a campaign of extermination looks like. Israel wouldn’t have ever occupied the West Bank, or Gaza, or the Golan Heights had they not been attacked unprovoked by thier neighbors. No nation in the Middle East has the military capacity to run against Israel army against Army, which is why the cowards resort to terrorism. It should be no surprise that terrorism against Israel really picked up after they handed the Arabs thier asses last time they fought it out in the 70s.

As far as the Palestinians go, they’re nothing but pawns. All of these Arab countries that are swimming in oil money don’t help them out and haven’t for the last 40 years. Why? Becasue they know that if the Palestinains are desperate and have no hope they will be more willing to strap bombs on themselves and work for the annihilation of Israel that all of these Arab countries want but don’t have the ability to pull off.

All of Israel’s neighbors exist at Israel’s pleasure. If Lebanon wants to hide behind the UN’s giving it sovriegnty, then they need to act as a sovriegn nation and reign in Hezbollah on their southern border. If the Palestinian Authority wants to be allowed to function, it needs to keep people from attacking Israel from its territory. Until they do this, Israel is fully justified in policing these areas itself.

Personally, I think the Israelis should start knocking off the leaders of these countries and show them that unless they rein in their own people, they are just as at risk as the Israeli citizens they allow these radicals to kill

Posted by: 1LT B at July 17, 2006 3:31 AM
Comment #168157
Personally, I think the Israelis should start knocking off the leaders of these countries and show them that unless they rein in their own people, they are just as at risk as the Israeli citizens they allow these radicals to kill

This is what they have done in response to the Hamas attacks from Gaza, but it hasn’t really been too effective that I can see, at least with Hamas.

Really, I wonder at the reason why this isn’t done? Imagine a North Korea suddenly without a madman at the helm, or an Iran with a few less fanatic religious leaders running the show…

I suppose it is illegal to assassinate a head-of-state? At least for the USA President, right? Too bad, would be a good option to have on the table!

NAC

Posted by: NAC at July 17, 2006 3:51 AM
Comment #168162

I supported the Iraq war, but with all the violence there & in the greater Middle East now it appears containment of Saddam and negotiations are looking quite attractive now. We can do next do nothing about Iran now. One writer said do you think it was a coincidence that Hezbollah (fully funded by Iran & Syria) chose to attack Israel on the date Iran was supposed to give a “yes or no” answer to if it wanted to start talks on its nuclear program? Probably not.

You are right, Iran does not seem to be a country that we can negotiate with. This is because their old enemy that used to keep them in check (Iraq) is now weak and in flames. And if we attack Iran, they will make helll for us in Iraq and Afghanistan (more trouble than they’re making now).

All this chaos and oil prices rise. Russia has doubled their power within a 2 year period of time and so has Iran. The mullahs are laughing all the way to the bank and if Israel were to pour into Lebanon or even Syria, that would drive oil prices up even more. The mullahs would be rolling in it.

You cannot negotiate with regimes like Iran or Syria, but the USA has no power to attack them right now either. Believe me, we can’t do it militarily AND hope to suceed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

What is becoming clearer and clearer is that Russia and China are the only 2 countries who could stop this if they wanted to and because of Russia’s oil & natural gas reserves and China’s rising business sector, they can do whatever they want (Did you know they are even sharing athletic facilities in the hope to not have the USA win the 2008 summer olympics?) The Europeans have become insignificant. Welcome to the 21st century and the new balance of power.

I appreciate your post, but we just don’t have the clout anymore because as one person said, “You just need our help because your bogged down in Iraq. What if that wasn’t so?” True, what if it wasn’t so?

Posted by: Steve C. at July 17, 2006 6:08 AM
Comment #168163

Would the terrorists understand if their Holy sites were put on the negotiating table? That one more dead civilian means no more Mecca? No more Blue Mosque? No more dome of the Roq?

What if terrorist actions were tied to severe consequences in their name?

What would we see then?

Tit for Tat. What they believe dearly in in exchange for what we believe dearly in.

John

Posted by: john at July 17, 2006 6:09 AM
Comment #168166
Why Negotiate?

Because human are a talking animal, not just an animal. Killing your enemy *before* talking with him is way easier than *after*.
Oh, BTW, nobody was killed by voice. Ever. Not even kids and womens.

Humans are the worst species on Earth, no doubt.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 6:20 AM
Comment #168167

I guess I should make me more clear about this:

Killing your enemy *before* talking with him is way easier than *after*.

Technically speaking, it’s obviously not, but unfortunatly it seems to be the psychologic path taken most of the time. How irrational is that?!

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 6:24 AM
Comment #168169

How rational would it be for a zebra to try and negotiate with a pack of hyenas about eating not eating her baby? How would a Jew talk to Hitler?

Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 6:30 AM
Comment #168170

Homer,

Last I checked, Noam Chomsky and a variety of other apologists for Arab terrorism were liberal. These are cut from the same cloth as the idiots who thought we could negotiate with the poor, misunderstood Hitler and the peace-loving Soviets. As far as the Army goes, why dont’ you come out here and see what you’re defending, you whining civilian?

Steve C, NAC, and john,

I’ve mentioned before that while the Army is tied down, the Air Force and Navy are not. I wouldn’t mind seeing the Dear Leader or a few of these so called clerics eating about 2,000 lb of Lockheed Martin’s finest, but we won’t do that. After all, God forbid we actaully make use of our assets.

As far as bombing Muslim holy sites, I’m not quite sure I support that, but it does have the virtue of not having been tried. Actually, I don’t mind it at all. Just as the huge majority of Americans don’t serve in the military, so too most of the Muslims of the world are not jihadist, but many do support them. Since the jihadists have decided to call this a war of cultures, it seems to me that if they hit our cultural treasures, theirs might be good targets for us.

In a larger sense, this can be tied back to us not doing what it takes to gain true victory. In WWII, Germany and Japan both paid for waging wars of aggression based on militant nationalism with millions killed and their cities laid waste. By the time the war was over, they had learned full well the consequences of their tactics. It seems to me that the Arab nations who made war on Israel and the radical jihadists have yet to learn this lesson. We too need to learn from WWII. Back then, we were willing to do what it took to win. I wonder if we are now. At some point, we are going to figure out that our enemies now are just as bad as Nazism was. Maybe then we’ll be willing to take all appropriate action to defeat them. The only sad thing is that it will probably take many more attacks and Americans slaughered on the altar of “peaceful dialogue and coexistance” before we shape up.

Posted by: 1LT B at July 17, 2006 6:32 AM
Comment #168173

JayJay

Just imagine that your neighbor said his goal was to kill you and your family. His reasoning was that 50 years ago, your family did something bad to his family and he wants revenge. It has less to do with you than with your history.

You said you’d try to change so that your next neighbor would like you better. But you don’t have that luxury….yet. You have a current neighbor bent on destroying you—even if he destroys himself in the process. He doesn’t care whether you change or not, because his only interest is avenging history. And not even you can change your history.

If you protect yourself once, and then change for the better, your neighbor will come back again to kill you. If you protect yourself 10 times, your neighbor will still try to kill you. 100 times—same attempts on your life, and your family’s.

What is your plan for negotiation? Its a noble desire to attempt to talk your way out of the bad situation, but ultimately I see it as fruitless. Until you can suggest a course of action in the negotiations that has a chance of success, I’m afraid you are tossing out theories….and theories in the face of absolutes don’t carry much weight.

If my neighbor tried to kill me, I would defend myself and family with all necessary force.

Isn’t this what Israel is doing right now? Perhaps they simply want a different neighbor.

Posted by: joebagodonuts at July 17, 2006 6:50 AM
Comment #168176

One point I forgot to address. The only time negotiations have any point is if there is good faith on both sides. If there isn’t, then more harm than good is often done. For instance, at the end of WWI, Germany went to the negotiating table in good faith expecting to be treated fairly in the way that Wilson outlined. Instead, they were forced to admit sole responsibility for the war, slapped with a ruinous reparations burden, and completely humiliated. It was from this seed of bad faith that Nazism was born.

In Korea and Vietnam, we went to the table in good faith with people who didn’t come in good faith, and look what it got us. There still is not peace treaty in Korea and North Vietnam waited until we were gone and conquered South Vietnam.

Much of the same happens in Israel now. Israel has consistently gone to negotiate in good faith with enemies who did not. Instead of building peace, the terrorists simply took advantages in lulls of Israeli military action to build their arsenals, then attacked Israel again. Iran and Syria still want to see Israel destroyed, and so do thier lackeys from Hezbollah and Hamas. Probably the only thing that will make them come to the table in good faith is a complete and shattering defeat such as we inflicted on Germany or Japan in WWII. Until the Arabs come to Israel in good faith, they shouldn’t even bother talking to them except from a gun.

Posted by: 1LT B at July 17, 2006 7:39 AM
Comment #168177

Phx8 et al

If there is only one thing you can learn to become a better negotiator it is the ability to walk away from a negotiation. As long as your partner knows you cannot or will not walk away, he has the ability to abuse you.

By not negotiating now, you are not saying you will negotiate never. You are saying that the current situation is not amenable to a negotiated solution. Until conditions, minds or people change, no good can come of it.

We make a really big mistake with terrorist in many cases. We negotiate with someone whose goal in negotiations is only to weaken us and not reach a solution. Consider Arafat. What a travesty that he got a peace prize. The Nobel Committee should take it back. There was no chance of peace as long as the evil man lived. We had a chance when he died. But we have similar bad guys in Hamas and Hezbollah. Maybe they also need to die before peace is possible.

JayJay

Others have said it too, but let me also jump in. Your advice is good, but what if you found out that your neighbor wanted to kill you because of what you were and that is only goal was to drive you out of the neighborhood by killing your children.


Philippe

Negotiations have been going on for years. Some people have been reasonable and there is not war in those places. Sometimes negotiations is not an option under current conditions. Please see above.

Posted by: Jack at July 17, 2006 7:47 AM
Comment #168178

Some people are simply unfit to live with.
They can not coexist with anyone.
They are blinded with hatred and fanaticism.
The only solution is to eliminate them.

Posted by: d.a.n at July 17, 2006 8:11 AM
Comment #168179


I am not, by nature, a violent person. I prefer to avoid fights if at all possible. Having said that, I will say that if I had a neighbor whose only aim in life was to destroy my family, and had made that very clear in words and attitude, I would try to negotiate to defuse the situation before it escalated. If that neighbor or a member of the family harmed a member of my family, I would do all in my power to remove that neighbor and family from the land of the living. And, I would use whatever neans I had at my disposal. To do otherwise would be the height of irresponsibility.

Israel is not an aggressor nation. It fights only when attacked. One of the differences between Israel and Hamas or the Palestinians is that, for most most part, Israel does not deliberately target non-combatants or fire indiscriminately. Hamas and the Palestinians do. The recent rocket attacks have been aimed at killing as many Israelis as possible with no regard to military targets.

I regret the loss of a single life in war. However, I can definitely understand the position of Israel in this matter.

As for the U.S being a go between and negotiating, never happen. Israel will ignore any solution that leaves them opn to attack and the other side will reject any solution that gives Israel the right to exist.

Posted by: John Back at July 17, 2006 8:13 AM
Comment #168180

lllplus2,

How rational would it be for a zebra to try and negotiate with a pack of hyenas about eating not eating her baby? How would a Jew talk to Hitler?

Interesting analogies. Both Hyenas and zebras are non-talking animals, while both Hitler and whoever Jew he could have talken with were and both had this human unique ability to use their respective voice, ears and brains to speak a common language with others.

But guess who did the worst evil behavior, the wild animals or the human who could have talken but chose to just hate instead?

PS: wild animals don’t have ideologies and beliefs systems, and it’s a bless because otherwise I’ll bet that humans would have been exterminated long ago by anti-humans rats or ants or whatever…

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 8:54 AM
Comment #168181

JBOD,

If my neighbor tried to kill me, I would defend myself and family with all necessary force.
Isn’t this what Israel is doing right now? Perhaps they simply want a different neighbor.

Could someone explains me how destroying power plants & bridges help Israel to defend herself against Hezbollah’s or Palestinians rockets strikes? I’ll bet that these rockets don’t needs power grid nor bridge to be fired…

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 9:04 AM
Comment #168182

Sounds like the same old thing; libs are blaming conservatives for “waging war instead of negotiating” and the “US and Bush are too incompetent (b/c of Iraq!) to do anything about it”.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. All you “professors” know about muslim hatred against Jews, huh?! How they attacked Israel and all you guys want to do is “negotiate”??!! Uh, ok… Whatever. This is why the “passivist” approach to geo-politics doesn’t work; Israel will show the world just exactly how to deal with this hatred.

There’s even mention about how US and Britain are staunch supporters of Israel and Russia, China, and France (etc.) are against it. So!!!! That’s about right, they’re (predictably) on the wrong side of the issue; why should this be any different?! These government have choose sides and it’s obvious they choose the side of “Big Oil”!!!

Posted by: rahdigly at July 17, 2006 9:08 AM
Comment #168184

THE FREAKIN’ POINT IS, YOU CANNOT REASON WITH ANIMALS. Hitler was an animal and so is any terror group who hides behind civilians as they try to commit genocide. That is their goal. They are backed by Iran who has plainly said their goal is to wipe the Zionist regime off the planet. They won’t even recognize Israel as a country.

How about this analogy for ya? What do you say to a cannibal as he licks his lips and sharpens his knife while you are negotiating peace?

Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 9:13 AM
Comment #168185

Another analog. How does the NAACP negotiate with the KKK?

Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 9:16 AM
Comment #168186

Jack,

Negotiations have been going on for years. Some people have been reasonable and there is not war in those places. Sometimes negotiations is not an option under current conditions. Please see above.

Who said negotiations are limited to only the two parties in conflict? What happened to the concept of strong mediator in negociations? When two parties don’t want anymore to talk together, a third one still could force them to do it if he’s stronger than both of them and neutral enough.

Why a third, internationaly backed one could not *enforce* negociation here? We did that very often in the past with several, smaller powerfull nations in neighboorhood conflicts, why can’t we do it here in Middle East?
Are you saying that in the G8 they’re not enough power to enforce Israel and its arabs neighboors to reach a cease of fire and going back to negociations?

No, the issue here is not if negociation is or isn’t an option anymore, the issue here is that none of the great powers want peace in Middle East *enough*, and thus lack the neutrality and will needed to enforce a negociated ends of this 50+ years old conflict.

After all, we, the westerners, have our share of responsability in the current mess in Middle East, right?

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 9:20 AM
Comment #168191

Don’t count on Russia or China to say anything to Iran, they are too dependant on Iranian oil.

A third party forces peace, what happens when someone crosses the border, murders, kidnaps, and breaks the peace? It seems Israel already has the answer for that one.

Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 9:29 AM
Comment #168192

1LT B,

One point I forgot to address. The only time negotiations have any point is if there is good faith on both sides. If there isn’t, then more harm than good is often done. For instance, at the end of WWI, Germany went to the negotiating table in good faith expecting to be treated fairly in the way that Wilson outlined. Instead, they were forced to admit sole responsibility for the war, slapped with a ruinous reparations burden, and completely humiliated. It was from this seed of bad faith that Nazism was born.

Good point. But do we (third party) have to accept silently civilians being taken in hostage (and eventually killed) once again when both parties fail to have good faith in negociation path?

Why does bombing urban area, destroying civilian infrastructure considered a moral tactic since WWII??? Before, soldiers used to target enemy soldiers…

Here a idea: setup an international operation to build a (temporary, let’s hope) massive exode of every civilian who want to exit the Gaza/Lebano/Israel borders areas. After the last one quit, declare the battle as “open” and let them kill themselves as they want in nomanlands.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 9:36 AM
Comment #168193

lllplus2,

A third party forces peace, what happens when someone crosses the border

He’s arrested or killed by peacekeeping troops that control the border. Does DMZ ring a bell?

…murders, kidnaps, and breaks the peace?

The leaders of the side, whatever the side, breaking the peace are arrested, which will put the peace responsability on their elbows, both sides, as much as the third party.

It seems Israel already has the answer for that one.

Nope, because they’re not a third party in their conflict with their arabs neighboors. They’re too involved to be neutral here. They can’t be judge and party. Neither the other side could.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 9:44 AM
Comment #168194

Philippe,

If someone had one of your children hostage, would you sit at a table to talk peace? Would you wait for the peacekeepers? Would you let this same person come in your home over and over again to slap you in the face? When would you stand up to the bully?

Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 9:55 AM
Comment #168195

lllplus2,

THE FREAKIN’ POINT IS, YOU CANNOT REASON WITH ANIMALS.

If by “REASON” you mean talking, true. If you mean force his mind to change, you’re wrong. Check animals trainers textbooks.

Hitler was an animal…

Alas, no. Making your world black and white, evil or good, aka over simplifying it doesn’t make your point here a proven fact. Hitler was many things, pretty much all of them horrible but, unfortunatly for the humankind he was definitly one of its members. Probably one of the worst of all its (small) history, sure, but you could bet one day one will be worser.

How about this analogy for ya? What do you say to a cannibal as he licks his lips and sharpens his knife while you are negotiating peace?

What about bluffing “I’m seropositive. Still want to eat me?”. Anyway, are you saying terrorists are cannibals? Still locked in “they can’t be as human as me” step?

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 9:56 AM
Comment #168196
If my neighbor tried to kill me, I would defend myself and family with all necessary force. Then I would find out what I did to make my neighbor so angry that he wanted to kill me. Then I would try to improve myself so that my next neighbor would want to defend me, rather than kill me.

And what if he said he wanted to kill you because he was better than you, because you were a desecration to his God? What if when you asked what it would take to stop he said he never would?

No sane society lets psychokillers walk the streets. No sane civilization should put up with countries that act the same.

I understand what motivates them. They think they’re God’s chosen people and that everyone else should die. Got it. Now that I know I won’t be foolish enough to rationalize with them.

Posted by: Max at July 17, 2006 9:59 AM
Comment #168197

lllplus2,

If someone had one of your children hostage, would you sit at a table to talk peace? Would you wait for the peacekeepers? Would you let this same person come in your home over and over again to slap you in the face?

Nope. But, then, I won’t be anymore a neutral third party but an involved one. But If I eventually manage to find a way to hunt, find and catch my children kidnappers and be about to kill them, their kids and theirs relatives, I really hope someone will jump right between us and force me to abort making justice myself.

Which, in the Middle East, westerners are not doing.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 10:02 AM
Comment #168198
Sounds like the same old thing; libs are blaming conservatives for “waging war instead of negotiating” and the “US and Bush are too incompetent (b/c of Iraq!) to do anything about it”.

I just want to say this is not what I see on this board. I see almost everyone except the lunatic fringe on both sides backing Israel. I don’t think I’ve ever seen such widespread unanimous support on an important issue from both sides of the aisle.

Posted by: Max at July 17, 2006 10:06 AM
Comment #168199

would be hard to arrest someone sneaking in.. when the infiltrator is fine with blowing himself up at the checkpoint if hes caught, or if not caught finding a nice bus or shop to blow himself up in.

As for not bombing the cities, that would be welland good if ther enemy didnt intermingle and use the civvies as cover and shelter.. the days of two armies lining up and exhanging fire are passed.

A no-mans land would be an interesting idea, would put me in mind of ( I hate to use this example) but german tanks running over the polish Horse calvery in 38 but we all know the terrorist groups wouldn’t take the field, maybe they should just have a big paintball war, winner take all? (i could just visualize the suicide bomber with areosol paint cans tied around his waist)

Peace has to be somethign both sides want, not just to have a break to regroup and create propaganda, as long as Syria and Iran are backing these terrorist groups and supplying them I don;t see an end to hostilities for a while ( can;t negoiate with someone whose terms are if you were all dead, there will be peace.

Posted by: RHancheck at July 17, 2006 10:06 AM
Comment #168202

RHancheck,

would be hard to arrest someone sneaking in.. when the infiltrator is fine with blowing himself up at the checkpoint if hes caught, or if not caught finding a nice bus or shop to blow himself up in.

Sure. But the different strong Israel policies toward palestinians since 50 yeras doesn’t succeed at stopping this kind of terrorist attack either.

Guess what: nothing could. Until no more guy is willing to die while blowing himself and killing people around, nothing could. You can’t stop such terrorism acts to happen.

Unfortunatly, each time you kill someone, its nearest relatives could want to avenge their lost enough to become ready to die for the revenge.

What’s the solutions here?
a) Stop killing people
b) Kill them all. All. No survivors. Not even the kids old enough to remember your name.

No sides is doing neither a) or b). Maybe it’s time someone else do the choice instead? What will be your choice if you were to become a third party (as I suspect pretty much all here are)?

As for not bombing the cities, that would be welland good if ther enemy didnt intermingle and use the civvies as cover and shelter.. the days of two armies lining up and exhanging fire are passed.

Sure. And? Is it a moral justification to bomb civilians?

A no-mans land would be an interesting idea, would put me in mind of ( I hate to use this example) but german tanks running over the polish Horse calvery in 38 but we all know the terrorist groups wouldn’t take the field

Probably not but, then, they lost the last land they were fighthing from. Gaza and Lebano will come Israel lands. Next time terrorists will want to attack, it will be from Syria, Jordania or Egypt. Putting these arab nations at the task to fight the terrorists they could host to survive or be the next to eventually fall.
Except that, while Palestine and Hezbollah Land in South Lebano are hardly nations, Egypt, Jordania and Syria are.

Last but not least, civilians would have survive war.

can’t negoiate with someone whose terms are if you were all dead, there will be peace.

No you can’t. But if an huge international body made of pretty much all power nations in the world tell you “Last chance to negociate. Or you’re dead”, they will have to. You can force people to stop fighting.
But they’re too much interest in Middle East not being in peace…

I don’t even understand why anybody would want to live there anymore!

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 10:46 AM
Comment #168205

How do you negotiate with a Rabid dog.
Rabbies is incurable.
You can only put it out of misery.

Posted by: d.a.n at July 17, 2006 11:21 AM
Comment #168206
How do you negotiate with a Rabid dog. Rabbies is incurable. You can only put it out of misery.

d.a.n., better vaccinate the other dogs or be prepare to lost way more than just a few pets.
While rabies is indeed incurable yet we do have develop a efficient way to protect ourselves from it: vaccinate dogs as much as possible.

Translate into islamism terrorists lingua, it means make some step to insure that non-terrorists people wont become ones. What kinda of vaccine do you propose here?

Killing them all or as much as possible blindly?
Sorry, that’s not what one will call usually a vaccine…

PS: you guys loves singing “terrorists are not human born” mantra or what???

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 17, 2006 11:30 AM
Comment #168208

lllplus2,

“How rational would it be for a zebra to try and negotiate with a pack of hyenas about eating not eating her baby?”

How rational would it be to think that non-sentient animals would bother?

Jack,

We negotiate because that is what sentient beings do first.
I realize that is going to be a concept that some here will fail to grasp.
Israel, by bombing the infrastructure of Lebanon, has not only stoked the fires of hatred that already existed, but has also cut the legs from underneath an already fragile Democratic neighbor.

Does the Lebanese government control Hezbollah? It doesn’t appear to be.
Yet, that is where Israel is doing the most damage.

If Hamas and Hezbollah had no support, they would eventually evaporate.

Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 11:46 AM
Comment #168215

Philippe Houdoin,
Sure, vaccinate as much as possible.
But, that still won’t help with the incurable, that will never stop trying to kill you.

Posted by: d.a.n at July 17, 2006 12:16 PM
Comment #168218

Jack,
We can and should always, always negotiate. Even when the negotiated terms seem unfavorable, we should still negotiate a solution. Why?

A year or two ago I negotiated a deal with a client. He got everything he wanted.

“Boy, phx8” he said, “you are a terrible negotiator!”

What the client failed to realize was that this was the 5th transaction. Each transaction was for a larger and larger volume, at a lower rate/unit. The client failed to realize that we both won. We both achieved our goals. I closed the deal, and it still represented a very acceptable profit margin. However, it was important to the client to feel he had won, so I just laughed, and gave him credit.

The US can and should always opt for the negotiated settlement. Why? Because our greatest strength is not military. Winning by force is a temporary achievement. Our greatest strength is our culture, our economic system. No one in the world benefits more from international law, trade, & relations than us. Few countries in the world can culturally survive our loving embrace. Peaceful, non-violent contact with the US makes the end game a foregone conclusion in our favor.

Which brings me back to my original point. There is no use in the US backing religious states. There is no use in the US backing terrorists, or even using the term “terrorissts,” since the term makes it more difficult for the US to achieve its aims.

Seperate the sides. Enforce Resolution 1559. Follow through on supporting democracy, and give the Lebanese government & the Hamas the means to enforce a responsible government.

By the way, we can and do negotiate with “terrorists.” The US has negotiated with Iran in the past. Check with Negroponte, Poindexter, and Abrams: all were deeply involved with Iran Contra.

Posted by: phx8 at July 17, 2006 12:18 PM
Comment #168219

All the missles aimed at Israel are comming from Lebanon. If the Lebanese government wants this to stop I think they would get their army together and gop to their border with Iarael and get rid of those that are launching the missles. And no the Lebanese government does not control Hezbollah. I think right now Hezbollah controls the Lebanese government. What government in it’s right mind would not want to protect their citizens. In my estimation the Lebanese government better get up and take care of it’s problem at its southern border.

Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 12:19 PM
Comment #168220

Houdin;
Targeting infrastructure is not something new since WWII. Look at any major conflict prior to WWII, and you will see that it happens in any war/conflict. Huns did it to the Romans, Mongul’s did it to China, so it not new. You tear down the infrastructure and then the people will surrender.

Posted by: KT at July 17, 2006 12:25 PM
Comment #168221

KT,

The people aren’t the problem.

Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 12:28 PM
Comment #168224

I think it’s great that some liberals are supporting Israel’s right to defend itself. Israel has been trying to negotiate for decades. Israel is a tiny country, so the Arabs claiming Israel is expansionist cannot possibly believe their own untruths. The Arabs and anyone else teaching hate to their children need to stop that. The Palestinians have been given huge amounts of money that could have built them a fine nation if they would start spending the money on building rather than on buying weapons. Since they hate Israel so much why would they want to work there? they say they have no choice, but they do. As 1LT B said, the Arab nations have plenty of money, but they don’t really want the Palestinians to be well off. The Palestinians even now could use the money they are receiving to build instead of to teach and practice hatred. The terrorists supporting this hatred also are supporting hatred and murder around the world. By the way, has anyone else noticed that since we didn’t tell Israel to stop, suddenly China and Russia are more willing to help stop North Korea? If China hadn’t stopped the UN in the Korean war then North Korea wouldn’t be the hateful suffering people they are. Wouldn’t it be fair to let everyone who wants to use a nuclear bomb have one? Right now, the countries who have nuclear bombs don’t want to use them. What difference will all this carbon dioxide global warming panic make when nuclear bombs are having more impact on the environment that carbon dioxide ever did? We should spend our money on improving the economy and stopping these murderous lunatics from using nuclear bombs.

Posted by: Steve S at July 17, 2006 12:38 PM
Comment #168226
I think right now Hezbollah controls the Lebanese government. Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 12:19 PM
Hezbollah is a “legitimate” political party in Lebanon. Much the same way Hamas is.
I think it’s great that some liberals are supporting Israel’s right to defend itself. Posted by: Steve S at July 17, 2006 12:38 PM
It’s not only liberals Steve. Unless, of course, you consider rahdigly a liberal… But, actually, it is the leftist extreme that has taken the terrorist side against Israel. As a liberal, I think that’s a pretty stupid choice usually made by those too young or bigoted to know better. Posted by: Dave1 at July 17, 2006 12:46 PM
Comment #168227

I can’t believe I’m about to say this, but Newt Gingrich made some good points on MTP yesterday. He questioned why we aren’t waging an effective propaganda war, both in Iraq and now in Lebanon. The Lebanese people are not behind Hizbollah, they are frightened of what this war will do to their lives. This is the best opportunity we’ve had in decades to establish a strong, trully democratic government in the region without military action and we are blowing it.

Posted by: David S at July 17, 2006 12:50 PM
Comment #168230

Rocky so hamas and hezbollah aren’t people. Of course they are, and as long as the Lebanese, let them stay(hide within their houses, buildings, churches and mosque’s) within their country,unfortunately the lebanese will suffer along with hamas and hezbollah. When the people standup to them, and turn on them, maybe then the conflict will end.

Posted by: KT at July 17, 2006 12:57 PM
Comment #168231

I think that underlying much of the anti-western sentiment on the streets of the Middle East is the perception that the West does not respect the Arab/Muslim world. Our refusal to engage the Palestinians has cost us much. bush would have gained much by going to Palestine and speaking with the newly elected government, thereby giving the democratic process going on there a certain status. It is too bad that we have a president who is uneducated, inarticulate, unpersuasive and of poor judgment, because maybe we could actually get something done to solve these problems. Regards

Posted by: Charles Ross at July 17, 2006 1:06 PM
Comment #168232
The people aren’t the problem.

Huh ? What is the problem?

  • Lack of democracy?

  • Government? Oh Right. It is the U.S.’s fault.

  • Other countries?

  • Rabid hatred and fanaticism?

  • Poverty?

  • Economics?

  • Ignorance, lack of education?

  • Corruption?

  • Oppression?
  • Who created all of that?

    People.

    Posted by: d.a.n at July 17, 2006 1:10 PM
    Comment #168234

    As a “senior” and a vet, I’m pleased by the response from Israel. Seems like all kids these days are taught that it’s better to give in than to defend yourself. If someone keeps hitting you with a hammer, sooner or later he’s going to hurt you…take away the damn hammer!

    Posted by: Gramps at July 17, 2006 1:18 PM
    Comment #168235

    KT,

    “Rocky so hamas and hezbollah aren’t people.”

    Are you incapable of recognizing the distinction between the “people” of Lebanon and a militia backed by Syria?

    The Syrians hold Hezbollah’s leash, and that is where the pressure should be applied.

    I am not against Israel’s right to exist, but I think these small conflicts are what “World” wars are made of.
    I think Israel’s lack of a proportional, measured response to what initially was a hostage situation could escalate, and I think that it was a huge mistake.

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 1:19 PM
    Comment #168236
    You admit you would protect your own, but you deny that Israel has the same right as a sovereign nation to defend herself against unprovoked rocket attacks killing several of her citizens and a territorial invasion in which 8 soldiers were killed and 2 kidnapped.

    NAC,

    Where exactly did I say that Israel didn’t have a right to defend itself? I never said that force was never needed, I said it isn’t always needed.

    For those of you who have used the neighbor analogy, I would have to seriously step back and try to figure out how killing others in the neighborhood, who have nothing to do with the conflict with my neighbor and me, is helping my situation. It’s not. Instead, I have just created more neighbors that want to kill me. If my neighbor will not listen to reason, and I am in the right, then perhaps a better plan of action would be unify the whole neighborhood behind my position. There is strength in numbers and strength in perception. If my neighbor perceives that the neighborhood is against him, then he is less likely to commit what the whole sees as being wrong.

    Some of you sound like you are so paranoid, that everyone in the neighborhood is trying to kill you, that the only solution is to resort to mass genocide. The key in the Middle East has always been and always will be to divide your enemies and unite your allies. There are many more Arabs, Muslims, Jews, & Americans who want peace than there are that want violence.

    If you divide your allies, you have just created more enemies. Bush and the Neocons have pushed us further away from a peaceful Middle East, by doing just that.

    What I hear often from the right is “let’s kill them before they kill us.” Ok, but how does that make you any different from those that are trying to kill you? There is a fine line between defending yourself against terrorists and becoming the terrorists yourself. If we have not already crossed that line with Iraq, then we have come pretty darn close.

    THE FREAKIN’ POINT IS, YOU CANNOT REASON WITH ANIMALS.

    lllplus2,

    Aren’t you just creating more animals? Can’t you see the cycle that keeps on recreating itself? This is how the seeds of xenophobia spread, and the cycle of hate just keeps on going round and round. The ethnic group is different, but the hatred is the same.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 1:20 PM
    Comment #168237

    Hezbollah is a legitimate party in Lebanon and Hamas in Palistine. Right now they are like a cancer to their respective countries and what do you do to eradicate the cancer,you cut it out because if you leave it in you DIE.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 1:21 PM
    Comment #168238

    Jack,
    If everyone had your pessimistic belief hat negotiations are worthless, we would be up the creek-totally. There’d be no point in trying to negotiate with criminals holding hostages - particularly if someone was already dead.

    We’d still be fighting WWWI and WWWII, possibly on back to our own Revolution,or further because the other side wouldn’t have the foggiest idea what our desires are if we didn’t establish some form of communication with them.

    In my opinion the whole problem boils down to motivation. What WE want and how best to get it.

    In truth all the US cares about is what’s good for us. OIL

    Seems to me, Israel should be the one nation that understands how Palestine feels - they both live in countries that were ‘Created’ for them. They were ‘given’ their land, and told to live on it. Land that originally belonged to someone else.

    What I don’t understand is why the US feels it must get involved. We are not the “Policemen of the earth”. No one appointed us as a mini-god. No one has actually asked us to interfere with the Mid-East.

    We are not there suppling weapons just for fun. And the U.S. can not pull off pretending it’s there for altruistic reasons.

    If we were there for totally pure reasons there would be no problem. But we are not. We want something in trade for our support. OIL. And for some unknown reason we believe that if Israel wins it’s battles with everyone, we will wind up getting what we want most -OIL!

    The major problem is we actually don’t care who rules as long as we get our OIL. That’s all it boils down to.

    If we used half of what we spend in one day attempting to self-subsidize ourselves, we could bow out and and go back to the Monroe Doctrine of Isolationsm. Then we might be able to achieve some sense of neutrality. (However it’s way to late for that, I know)

    But for Heaven’s sake don’t stop talking. The “He hit me first, so I had to hit him back - harder” reminds me of the Italian word, Vendetta. It also reminds me of how a 5-7 year old might act. No one can save face until the other backs down. So on and on it goes. The entire justifications for a War. It’s asinine, to fight and kill over MONEY! Oil is not the beginning or the end of everything.

    Posted by: Linda H. at July 17, 2006 1:31 PM
    Comment #168239

    KAP,

    Right, remove the cancer, don’t kill the whole patient.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 1:34 PM
    Comment #168241

    Linda H
    We are not getting into this one. Israel is on their own. Talking with Hamas and Hezbollah and any other extremist faction WILL NOT WORK. They have a one track mind instilled from a very early age to HATE, Jews, Christians, and Americans in general.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 1:42 PM
    Comment #168242

    JayJay
    At least we can agree on that point.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 1:44 PM
    Comment #168244

    Linda H,

    I have asked myself over and over, why in the world would the U.S. want to get itself tangled up in that mess in the Middle East? Let them fight it out amongst themselves, winner take all. Problem is, the Neocons want to be the winner, that way they can take all, the oil that is.

    The U.S. should be mature enough to not get involved in this “you did it first” mentality. Vendetta is a good word to describe it. If the U.S. wants a role, maybe it should be as a mediator, instead of taking sides, which only created more animosity towards the U.S.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 1:52 PM
    Comment #168245

    Rocky, if it was an really Army against a really Army, where each side wears a uniform, then you could tell combantants from non-combantants, but with hamas and hezbollah dressing like non-combantants, and they all carry weapons how do you tell one from another, and that is a question to you, how would you tell one from another. What about hezbollah shooting rockets into the Haifa, are they shooting at a military target, I don’t think so. Sending a suicide bomber into a crowded bus, or night club, those are military targets, not even.
    The people of Lebenon (and Iraq), have to standup against these terrorist and tell them no more, they are tired of the suffereing and get rid of them, be it send them to Syria or Iran, throw in jail and throw away the key, but it will take a strong stance on their party to do it.

    Posted by: KT at July 17, 2006 1:52 PM
    Comment #168247

    At the risk of sounding offensive; I am having a hard time understanding the assertion that oil is the prime mover of America’s every move. The comment labeling NeoCon’s as a band of oil-lusting dragoons is a bit disingenuous in my opinion. I would be interested to hear what liberal plans are available for solving the supply side of the oil issue. I am fully aware of what they think of the demand side of this equation. Tax, more tax, release the strategic reserves, buy gas on odd numbered days only etc.

    This conflict has been raging since the beginning of time. More recently, 1948 I believe, Lebanon has been at war with Israel. They never signed a peace agreement. They have used specious definitions of territory ownership to support spurious attacks over the last 50 years. Until recently those attacks were more symbolic than opportunistic. Israel has a right to defend her borders and people. The US has an obligation to support her as she is a sovereign nation and an ally of ours. If Canada had crossed our borders and kidnapped two soldiers while murdering 7 others; we would be incandescent.

    Posted by: Grey Archer at July 17, 2006 2:04 PM
    Comment #168248

    BTW, I do disagree with this U.N. thing about condemning Isreal. That is not mediating, that is taking a side. The U.N. and the U.S. should be neutrel partners to facilitate a peaceful solution.

    “Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.” ~Matthew 5:9

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 2:04 PM
    Comment #168249
    I would be interested to hear what liberal plans are available for solving the supply side of the oil issue.

    Grey,

    Energizing America

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 2:08 PM
    Comment #168250

    Some people think that just because we have might, we should use it. We have brains too, but I don’t see too many people using them.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 2:10 PM
    Comment #168251

    KT,

    You fail to see the big picture.

    Israel isn’t capable of destroying Hamas and Hezbollah, any more than America is capable of winning the war on terror.
    Without world support, both are futile efforts.

    Let me say it again.

    Both Hamas and Hezbollah are supported by Syria.
    That is where the pressure needs to be applied.
    Unless Syria is made to see that their continued support of these two groups is not in their best interests, the violence will continue to escalate until the entire world is drawn into the conflict, and America may not like the way the sides are drawn up.
    This is just one incident in a long line of incidents. Revenge only begets more revenge.

    Cooler heads need to prevail here.

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 2:14 PM
    Comment #168252

    LindaH and JayJay
    The “He hit me first” thinking doesn’t wash. For a number of years Hesbollah has been raining rockets on Israel. Israel has been turning the other cheek. When Israel promises something they are usually successful. They probised to bomb Lebanon back 20 years. I think that will happen. Already Hezbollah has been reduced by 25% and mounting. Hopefully that 50% figure will be very quick. Then onward to 100%. Of course Syria and Iran are sitting in the background giving the orders. It is just like a baseball manager giving the signs from the dugout. The players follow the instruction. Syria and Iran are sitting on very tenuous ground. There are certain elements that could come into play. If the damage that Hezbollah brags about doing to Tel-Aviv or Haifa is done, then Hezbollah will suffer enormous losses. I hope Israeil causes those huge losses without the Tel-Aviv and Haifa damage.

    Posted by: tomh at July 17, 2006 2:18 PM
    Comment #168255

    PHX8

    Instead, I would be willing to see the US back off, re-assert its neutrality, and broker a peace. Provide the Lebanese government with the funds and troops to bring law and order to the south. Bring in peacekeeping troops from, say, Iran. Now that would be a twist. Let the Iranians become invested in a peacekeeping process.

    Is your idea of negotiating putting a force of Iranian ‘peacekeepers’ on the border? All I can say is wow! Maybe the skinheads can keep the peace at the KKK rally in Compton. Ideas, like this one, that are so out of step is what helps liberals lose elections.

    Posted by: NotNutts at July 17, 2006 2:24 PM
    Comment #168257

    HardHatHarry wrote:

    Besides, liberals don’t believe in heaven, so don’t count on it helping you.

    I’ve held my tongue regarding remarks like yours concerning liberals and religion, but I find I just can’t any longer.

    I tend to lean towards the Liberal side, and I most definitely believe in God, Christ and and Christianity. I just don’t believe I need to push it down other people throats. I truly believe that MY Higher Power, God, is a merciful,loving, forgiving God, not a judgmental, hateful, or revenge seeking God.

    I just don’t feel the need to invoke His Name in order to try to make my point (or accusations) on a BLOG.

    Using religion to justify up ones’ points is very much the same as using religion as an excuse for killing ‘infidels (sound a little familiar?)

    I do not feel the need tell you or anyone else what to believe, and frankly I’m tired of being told I am going to hell, etc.simply because I don’t side with you with your particular brand of politics.

    Speaking only for myself, I get rather defensive regarding accusations about my religious leanings. Just like you and others like you would do if I attacked your harder, colder beliefs. If I implied that you are going to hell for disagreeing with me, then you would know how it feels. I simply see things a tad more openly that some people on this blog.

    Thanks for reading my post.

    Posted by: Linda H. at July 17, 2006 2:25 PM
    Comment #168258

    JayJay

    I am as interested as anyone in biofuels and renewables, but that cannot be the basis of our national strategy in the short or medium run.

    Read this nonpartisan analysis that is meant to be the basis of decision making, not point scoring.

    Linda

    Not negotiating now does not mean not negotiating ever. If you want to look at negotiations in a very broad way, you could say that the current negotiation position should be to wait to open talks until conditions on the ground are clearer and perhaps more favorable.

    I hope that every time you pass a used car lot you do not feel compelled to enter into negotiations with the salesman, even if the guy says it is a once in a lifetime, must have deal. Some negotiations are pointless until conditions change. When you are in the market for a car, THEN you start talking.

    Phx8

    You did not negotiate with your client. You just gave him what he wanted. If Israel was willing (or able) to do that, it would be no problem either.

    But those Israelis stubbornly and unreasonably resist the idea of being annihilated.

    Just because you are not actively negotiating does not mean you are not open to changes in conditions. In the car example I gave Linda, if a dealer offered me a new Mercedes for $1000.00, I would instantly become interested in the negotiations. But under normal conditions, not.

    Stefano

    See earlier points. Not negotiating now does not mean not negotiating at all. Conditions are not currently good. No matter how hungry I am, I cannot harvest my crop until it is ripe, even if everyone complains and thinks it is stupid to wait.

    Philippe

    The current mess in the Middle East is the fault of Hamas and Hezbollah. If the Arabs had simply been reasonable at almost any time since 1948, we would not have this problem. You live in Europe. Borders moved a bit around that same time. You don’t expect German terrorists to bomb you because they are still angry about the loss of Alsace and/or they don’t bomb Warsaw because they are still stung by Silesia going to Poland. I put them blame squarely on the Hamas and Hezbollah and they are the only ones who can solve the problem.

    Rocky

    Hamas and Hezbollah DO have support. That is the problem. They have support to destroy Israel. That is the goal lots of people around there share. Naturally, the Israelis are less enthusiastic about it.

    Posted by: Jack at July 17, 2006 2:37 PM
    Comment #168260

    Jack,

    “Hamas and Hezbollah DO have support. That is the problem.”

    My point exactly.

    When will pressure be applied to the countries (Syria, and Iran), that are sitting on the sidelines pulling the strings?

    The BBC reported today that Israel would continue until it got it’s soldiers back.

    So far the trade out for those two soldiers is 150 civilians in Lebanon.

    Good trade right?

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 2:46 PM
    Comment #168261

    What about the civilians in Israel? The job of pressuring Syria and Iran should be the UN. The only thing I hear the UN doing is blaiming Israel for trying to defend itself.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 2:54 PM
    Comment #168262

    Rocky,
    You made one of my first points:

    Revenge only begets more revenge.

    This is very true, and if someone doesn’t stop retaliating, it will never stop until all are gone.

    My bet is that neither Israel nor it’s various enemies will stop.

    Yes I feel for Israel, but I also understnad a tad about how the Hezbollah legitmate political party, and the Hamas in Palistine feel. The Hamas are the legitmate rulers of their country. I know no one expected them to gain power under the Democracy that was set up for them, but they did win.

    Now we want to change the rules, simply because they did as WE demanded, .

    Seems to me, if the US had attempted to work with the Hamas in Palestine,originally, we might have been able to control some of the anger now felt between Israel and Palestine, and south Lebanon.

    “Negoiating” some how just floated up in my head. Maybe that’s what WE should have done originally.

    Posted by: Linda H. at July 17, 2006 2:56 PM
    Comment #168263

    KAP,

    “The only thing I hear the UN doing is blaiming Israel for trying to defend itself.”

    Actually the UN offered to step in between the fighters and was turned down by Israel.

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 2:57 PM
    Comment #168264
    Aren’t you just creating more animals? Can’t you see the cycle that keeps on recreating itself? This is how the seeds of xenophobia spread, and the cycle of hate just keeps on going round and round. The ethnic group is different, but the hatred is the same.

    JayJay Snow,

    Do the Japanses still hate us for using the atomic bomb on them? Does the rest of Europe hate Germany because of Hitler?

    Europe was raveged during the WWs, but there was no cycle of hatered, was there? Perhaps if there is a cycle of hatred, it is because terrorists are indeed subhuman.

    Deal with them now before they deal with us.

    Posted by: GK at July 17, 2006 2:58 PM
    Comment #168266

    KT;

    …if it was an really Army against a really Army, where each side wears a uniform, then you could tell combantants from non-combantants,…

    How do you guys think we won the Revolutionary War - by standing in a straight line wearing red suits?

    Give me a break.

    Posted by: Linda H. at July 17, 2006 3:03 PM
    Comment #168267

    Linda H
    No but our enemy did.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 3:14 PM
    Comment #168268

    KT,

    Are you suggesting that we arm Hezbollah and Hamas with the necessary conventional weaponry to fight against the western backed Israel? Because that is the only way you are going to stop guerilla warfare in this situation.

    tomh,

    “Israel has been turning the other cheek”? What the hell have you been smoking? They haven’t turned the other cheek for a second. Take the current conflict. How many residential places have they bombed so far? While I cannot give an exact number it is a few. They have specifically targetted citizens. There is no excuse for that.

    This recent conflict started with attacks on military targets. This was in response to Israel’s continued illegal arrests. Going back to the “neighbor” theory everybody has been going on. First, the government was bribed by the current neighbor, (Israel) to impose eminent domain to take a large parcel of the land owners property and give it to Israel (the new resident) at far below market value. Since since they built the house, Israel’s dog has been crapping on its neighbors lawn. Than, they steal their neighbor’s paper everyday, they hooked up to adn are stealing their cable, than, to top it off they built a large fence, (which they never recieved a permit for) and enclosed their neighbors garden on their side. That would piss any neighbor off!

    Posted by: Metacom at July 17, 2006 3:19 PM
    Comment #168269

    metacom
    I take it you are siding with Hezbollah and Hamas.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 3:27 PM
    Comment #168270

    Linda H.

    It is not good practice for anyone to judge another’s heart as far as faith is concerned. I support your push-back against those who would assume you are a person who lacks faith. I am sorry that others have insinuated that about you due to your political leanings. You may certainly believe that Christ is the Son of God and that He walked this earth and Died for your sins on the cross so that you may have eternal salvation through His suffering. The hard thing to reconcile is that politics and God are seemingly miles apart. Many see the endorsement of a liberal cause as an indictment of their lack of faith and non-religious under-tow. God is not Democrat or Republican.

    As a Christian, I am sure you struggle with the irreconcilable parts of your faith and your liberal political leanings. That is a difficult task and often ends with a patch work faith based partly on God and partly on man. A loving, benevolent God is certainly the one you worship as a Christian. I would just add that He has wrath and judgment at His side and it is to display His grace and mercy even more clearly; not berate you into submission of a political agenda. God is not a cosmic bellhop with designer jeans and a lethargic approach to sin. He can not abide sin. If you feel God is not judgmental or that he lacks wrath; I would point you to the cross and to see what he did to His own Son that you and I, of all people, could have eternal salvation. That judgment and wrath was meant for us, Linda, but Christ took it upon himself. Everything else is minutia. Including politics.

    As a point of reference; I have no idea how someone can be Christian and liberal. I really do not have a clue; it defies every thread of logic in my body but I am far from righteous enough to condemn you for your political leanings. That judgment will be God’s not mine. That is a difference in Christianity; God says judgment is his and not man’s. The Quran says the complete opposite.

    Posted by: Grey Archer at July 17, 2006 3:37 PM
    Comment #168271

    Linda H;

    Give US a break, you are talking about the British, but yes majority of the fighting was done standing in-line eye to eye with the enemy, not hiding behind a skirt or kids like hamas/hezbollah is.

    Posted by: KT at July 17, 2006 3:42 PM
    Comment #168272

    NotNutts,
    Just came out, Israel has rejected international monitoring, so it is a moot point.


    I can think of few better solutions than placing Iranian troops on the Israeli border, in charge of security and responsible for Hezbollah.

    Those peacekeeping troops would be a match for Hezbollah & capable of maintaining order, just as the Syrians used to do. However, the Iranian peacekeeping troops would lack air power, sea power, a viable supply route, and heavy armor.

    They would be on the hook if any long range, Iranian manufactured missiles were launched. At the same time, they would be defenseless before the IDF.

    In addition, the temptation for the Iranian President to talk trash from a distance would be removed.

    Finally, even if Iran refused- which it would- such an offer extends respect to the Iranians as a regional power. It also brings them into contact with the US; it brings them into our embrace.

    Iran might agree to be part of a multinational force. Anyway, it does not matter. Israel has refused international peacekeepers. The Israelis are intent on dismantling Lebanon.

    Posted by: phx8 at July 17, 2006 3:43 PM
    Comment #168273

    “If my neighbor tried to kill me, I would defend myself and family with all necessary force. Then I would find out what I did to make my neighbor so angry that he wanted to kill me. Then I would try to improve myself so that my next neighbor would want to defend me, rather than kill me.”


    JayJay,

    First off I find it odd that we’re in disagreement on anything, but that aside, what if you learned that “your existence” is what angered that neighbor? What if every time he spoke he advocated the deaths of your family and yourself? What if that neighbor, after years of feuding, finally agreed to concessions but at the same time rented out the land bordering yours to someone that advocated your death?

    It’s impossible to draw a true comparison to life in the USA but I think you get what I’m saying. Don’t misunderstand me though, I do disagree with Jack, negotiation must always be “on the table” or the entire world will be in a perpetual war. But, I’ve said on other threads, and I’ll say again, I can’t fault Israel in the current escalation of violence.

    Within a two week span of time they suffered two intrusions on their security. Harsh steps were necessary. This can’t be compared to our occupation of Iraq. OTOH I believe the failed diplomacy of the Bush administration is fair game. Oh SHIT, did I say that!

    KansasDem

    Posted by: KansasDem at July 17, 2006 3:57 PM
    Comment #168274

    Jack,
    There was a little more to that negotiation I mentioned earlier, that was the short version. In brief, a negotiation is not necessarily a win/lose proposition. It really is possible for their to be a win/win, by creating a larger portion to be apportioned.

    And, just because one side beats down the other side, and obtains everything they want, does not necessarily mean they “won” the negotiation, especially when they do not understand what the other side wants, what the other side considers a “win,” and what motivates the other side.

    The situation between the US and Islamic fundamentalists is a lot like the situation between the US & the USSR. The USSR never stood chance; merely being in contact with us ultimately doomed them.

    Keep the US and its secular culture in close enough contact with the Israelis and the Islamicists, and the results will inevitably be the same.

    It is not a matter of military power. It is not even a matter of economic power. It is the culture itself.

    Posted by: phx8 at July 17, 2006 3:58 PM
    Comment #168275

    Rocky

    It depends.

    Hezbollah constantly and continually violates human rights of Arabs and the Geneva conventions but hiding among and posing as civilians. Hezbollah is responsible for all those civilian deaths. Maybe the ICC would be a good place for them, if our Euro friends are so fond of such things.

    Re Syria. “See the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this shit and it’s over” Bush told Blair. You and Bush see eye to eye.

    Posted by: Jack at July 17, 2006 4:09 PM
    Comment #168276

    Jayjay,
    “The U.S. should be mature enough to not get involved in this “you did it first” mentality.”

    We don’t need to get involved in it b/c the world knows (exactly) who started it and that’s Hezbollah. Do you agree with that? Or, do you think it’s Israel’s fault?! Come on, step up and make your decision firm and clear; none of this wishy-washy, politcally correct BS.


    Most of us know it’s the muslims fault; Israel pulled out of Lebanon, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and the palestinians still are attacking them. In fact, they dug a tunnel and kidnapped Israelis soldiers; even though Israel is out of those settlements.


    It’s going to take (real) courage to admit that Israel has a right to defeat this hateful enemy and to condemn Hezbollah, along with Syria and Iran. Real courage. Are some of you up for that?!

    Posted by: rahdigly at July 17, 2006 4:10 PM
    Comment #168277

    “You and Bush see eye to eye.”

    Jeez, Jack, what a scary thought that is.

    I’m glad he’s finally coming around to my way of thinking.

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 4:21 PM
    Comment #168278

    I like the idea of using Iranian troops to moniter the Israeli border. It will never happen though. I completely disagree that diplomacy must “always” be on the table. Part of negotiating is telling the other side that beyond a set point, there will be no negotiation. Otherwise you provide no incentive to come to an agreement.

    Israel should not negotiate in response to attacks on its citizens and no nation should expect them to. Doing so will not help them, short term or long term. It will only inspire those who would seek to frustrate the process to commit even more violent acts. Someone needs to be held accountable, and at the moment, the lack of troops in South Lebenon speaks volumes as to who is advocating these actions.

    Phx8- I’m not sure how you can with one breath advocate that peace talks must be constantly sought, and with the other admit that the very diplomatic ties you seek to create would undermine the cause of these people to not recognize the right of Israel to exist. So are you saying that we should be striving to do only that which the other side cannot do? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 17, 2006 4:23 PM
    Comment #168281

    Philippe:

    Could someone explains me how destroying power plants & bridges help Israel to defend herself against Hezbollah’s or Palestinians rockets strikes?

    If you would, kind sir, please fax over to Israel the location of all the Hezbollah and Palestinean rockets, I’m sure those nice Israeli boys would shoot there instead. Would that it were so easy. Would that the inane littleminded theories were able to find fruition in the real world.

    Jack:

    I like your idea that negotiation is necessary, but that now isn’t necessarily the right time for words. Sometimes actions help the negotiations along nicely. It’s amazing how the playing field changes when one side realizes that the other side means business. If you never establish that fact, then the words can go on and on and on, never really meaning anything.

    Posted by: joebagodonuts at July 17, 2006 4:46 PM
    Comment #168282

    rahdigly,

    “We don’t need to get involved in it b/c the world knows (exactly) who started it and that’s Hezbollah. Do you agree with that?”

    Frankly, I don’t care who started it. I want it over before it escalates into a full blown war.

    “It’s going to take (real) courage to admit that Israel has a right to defeat this hateful enemy and to condemn Hezbollah, along with Syria and Iran. Real courage. Are some of you up for that?!”

    OK, I’ll bite.

    Israel has the right to exist.
    Israel has the right to defend itself.
    Israel also has the responsibility to respond proportionately.

    Israel has the right to defeat it’s enemies?

    Please, pray tell us, what country has “THE RIGHT” to defeat it’s enemies?

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 4:50 PM
    Comment #168284
    Do the Japanses still hate us for using the atomic bomb on them? Does the rest of Europe hate Germany because of Hitler?

    Europe was raveged during the WWs, but there was no cycle of hatered, was there? Perhaps if there is a cycle of hatred, it is because terrorists are indeed subhuman.

    Deal with them now before they deal with us.

    GK,

    It is exactly this kind of thought process that leads to people like Hitler and Nazi Germany.

    KansasDem,

    I am not sure why, perhaps I phrased something wrong along the way, but everyone here seems to think that I believe that Isreal was in the wrong and has no right to defend itself. Such is not the case. If you are under attack, then by all means use all neccessary force. Otherwise, the true test of our strength is not in our ability to wage war, but in our ability to avoid war.

    We don’t need to get involved in it b/c the world knows (exactly) who started it and that’s Hezbollah. Do you agree with that? Or, do you think it’s Israel’s fault?! Come on, step up and make your decision firm and clear;

    rahdigly,

    I am not assesing blame on either side, and as I said I am against the U.N. assesing blame as well. It should not be the job of the U.S. nor the U.N. to assess blame, but only to be a mediator. We have this mentality in the U.S. that we are always right, which makes us feel superior. Maybe we just don’t see it from the other perspective. If you want my honest to god opinion of it, I don’t give a flying fig whose fault it is. If Isreal wants to declare war on the entire region then that is their call, but the U.S. should stay out of it.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 5:11 PM
    Comment #168285

    Jack,

    Yes, yes; excuses, excuses. If JFK could accomplish the impossible by putting men on the moon, then certainly we can do the impossible too. It is just a matter of how badly we need/want it.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 5:15 PM
    Comment #168286

    Rocky-

    What exactly would a “proportional” response look like?

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 17, 2006 5:23 PM
    Comment #168288

    “Humans are the worst species on Earth, no doubt.”

    Philippe Houdoin,

    I don’t think we all fit into that category, unfortunately far too many people do. I remember all too well watching the daily “news breifings” during both of our wars in Iraq, and I was actually somewhat amazed at the nearly “gleeful” display of what and who we’d blown to hell in the past 24 hours.

    No one should be foolish enough to think that only militants can be targeted with even the most modern weapons. At best we can “minimize” the MURDER of innocents. Such is the nature of war. Still at this point I can not fault the Israeli’s for taking an offensive action to restrain Hezbollah or Hamas.

    KansasDem

    Posted by: KansasDem at July 17, 2006 5:36 PM
    Comment #168289

    Metacom, no I am not saying arm hamas/hezbollah as they are already armed, thanks to syria and iran. What I am saying is to let Israel do what they have to to protect themselves, and to only stop when Syria/Iran or the Lebanenese people finally say enough is enough and turn on hamas/hezbollah, for bring this upon them.

    Posted by: KT at July 17, 2006 5:39 PM
    Comment #168291

    Kevin23,

    proportional;
    Function: adjective
    1 a : corresponding in size, degree, or intensity.

    Let’s say Canada comes across our northern border and kidnaps two of our soldiers, and refuses to give them back unless we release some criminals.

    Would you consider it proportional to take out Quebec?
    How about blow up some power stations, or a few bridges?

    Is that proportional?

    How about if when you gouge me in the eye, I lop off your head?
    Is that proportional?

    Not long ago Lebanon was praised as the type of Democracy we would like to see take hold in the Middle East.
    Israel, in it’s attempts to up the ante, has done serious damage to the infrastructure of Lebanon.

    Is that proportional?

    Is Israel fighting Lebanese troops or Hezbollah?

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 5:45 PM
    Comment #168292

    Everyone in the world knows that Iran and Syria are responsible, but the UN is going to be crippled by oil. I am talking about Russian and Chinese need for oil from Iran. If I were Israel, I would not trust a UN with #2 and #3 world powers addicts to oil from the true masterminds behind this. The Russians have finally adopted our constitution, though. Iran is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

    If Iran and Syria and everyone else truely cared for the civilians they would be putting some of these billions of dollars of oil money back into their countries and not into arms and arms development. They cry about civilian casualties as they hide and fire rockets amongst civilians.

    I still can’t understand how you are suppose to negotiate with someone who hates you because of who you were born as. I got my butt kicked by two kids when I was 10 because I was the only black kid in an all white neighborhood. I didn’t do anything to them and was friends with everyone else. They were new to the neighborhood. So when Bobby came after me again a few days later I was ready then. I had back up from other kids just to make sure it was not 2 on 1 again. I kicked his butt, but not nearly as bad as I got it from them. Not being a violent person, I gave him mercy. As soon as I turned my back he came after me again. I really messed up his teeth then. I felt bad for the idiot and turned to go home. He came after me again and this time being bigger was able to pin me to the ground right in my neighbor’s front yard. My neighbor’s dad came out and broke up the fight. He had seen the whole thing. He said, “Bobby, he has kicked your ass enough now go home.” Shortly thereafter Bobby’s older brother was sent to detention home and the open hatred stopped because he couldn’t fight the “nigger” alone. Knowing that to attack me was to invite a butt kicking stopped him. Negotiations with someone who hates you and your children for what you are is futile as long as they think they can bully you. Did the US do the wrong thing by declaring war on Japan after Pearl Harbor?

    Israel has a responsibility to defend her citizens. Return the soldiers and then talk about peace.

    Posted by: lllplus2 at July 17, 2006 5:50 PM
    Comment #168293

    JayJay

    This is off topic, but what do you think a fuels program would accomplish? We still use oil today because it is cheap - even now - compared to alternatives. At around $60/barrel, alternatives are competitive. We are there now (if the price doesn’t drop). BUT alternatives will not be as cheap as oil WAS. In some places you can lift oil out of the ground for almost nothing. Even in the best case scenario, an agricultual bases fuel system would require significant investments in land and labor.

    Changing fuels of a nation is also more complicated than a single goal of getting a man on the moon. BTW - how many times have we been back recently?

    We will go to alternatives. But don’t expect them to “solve” the problem. We really do not have a problem even today. We have an expense.

    BTW - JFK set the goal, but they built most of the stuff during LBJ and actually achieved it under Nixon. Setting the goal is the fun part.

    Posted by: Jack at July 17, 2006 5:51 PM
    Comment #168295

    “If JFK could accomplish the impossible by putting men on the moon, then certainly we can do the impossible too. It is just a matter of how badly we need/want it.”

    JayJay,

    But not with a “cow-boy” leading the battle. First of all let me say that I’m speaking of a “cow” “boy” not a a real cowboy. This Texas import is not a cowboy or a cowman. He’s “all hat ‘n no cattle”!

    I don’t know how many folks have seen the impromptu “cussin’” at the lunch table clip but I’ll tell you right now, long before he said SHIT I was disgusted at his table manners. The butt-nugget chews with his mouth open like a COW!

    I’m a little better than 54 years old but I’ll guarantee you that if my mom were still alive she’d smack me right up side the head for displaying that kind of manners. Our current President is a buffoon! No one respects a buffoon!

    KansasDem

    Posted by: KansasDem at July 17, 2006 5:57 PM
    Comment #168296

    David Brooks on Israel:

    Why is this Middle East crisis different from all other Middle East crises? Because in all other Middle East crises, Israel’s main rivals were the P.L.O., Egypt, Iraq and Syria, but in this crisis the main rivals are the jihadists in Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and, most important, Iran.

    In all other crises the nutjobs were on the fringes, but now the nutjobs in Hamas and Hezbollah are in governments and lead factions of major parties.

    In all other crises, the Palestinians, thanks to Yasir Arafat’s strenuous efforts, owned their own cause, but now the clerics in Iran are taking control of the Palestinian cause and turning it into a weapon in a much larger struggle.
    In all other crises there was a negotiation process, a set of plans and some hope of reconciliation. But this crisis is different. Iran doesn’t do road maps. The jihadists who are driving this crisis don’t do reconciliation.

    In other words, this crisis is a return to the elemental conflict between Israel and those who seek to destroy it. And you can kiss goodbye, at least for the time being, to some of the features of the recent crises.

    You can kiss goodbye to the fascinating chess match known as the Middle East peace process. That chess match was dependent on a series of smart and reasonable Arab players with whom Israel could negotiate. Those smart and reasonable interlocutors still exist. They still invite visiting Westerners to dinner and may still represent the majority of their countrymen. But they are not running the show now.

    Iran has conducted a semi-hostile takeover of what used to be known as the Arab-Israeli dispute. Iran has deepened and widened its support for its terrorist partners. Iran and the Islamists are fueled by the sense that the winds of history are blowing at their back. They pushed the Soviets out of Afghanistan, the U.S. out of Lebanon, Israel out of Lebanon and Gaza and they seem on the verge of pushing the U.S. out of Iraq. After centuries of Muslim humiliation, these people know how to win.

    So Hamas and Hezbollah audaciously set the pace of confrontation. Maybe the moderates will eventually crack down on the radicals (there’s a first time for everything), but in the meantime there will be no peace process. There will be no shuttle diplomacy. Instead, the main mode of communication will be death: the minuet of missile launches and retaliations, escalations and de-escalations that irreconcilable enemies use to talk with one another.

    You can also kiss goodbye to the land-for-peace mentality. In all other crises there was the hope that if Israel ceded land and gave the Palestinians a chance to lead normal lives, then tensions would ease. But this crisis follows withdrawals in Lebanon and Gaza, and interrupts the withdrawals from the West Bank that were at the core of Ehud Olmert’s victory platform.

    Israel’s main enemies in this crisis are not normal parties and governments that act on behalf of their people. They are jihadist organizations that happen to have gained control of territory for bases of operations. Hamas and Hezbollah knew their kidnappings and missile launches would set off retaliation that would hurt Gazans and Lebanese, but they attacked anyway — for the sake of jihad. They answer to a higher authority and dream of genocide in his name.

    What’s happened over the past few years, in short, is that public opinion in Israel has moved to the center at the same time that decision-making power on the other side has moved to the extreme.
    Now there is a debate over how Israel should respond to this situation. Some say Israel should temper its response so Arab moderates can corral the extremists, which would be great advice if the moderates had any record of ever doing that or any capacity to do so in the near future. Others say Israel simply must degrade the capabilities of its fanatical opponents.

    But this is a secondary issue. The core issue is that just as Israel has been trying to pull back to more sensible borders, its enemies have gone completely berserk. Through some combination of fecklessness and passivity, the Arab world has ceded control of this vital flashpoint to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Bashar al-Assad. It has ceded its own destiny to people who do not believe in freedom, democracy, tolerance or any of the values civilized people hold dear.

    And what’s the world’s response? Israel is overreacting.

    Posted by: Max at July 17, 2006 6:08 PM
    Comment #168299

    Oh also, if anyone thinks the Katrina response was all Brownie’s fault, the “Buffoon-in-Chief’s” response to evacuating Americans from Lebanon should be the only answer you need to the question, “how prepared are we”?

    We’re not, because this buffoon “shoots from the hip”! Maybe we can outsource our defense to China.

    KansasDem

    Posted by: KansasDem at July 17, 2006 6:26 PM
    Comment #168323

    Rocky-

    I didn’t need you to look it up in Websters…that was pointless. So eye for an eye? Is that the golden rule? Then Israel should fire rockets randomly at Lebenese cities and then all is right with the world?

    That is crazy. When a nation is forced to use its military, you can’t expect them to be friendly like a neighborhood police officer. That is just stupid as it would endanger the soldiers. They are taking out the infrastructure so that they can limit organization and mobility. Again, there are VERY good reasons to do this starting with protecting the soldiers on the ground. You can’t honestly expect a military force to be nice when they roll into a town. And you can’t expect Israel to send in the pretty princess gang to keep the peace.

    So where does that leave us? First, Hezbollah knew what they were doing, and they did it anyway. They knew the only viable response was NOT going to be a white flag. They KNEW this, and acted, and continue to act accordingly to start a war. Second, they are continuing to ask for exactly what cannot be given. They know this as well. Finally, there is a legitimate outside influence that is undermined by destroying bridges, roads, and airports. Most citizens have evacuated, so who needs power in the city besides the enemies? What should they do instead? You gave a bunch of innappropriate examples of what was “disproportionate” in a simple sense, but none had anything to do with Israel and the catch 22 they find themselves in. Again…what would a “proportionate” response look like?

    As for the Canada example, I would absolutely agree with knocking out some Canadian infrastructure if the government had no troops in Qubec and the militias there were kidnapping our soldiers and then threatenning to move them to Iceland. Especially the airports so they would be unable to get them there quickly. How do you think a military achieves the objective of their safe return otherwise? By asking with the magic word?

    Forgive me if I’m not putting all my stock in the terrorists’ abilities to be reasonable. Instead, they awoke the Israeli military. They continue to provoke it. Now they have to deal with it until all the military objectives are complete. I don’t feel the least bit sorry for the Lebenese government. Maybe they should have dealt with this as opposed to condoning it, which is exactly what makes it state-sponsered.

    So you retreated from asking Israel to leave the land, so what solution would you broker without first disarming the terrorists on the border?

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 17, 2006 8:40 PM
    Comment #168342

    Kevin23,

    “So eye for an eye? Is that the golden rule?”

    So maybe a leg for an eye?

    Do you find that more acceptable?

    You seem to be under the illusion that Hezbollah speaks for the entire country of Lebanon.
    Taking out the airport also precludes the escape of any tourists that may be in harms way.

    As for a “proportional” response.

    How about we shoot back at the guys that are shooting at us?

    Israel hasn’t declared war with Lebanon, yet is acting as if they have.

    “Most citizens have evacuated, so who needs power in the city besides the enemies?”

    Don’t you think that Lebanon might have to rebuild those power stations someday?

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 9:34 PM
    Comment #168354
    Don’t you think that Lebanon might have to rebuild those power stations someday?

    No, the U.S. will.

    Posted by: JayJay Snow at July 17, 2006 10:01 PM
    Comment #168355

    Rocky

    You know today is the anniversary of the U.S. annexation of Florida. Andy Jackson took over Florida because the Spanish were unable or unwilling to control hostile Indian and pirates who were raiding the U.S. If a country does not control its territory, it is not sovereign and neighbors have a right to abate the nuisance.

    Hezbollah breaks international law by hiding among and posing as civilians. All the civilian deaths are on their hands. Beyond that, many of the civilians are harboring Hezbollah. If you allow a terrorist to hide in your house, you have no complaint coming is your house is destroyed.

    I think the Israelis should follow Machiavelli’s advice and do as much damage to Hezbollah as they can and get it out of the way before comes the inevitable world reaction. They are already in the lake and they cannot get much wetter. Take advantage of it now.

    Posted by: Jack at July 17, 2006 10:01 PM
    Comment #168360

    KAP,

    I’m not on anybody’s side. I merely look at the facts FROM ALL PERSPECTIVES, than draw a conclusion. The conclusion is Hamas & Hezbolla do not have the conventional weaponry to fight open warfare. If they had the means as Israel does, history shows that they would fight open warfare. Is Israels staying out of harms way with bombers really any different? Besides, Hezbolla typically does not hide among citizens as they have less need to than Hamas.

    History has repeatedly shown that the group with the weaker military will fight in this manner. While some governments call it terrorism to gain support to oppose it. It is actually guerilla warfare. The colonies used it resisting Britain, the natives used it resisting colonists/Americans, the slaves used it, South Americans of damn near all nationalities used it, Lybians used it resisting French, Vietnamese used it resisting America, and so on and so on.

    Rahdigly,

    The fact is Israel is on stolen land. Argue all you want, this is the fact. Now, I personally feel that they earned their right to a small chunk of it. However, their aggresive actions have turned me against them. I used to fully support them but as you can see, I am no longer manipulated and narrow sighted.

    Anyway, given that Israel is on stolen land the conflict is Israels fault. Israel did not leave all occupied territories. The West bank is still occupied, near 10k Palestinians are sitting in Israeli jails, Golan Heights is still occupied, IDF still continues to make illegal arrests. Anyone would have to be a complete idiot to place all the blame on the Arabs.

    If Israel truly wanted peace they could have easily offered all land captured in 67 war or, better yet 53’ war. They want land, not peace. They are unwilling to sacrafice the land for peace.

    Further, anyone would have to be an idiot if they really think the war is about religion. The same as the morons who thought Veitnam was about communism. The war is about nationalism, just like Veitnam. If Hamas is so religously radical why is there femal Hamas members in legislation? Why has Hamas repeatedly tried to open doors with the U.S? The argument has no basis!

    Those who think the Arabs are SOLELY at fault are morons, who refuse to look at the whole conflict. They do have their share but Israel is just as if not more guilty for the continuing conflict.

    Posted by: Metacom at July 17, 2006 10:12 PM
    Comment #168365

    Jack,

    “Andy Jackson took over Florida because the Spanish were unable or unwilling to control hostile Indian and pirates who were raiding the U.S. If a country does not control its territory, it is not sovereign and neighbors have a right to abate the nuisance.”

    How many years had America been a Democracy when Jackson took that action?
    Do you remember the Hezbollah protests when Syria was forced to leave?

    Lebanon just hasn’t had that much time to get on it’s feet.

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 10:21 PM
    Comment #168369

    Metacom
    Hezbollah are the ones who started this. Even Saudi Arabia puts the blame on Hezbollah. I don’t know where you get your info from nobody thinks arabs are soley at fault. It’s the Islamic fanatics that are at fault. Israel is only trying to protect their own people.

    Posted by: KAP at July 17, 2006 10:29 PM
    Comment #168370

    Rocky

    Spain had been a state for a long time. They were the ones not managing their territory. The idea that Jackson put into action and John Q Adams supported with theory was that if you don’t police your own, you are asking someone else to do it for you.

    I don’t know if the Israelis can pull it off. That is my only concern. I don’t have a moral problem, only a practical one.

    Posted by: Jack at July 17, 2006 10:30 PM
    Comment #168375

    Jack,

    How often do you take your wife dancing?

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 10:36 PM
    Comment #168380

    Metacom

    You need to quit reading those comic books. They are influencing your outlook on life. Israel was set up in 1948 by way of treaty under the UN. So if a treaty is the basis for Israel and the land they now hold. How do you come to a conclusion that they are on stolen soil? If you are taking into the consideration that a couple of wars where they conquered land, then again the challenge is how is it stolen land. You need to get into the history books and prophecy to understand how, what, where, when and why of Israel.

    Posted by: tomh at July 17, 2006 10:52 PM
    Comment #168383

    Jack,

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pensacola,_Florida#First_United_States_period_.281821-1861.29

    “Andrew Jackson served as Florida’s first territorial governor, residing at the capital of Pensacola. He was noted for his persecution of Indians and Creoles, many of whom left the territory to be replaced by an increasing number of Anglo Southern settlers, including many planters and black slaves.”

    So, after that convenient dance step…..

    The point was that America had been around as a democracy for awhile when Jackson became the governor of the state of Florida.
    Spain was three thousand miles away and was in decline, and probably couldn’t care less ( no seven cities of gold, no fountain of youth, Mexico had already become pissy about independence…..)
    Syria has only been gone from Lebanon for what, a year.

    Posted by: Rocky at July 17, 2006 11:02 PM
    Comment #168405

    Grey Archer wrote:

    The hard thing to reconcile is that politics and God are seemingly miles apart. Many see the endorsement of a liberal cause as an indictment of their lack of faith and non-religious under-tow. God is not Democrat or Republican.

    I agree with you about God being not being Democrat or Republican. However the rest of what you wrote is a perfect example of what I was trying to point out. There always seems to be a BUT

    I don’t really care what you believe. I am not the one who will judge you. And for this I do Thank God, greatly. I simply don’t feel I have the right to accuse others of not believing in God, or not practicing religion because their political views disagree with each other.

    MY GOD gave me a brain to learn, think, and choose. He also taught:

    You shall not murder,
    which is what I honestly believe is happening in Iraq-sanctioned by our President.

    If you truly want to show your beliefs, then ACT on them.

    And please remember:

    You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour.
    Especially if you don’t know them. Posted by: Linda H. at July 17, 2006 11:52 PM
    Comment #168424

    The state of Mississippi could not control its citizens during the civil rights movement and the feds moved in to investigate and indict. The miltary had to insure black students got into the University of Alabama. Use your power to control your citizens or lose that power.

    Posted by: lllplus2 at July 18, 2006 12:46 AM
    Comment #168427

    KAP Responded to me:

    Give US a break, you are talking about the British, but yes majority of the fighting was done standing in-line eye to eye with the enemy, not hiding behind a skirt or kids like ham as/hezbollah is.

    a href=”http://WWW.channel4.Com/history/
    microsites/S/sh01/legions2.HTML

    Guerilla warfare History

    Guerrilla tactics

    Guerrilla warfare is a strategy that has been employed by the underdog throughout history. Defined in the dictionary as ‘harassing an army by small bands’ the guerrilla uses deception and ambush as opposed to mass confrontation and succeeds best in irregular or rugged terrain where superior knowledge is the key advantage, often over an invading force.

    Encompassing the antics of Robin Hood and the terror tactics of the American War of Independence, which saw Francis Marion ‘the swamp fox’ burn homes, and tar and feather enemies, the term was coined in the Peninsular War of 1808-14 when the Spanish proved unconquerable even by the armies of Napoleon I.

    According to the 2nd quote, we can sort of blame ourselves for the continued use of this type of warfare.

    During the American Revolution teenage boys as young as 14 were encouraged to fight.

    And many a woman defended her home and children while hubby was gone to war.

    Everyone is so upset because the Muslims are now using the similar tactics we used for our own freedom.

    I’m not justifying the use of guerilla tactics, I’m just pointing out that there were other countries, including our own that used similar tactics.

    It’s one of those ‘it’s okay if WE do it, but horrible when someone else uses similar attics.’

    I realize the Iraqis use much worse tactics, but they (terrorists and insurgents) believe they are fighting for their country, just as we did in 1776.

    Posted by: Linda H. at July 18, 2006 1:09 AM
    Comment #168441

    tomh,

    First, I’m a history major. Second, prophecy is irrelevent. Third, comic books have nothing to do with this conflict and if they did they would only be slanted in favor of Israel just as our news and other media.

    I think you need to put down the Bible and read some actual history books. As for Israel stealing land, land doctrined by someone who does not own the land has no basis. It’s always amazing to me how so many conservatives see everything in life as if they’re wearing blinders.

    You are not looking at the conflict from a practical, third person view. Arabs are pissed because the land was theirs. They lost the war and was still angry. So they faught again, lost that war. Tensions led to the outbreak of another war, they lost again. And yes, many were still angry. Fought another war and won than 2 countries eventually made peace.

    The current situation is a result of the combination of a handful of things. Little economic opportunity as a result of closed ports, settlers harrasing and murdering than stealing land and being backed by IDF while doing it. Leftover tension from the previous wars. Constant, (daily) murders by IDF. Daily raids arresting people without charges, and so on.

    I used to support Israel 100%, until it became obvious they were not interested in peace. If they were interested in peace they would first, not resist international mediation forces. Charge IDF personel when they commit blatent murder. Reign in all settlers and disband ALL settlements. Create situations in Gaza and West bank for economic development so that less people have the desire to fight. Extend their hand to their enemy no matter how hard it may seem.

    What you have to understand is that ultimately Israel was created due to mass immigration. Do you think we would sit idley by if a swarm of Mexican immigrants declared Texas and independant state that is going to be predominantely Mexican. Absolutely not! and if we lost the first war, we’d keep going until we won. Hell, we did that fighting for land that wasn’t even ours. It took 3 campaigns to defeat a major Native resistance in old North/West.

    Don’t give me crap about how Arabs should just move on. If you were in their position, you would do the same thing! Israel has a right to exist, I agree. However, Arabs have a right to resist.

    BTW Saudi has a lot of U.S. Investment to lose by backing Hezbolla. Further, they never lost anything to Israel so have nothing to gain from support. Given that’s how virtually all nations act don’t act suprised when and Arab nation does it.

    Posted by: Metacom at July 18, 2006 3:18 AM
    Comment #168446

    d.a.n.

    Philippe Houdoin, Sure, vaccinate as much as possible. But, that still won’t help with the incurable, that will never stop trying to kill you.

    They stop when they die blowing up themselves.
    You do know that rabid dogs eventually dies after being hit by rabbies. Suicidal terrorists eventually dies as soon as they become terrorists too.

    The issue about terrorists is not much the current one guy ready to commit (which, agreed, you should find first before he hit you) but the two - or more - next guys after him.

    The issue is more terrorism *grow* than terrorism alone. Stop feed the beast.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 4:58 AM
    Comment #168447

    JBOD,

    Could someone explains me how destroying power plants & bridges help Israel to defend herself against Hezbollah’s or Palestinians rockets strikes?

    If you would, kind sir, please fax over to Israel the location of all the Hezbollah and Palestinean rockets, I’m sure those nice Israeli boys would shoot there instead. Would that it were so easy. Would that the inane littleminded theories were able to find fruition in the real world.

    So those “nice Israeli boys” shoot at Power Plant and bridges because they don’t know the location of the Hezbollah and Palestinian rockets? Is that your reply???

    Does it sounds like revenge strikes more than “chirurgical” strikes only to me?!?

    Sometimes actions help the negotiations along nicely. It’s amazing how the playing field changes when one side realizes that the other side means business.

    And civilians pay most of these “business” cost. With their own blood. Again.

    I, for one, don’t care a bit about both sides “business”. I care about the victims who happens to be trapped right in the middle of “playing” field. When the game at play kill people, it’s not a game anymore.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 5:13 AM
    Comment #168448

    Hitting Muslim Holy sites seems attractive, but way too extreme. Most of them are in Saudi Arabia(our ally) and Jerusalem (another ally). One senator (I forget his name,think he was from Colorado) proposed doing this and John Zogby (who is an Arab) went tit for tat with him on Lou Dobbs I think.

    Only if the USA is hit with another major attack would I even consider attempting this. But, in order to do this, we need to make sure we have enough oil supplies to do so, because the Saudis would not give us a drop.

    Posted by: Steve C. at July 18, 2006 5:45 AM
    Comment #168450

    KT,

    if it was an really Army against a really Army, where each side wears a uniform, then you could tell combantants from non-combantants, but with hamas and hezbollah dressing like non-combantants, and they all carry weapons how do you tell one from another, and that is a question to you, how would you tell one from another.

    The one shooting at you is your enemy, the other(s) is/are not. And yes, it means “don’t shoot first”, yes it means “take the risk to be shoot first” but yes, it also means “we were NOT the agressor”. Something that can give you some moral ground…

    The people of Lebenon (and Iraq), have to standup against these terrorist and tell them no more, they are tired of the suffereing and get rid of them, be it send them to Syria or Iran, throw in jail and throw away the key, but it will take a strong stance on their party to do it.

    True, but unfortunatly instead of helping them to standup agaisnt terrorists we allow Israel blindly bombing their urban area (try to standup under bombing: good luck) and we’ve turned Iraq into terrorists heaven and failed to stop civil war.

    Plus, how do you standup against terrorists without being confused - and shoot at - with them by Israel (or GIs) as soon as you exibit a gun?
    If all US military power can’t defeat terrorists abroad since 3 years, how unarmed and helpless people could?

    See, in chaos nothing is as simple as one will hope.

    Now, who agree here that we (the international community) should take this opportunity to help people in Middle East to standup against terrorists? Why aren’t we? What the rational for not doing it yet?

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 5:58 AM
    Comment #168454

    Philippe:

    Your strategy would seem to be that if an when Hezbollah intermingles with the civilian population of Lebanon, the Israelis should do nothing for fear of hitting innocents. The fact is that Hezbollah intermingles with the precise idea that civilians will die, and then they can blame Israel.

    Israel has told people where they are going to be bombing, has warned them to leave and does this at risk to their own operations and personnel. They have shown Lebanon that if the Lebanese govt is unwilling to stop Hezbollah from attacking Israel, then Israel will do it.

    When the US went after the Taliban for harboring OBL in Afghanistan, we know that civilians died. That is truly a tragedy. But it is also a reality of any war. If you want to take a Quaker pacifist attitude and say that all war is wrong, I can accept that argument as logical—I’d disagree with the conclusion, but it would be logical.

    But your argument is that if Israel fights back and bombs infrastructure, they are wrong. If Israel fights back and kills any civilians, they are wrong. Pretty soon, that logical path leads to: If Israel fights back, they are wrong.

    What is your suggestion for what Israel should do? What options do they have?

    Posted by: joebagodonuts at July 18, 2006 8:03 AM
    Comment #168457

    Philippe;
    How many times does a person or country have to turn their cheek before they say enough is enough.
    If your neighbor throws rocks at your house day after day after day and break the windows each time, comes over and steals one of your kids(if you have any), are you going to turn the other cheek, are you going to your other neighbors and say this is what is going on help me. I doubt it. Israels has turn the other cheeck, moved back to their borders, given food to help the palatines, and tried, but thanks to hamas and hezbollah who have vowed to drive them to the sea doesn’t want peace.
    They hide among the civilians behind the skirts and kids, and cry look what you have done when unfortuantely some get killed, but when they kill civilians they say they are getting rid of the evil zionist.
    Philipe you are probably one of those that jumped for joy when 9/11 happened, instead of being outraged.
    Why don’t you take your olive branch and go to Lebanon and see how far you get talking to these terrorist, and hey take the family also they might enjoy the vacation.

    Posted by: KT at July 18, 2006 8:16 AM
    Comment #168460

    lllplus2,

    Everyone in the world knows that Iran and Syria are responsible, but the UN is going to be crippled by oil. I am talking about Russian and Chinese need for oil from Iran. If I were Israel, I would not trust a UN with #2 and #3 world powers addicts to oil from the true masterminds behind this.

    Funny how you choose to ignore whose the #1 world powers addicts to oil in your sentence. I wonder why…

    I got my butt kicked by two kids when I was 10 because I was the only black kid in an all white neighborhood. I didn’t do anything to them and was friends with everyone else. They were new to the neighborhood. So when Bobby came after me again a few days later I was ready then. I had back up from other kids just to make sure it was not 2 on 1 again. I kicked his butt, but not nearly as bad as I got it from them. Not being a violent person, I gave him mercy. As soon as I turned my back he came after me again. I really messed up his teeth then. I felt bad for the idiot and turned to go home. He came after me again and this time being bigger was able to pin me to the ground right in my neighbor’s front yard. My neighbor’s dad came out and broke up the fight. He had seen the whole thing. He said, “Bobby, he has kicked your ass enough now go home.” Shortly thereafter Bobby’s older brother was sent to detention home and the open hatred stopped because he couldn’t fight the “nigger” alone. Knowing that to attack me was to invite a butt kicking stopped him.

    Great parallel. So, in Middle East who will be the “dad” that break the fight and eventually throw some into “detention home”, which will stop the others by fear of being the next ones?

    Israel has a responsibility to defend her citizens. Return the soldiers and then talk about peace.

    In wars, prisonners are usually returned after the war ends, not before. Israel declare their soldiers kidnaping was an act of war. You can’t have both way.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 8:34 AM
    Comment #168468

    Kevin23,

    Most citizens have evacuated, so who needs power in the city besides the enemies?

    Beirut alone have a population between 1 to 2 millions. And you’re saying that every civilians in this city were evacuated???
    Could you share a link proving this claim. Or the crack you’re smoking otherwise…

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 9:04 AM
    Comment #168469

    KT,

    Philipe you are probably one of those that jumped for joy when 9/11 happened, instead of being outraged.

    Hey, didn’t see the “better critique the message not the messenger” at top?

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 9:09 AM
    Comment #168471
    If your neighbor throws rocks at your house day after day after day and break the windows each time, comes over and steals one of your kids(if you have any), are you going to turn the other cheek, are you going to your other neighbors and say this is what is going on help me.

    I’m going to police station and say this is what is going on, help me. And I bring some neighbors as witness.

    I’m not doing justice myself.
    Defense is not revenge.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 9:12 AM
    Comment #168478

    Linda H

    There is a great difference between guerilla tactics and terrorism. During our own revolution or during resistance movements against occupation in Europe, you did not find cases of the patriots purposely targeting their OWN civilian populations.

    There are SOME in Iraq fighting for what they believe in their country. Many more are former Baathists, who are most analogous to the KKK in the old south. They want to reestablish their dominance of others. Finally there are terrorists (many foreign) whose goal is to create chaos and civil war in the hopes that their own hand will be strengthened. We can give some respect to the first groups and perhaps compare them to freedom fighters. The others do not deserve that dignity.

    Remember that almost all the people killed by insurgents are Muslims.

    Philippe

    Hezbollah consistently violated the Geneva conventions and the human rights of the Lebanese by hiding among and posing as civilians. They invite and work to create maximum destruction among civilians. It is part of their strategy. They shoot rockets from civilian neighborhoods or school yards. When the Israeli artillery hits the source of the rocket, it also hits these things. The fault lies with those purposely trying to create this situation - Hezbollah.

    Remember that when civilians die, Hezbollah celebrates. Civilian deaths to them are NOT regrettable collateral damage. For Hezbollah civilian deaths, both in Israel and among Muslims ARE the goal.

    Posted by: Jack at July 18, 2006 9:40 AM
    Comment #168480

    JBOD,

    Your strategy would seem to be that if an when Hezbollah intermingles with the civilian population of Lebanon, the Israelis should do nothing for fear of hitting innocents.

    Indeed.

    The fact is that Hezbollah intermingles with the precise idea that civilians will die, and then they can blame Israel.

    Lebanese civilians don’t die because Hezbollah intermingles with them. They die because bombs are drop over them. Do you think survivors will say to bombers “I understand why you’re bombing us and I thanks you for missing me”?

    Israel has told people where they are going to be bombing, has warned them to leave and does this at risk to their own operations and personnel. They have shown Lebanon that if the Lebanese govt is unwilling to stop Hezbollah from attacking Israel, then Israel will do it.

    Which is good. But how do you evacuate half a country of over 3 millions of people in six days?
    How a government could fight the terrorists hiding in its country when its civilians population are under bombs, without grid power, water, bridges, and can’t evacuate thru airport nor harbor if they manage to still reach these?

    So far Israel show that they could attack Lebanon more than stopping Hezbollah from attacking her.
    Does the Lebanon gov declare war on Israel? Does all lebaneses are quicly drafted to build an army?
    Nope.

    Israel policy is attack, not a defense. Aka Bush Doctrine.

    But your argument is that if Israel fights back and bombs infrastructure, they are wrong.

    Bombing infrastructure is wrong, indeed. It didn’t stop Hezbollah attacks since, did they?
    But the civilians suffer from that and the lebanon gov is even more weaken than before.

    Israel fighting back is right. But the way they’re doing currently sounds counter-productive to me, yes.

    If Israel fights back and kills any civilians, they are wrong. Pretty soon, that logical path leads to: If Israel fights back, they are wrong.

    You’re trying to put words in my mouth. I’m not saying that.

    What is your suggestion for what Israel should do?

    Accept international peacekeepers force.
    No way I’m a geostrategic expert, that’s just my opinion, not a hint nor a definitive option, but escalating the conflict since 50 years didn’t work, isn’t the time to try an all new third way to resolve it? If you failed to do it yourself, you should not be too shiny or proud enough to ask for help.

    What options do they have?

    Still many, ranging from going switzerlandy to nuking all its neighboors.
    Mossad could hunt the soldiers kidnappers for example, without needing that gaza and lebanon civilians being bombed every minute. They could engage on the ground south lebanon instead of bombed Beirut civilians far to the north. They could propose to stop fire enough to allow every civilians that don’t want to be catch in the middle of fight in the few days coming to evacuate. They could promise to the international community that as soon as their soldiers are returning they’ll stop the attacks (if no rockets are fired anymore by the other side, obvioulsy…)

    Israel is not trap in a corner here, many options are still on the table. Even peace. They usually behave way better than the terrorists of the other side, they could continue but bombing civilians from high altitude saying they’re trying to kill the terrorists that hide among civilians is not behaving well and, in fact, it’s losing moral ground…


    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 9:44 AM
    Comment #168483

    Jack,

    Hezbollah consistently violated the Geneva conventions and the human rights of the Lebanese by hiding among and posing as civilians. They invite and work to create maximum destruction among civilians. It is part of their strategy.

    Indeed. Why do we/Israel play according to this strategy then??? A better counter-strategy should be to return the civilians against Hezbollah. We (the international community) had a chance to do that right after the lebaneses opposition to Syrian presence in Lebanon, but we failed to help its government to do it…

    They shoot rockets from civilian neighborhoods or school yards. When the Israeli artillery hits the source of the rocket, it also hits these things. The fault lies with those purposely trying to create this situation - Hezbollah.

    Sure, but each time you play according to your enemy strategy you’re losing. Killing civilians while trying to kill the rocket source is making you more enemies than friends, don’t you think?
    Maybe it’s time to switch tactic, no?
    If it doesn’t work that great since 50+ years, why it would work magically now?

    Remember that when civilians die, Hezbollah celebrates. Civilian deaths to them are NOT regrettable collateral damage. For Hezbollah civilian deaths, both in Israel and among Muslims ARE the goal.

    And, by overeacting, Israel is helping them to achieve this same goal quicker. Talk about a good strategy…

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 9:54 AM
    Comment #168489

    Philippe,

    The true parallel in what happened to me is people who hate you for whatn you are and not who you are cannot be reasoned with. At that point your best defense is a swift counter-offensive that leaves your enemy and his allies doubting the intelligence of their attack.

    Also, would it have been better for Israel to use the same tactics as the terrorist? Kidnap and blackmail.

    Posted by: lllplus2 at July 18, 2006 10:16 AM
    Comment #168493

    Philippe

    There really is not much alternative. Hezbollah hopes Israeli bombs will kill Muslims. Hezbollah is most happy when those killed are women and children. They respect live less than we do and glorify both murder and suicide. That is why they shoot from the places they do. BUT the shooting is not harmless provocation. Hezbollah missiles are killing Israelis. The Lebanese authorities will not or cannot stop them. How could you turn the civilian population against Hezbollah? Remember that many of these people support the idea that Israel should be destroyed. In fact, the best way to make Hezbollah less popular might be to impose a cost on supporters.

    When your country was liberated from the Nazis, many civilians were killed. Ironically, the Nazis were not as ruthless as Hezbollah and generally did not place their installations in places to deliberately cause deaths among their own (or even occupied) civilian populations, but in war it happens. Should the allies not have fought the Nazis?

    Re switching tactics, the Israelis withdrew from Lebanon and Gaza in return for peace. Immediately the bad guys moved in. Hezbollah is not interested in any peace that does not include the destruction of Israel. It is not a matter of misunderstanding among good people.

    Posted by: Jack at July 18, 2006 10:22 AM
    Comment #168507

    Jack,

    When your country was liberated from the Nazis, many civilians were killed. Ironically, the Nazis were not as ruthless as Hezbollah and generally did not place their installations in places to deliberately cause deaths among their own (or even occupied) civilian populations, but in war it happens. Should the allies not have fought the Nazis?

    Nazis were the power occupying France, and an huge majority of french were against them. They indeed accept being bombed as collateral damage when an allied bomb were targetting clearly nazis.

    Here, Hezbollah may be the power party occupying Lebanon, but lebaneses have yet to oppose them. Meanwhile, they are not happy to be bombed as “collateral damage” when an Israeli bomb were targetting not so clearly hezbollah.

    The situation may looks similar but it’s different.

    Re switching tactics, the Israelis withdrew from Lebanon and Gaza in return for peace. Immediately the bad guys moved in.

    Lebanon was at peace with Israel far more than just a bunch of months like since Gaza israeli withdraw!

    Hezbollah is not interested in any peace that does not include the destruction of Israel. It is not a matter of misunderstanding among good people.

    Again, I’m not saying Israel should stop defending, I’m saying they do it the same way they tried since 50 years without any success. Why the result could be different this time???
    How their current moves are breaking the cycle?

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 18, 2006 11:17 AM
    Comment #168510

    Phillippe-

    They are not blanket bombing the entire city. Just strategic targets and they’ve been dropping leaflets for days telling everyone where and when they’d bomb those targets. Don’t get all carried away with your little “crack” jokes. Instead, try to see things in their correct context. You really don’t want me to start taking that tactic with you seeing as how you’ve given more than enough ammo in your “why can’t we all just get along” wishful thinking.

    For the last time, they are responding to state sponsered attacks by crippling the organizational abilities and mobility of Hezbollah. Citizens in Lebenon are well aware of the targets, and were given plenty of notice from every available outlet. The same curtesy was not extended for the Israelis. I never said every citizen evacuated, I DID say they were afforded the opportunity. Stop being French for a second, and read. Maybe even think before you lash out.

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 18, 2006 11:29 AM
    Comment #168514

    Philippe

    We are getting into the grim calculus of war. IF the people of the region support Hezbollah, then they can expect that if a war comes they will also be involved. If I invite the gunman to use my house as cover, I am putting my house at risk and I am no longer an innocent civilian.

    But I do think it is interesting that the Nazis were generally more concerned with not endangering “friendly” civilian populations in a war zone than is Hezbollah. That says a few things about the Nazis and a lot about Hezbollah.

    Posted by: Jack at July 18, 2006 11:39 AM
    Comment #168516

    Philippe,

    This is LLLplus2’s wife.

    Who are the police that Israel can run to? Putin doesn’t want to do anything and neither does China. No one else in the middle east will help Israel. The U.N. will take a month or so to get off their butt and finally make a resolution, by which time the soldiers will be dead. International peace keepers would come too late.

    Prisoners of war are taken after war starts, they are not the reason the war starts. These soldiers are kidnap victims not prisoners of war.

    Israel gave land and angered their own people and forced them out of their houses to make peace with those bastards. What is their thanks? They invade Israel’s land from land given back to them from Israel, KILL and KIDNAP their soldiers.

    They started the war. If they want it ended they should return the KIDNAP VICTIMS in unharmed condition.

    You say that war isn’t the answer. Well neither is this peace you are speaking of. They were at peace when this started. If the police would not be there to help for a month and really didn’t care would you leave your children to suffer and die in the mean time?

    What are we to do when the kidnappers don’t want to stop? Are we to let them kidnap some more people? Why do they refuse to give back the people and cease fire? Hezbollah refuses to stop unless Israel stops. Well they should stop when they started it.

    Posted by: lllplus2 at July 18, 2006 11:41 AM
    Comment #168524

    If we negotiate I do not want mush mouth speaking for the US.
    Bush cannot even order a Happy meal from McD’s without screwing it up.

    Posted by: Joe at July 18, 2006 11:57 AM
    Comment #168538

    Jack,
    Grim calculus? Hezbollah celebrates after killing a dozen soldiers and a dozen innocent civlians. Israel feels bad about killing over 200 innocent civilians.

    Well, never mind. What I really wonder is if anyone thinks Israel can succeed. Apparently they intend to destroy Hezbollah & their huge arsenal of rockets; that involves destroying their ability to resupply, which means the destruction of Lebanese infrastructure.

    Seems to me this course of action might buy a few months respite, but will be followed by even worse attacks. The causes of conflict remain unaddressed. Meanwhile, without its infrastructure, Lebanon will be in truly desperate straits.

    Does anyone believe the actions of Israel will have positive results?

    Posted by: phx8 at July 18, 2006 12:32 PM
    Comment #168540

    phx8

    I mean Hezbollah celebrates after the Israeli bombs kill Muslim civilians. Also one of Hezbollah’s goals is to provoke the deaths of Muslim civilians. They are trying to get these people killed.

    I do not see positive results from this action, but I also do not see that the Israelis have much choice. Hezbollah would continue to attack and provoke. If you ignore them, they do NOT go away. Ignoring Hezbollah is like ignoring cancer. An operation might be painful and bloody, but the alternative is death.

    Posted by: Jack at July 18, 2006 12:44 PM
    Comment #168557

    phx8-

    I think you are right in that it will get much worst before it ever gets better under the current circumstances. Israel really does need to show some resolve and use their military might to make a lasting statement. If they fail to achieve their military objectives (and that does NOT mean destoying cities for the sake of destroying cities as some frenchman has alluded, but rather, as jack said, to put Hezbollah into temperary dissaray), then they will have absolutely no chance of achieving any political objectives.

    I’m just very dissapointed in the muslum leadership in those surrounding states. They are so worried about keeping their local power bases intact, that they cannot come to any sort of general concensus about a course of action for the interests of self preservation other than inflicting as much random damage to Israeli citizens as possible. This is the glue that holds the region together: hatred of the zionists. Need power or glory? Kill Israelis. Need foreign support? Kill Israelis. Need popular support? Kill Israelis. The sad part is that now even westerners like Philippe are giving their support in response to what? Killing of Israelis.

    As long as the killing of innocent people gets results, it will be the number one play in the terrorist handbook. The solution is not to forgive and forget and hope every potential terrorist sees and respects us for it, never to be heard from again. The poor and needy with nothing to lose will continue to come out of the woodwork all over the world and especially the middle east despite who is in power, and history will be telling them that these abominable tactics can work for them too.

    In the end, these people are NOT killing so that they can end all killing. To assume this and then go negotiate with them under this premise, in response to one of their attacks, would be just like Chamberlain saying “peace in our time.” In other words, peace right now, and inspiration to all those would would destroy that very peace.

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 18, 2006 1:34 PM
    Comment #168605

    Israels tactics will not work. You do not get people to love you by bombing them! Any one of you who thinks this has no understanding of conflict. Did we like the Arab world more when they attacked us? Hell no!

    It is the attitude of many of you conservatives here that keeps us in conflict. It is impossible to get people to like you by fighting them. For instance, when we took our little escapade into the Phillippines back at the turn of the last century, we were only able to win by making them like us through public works and showing that we would benefit them. We finally realized it ws futile to ferociously kill insurgents because it was only creating more.

    That’s why Vietnam didn’t work, the moronic thought of kill, kill, kill ruled. We never stopped burning villiges or dropping Napalm, or the many other tons of explosive and it just made the opposition more determined than ever, while creating new opposition.

    These examples is why Israel will never be successful if it keeps on the same path. Really, how the hell do they expect to get support from Lebanese troops when they are attacking them too? So it’s either that they are idiots or they don’t want peace. Given what I’ve seen I’d have to say it’s the latter of the two. They have the ability to create friends in the region but refuse. Come on, they continuously refuse international mediation forces. Why? so they can wreak more havok, that’s why!

    I am entirely disgusted with their policies, and I’m disgusted with this arrogant idea that Muslims wan to kill them simply because they’re Jewish. Anyone who thinks that does not know crap about what goes on over there. Or just simply cannot see anything that goes on outside of their little box. Israel creates their own problems and enemies so they shouldn’t cry when people resist.

    Posted by: Metacom at July 18, 2006 4:04 PM
    Comment #168607

    Metacom

    I have talked to 100’s of people of Islamic faith, and they all to a t said the reason they exist in this world is to kill the Jews. That is directly from those Muslims that I spoke with. According to you I should call them liars? You need to study and investigate history and the hearts of people a whole lot more. It is no secret that Muslims hate the Jews just because they are Jews. Your statements appear to be anti-semitic.

    Posted by: tomh at July 18, 2006 4:20 PM
    Comment #168627

    Metacom-

    I can’t believe you just made Tomh the voice of reason. You said: “I’m disgusted with this arrogant idea that Muslims wan to kill them simply because they’re Jewish”.

    I have been to Egypt several times with a close friend who grew up and still has family there. They HATE jews. I’ll repeat, they HATE jews. Period.

    Please explain what “ouside the box” information you have that completely explains the actions of terrorists against Israel and has no premise of hate? You are so quick to condemn Israeli actions, but everything they’ve done is a response to actions much more inhumane.

    So are you retreating to the magical liberal land where poor and destitute populations are completely justified for all their wrongdoings while those with power are held accountable for everything? A system with no personal accountability? At what point are Israelis allowed to defend themselves then? When they get nuked?

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 18, 2006 5:11 PM
    Comment #168669

    Jack,
    I know the difference between an insurgency and terrorism. I was only referring to the insurgents. Sorry you mis-understood.

    Why do the insurgents want to fight? I honestly don’t knnow. I realize they think they will gain something, but frankly I’m not sure what they hope to do.

    BTW;
    I could have swore I saw Bush standing under a massive banner that read:
    MISSION ACCOMPOLISHED.

    Posted by: Linda H. at July 18, 2006 6:46 PM
    Comment #168695

    Linda H


    We just need to be careful not to mix them up. There are very few honorable insurgents in Iraq. They are not led by someone like Robert E. Lee or George Washington. A Baathist fighting to reestablish the preinvasion order is like the KKK or a a former Nazi. The foreign fighters are just plain evil. Those who want to create hate among the ethnic groups are nefarious. I don’t know how many “honest” insurgents that leaves

    But I am not impressed with them as a honorable force. I have met many insurgents who fought the Nazis, who were much more oppressive than anything we have imposed. They never resorted to the kinds of murder we see in Iraq on a daily basis. They were willing to die to protect their civilians populations; they were not willing to kill them in order to harass the occupiers.

    Posted by: Jack at July 18, 2006 8:57 PM
    Comment #168737

    That’s right. Why negotiate with people who will always hate us. There are two type of muslims: the ones that hate us and the few others who are afraid to speak out against them.
    This world is so frustrating, look at republicans and Rush Limbaugh, he is a drug addict but republicans see him as a saint or as a role model.

    Posted by: Truth hurts at July 19, 2006 12:26 AM
    Comment #168759

    LLLplus2’s wife,

    Who are the police that Israel can run to?

    International community. If they ask for help, I will bet they will get some.

    Putin doesn’t want to do anything and neither does China. No one else in the middle east will help Israel. The U.N. will take a month or so to get off their butt and finally make a resolution, by which time the soldiers will be dead. International peace keepers would come too late.

    How could one come “too” late in a conflict 50 years old (and counting) ???

    The kidnapped soldiers may be dead, indeed. They could be already, even. Nobody knows. But if Israel was only after getting back their soldiers alive, whatever the cost, they would have made others choices that the ones they’re making, right? Both you and me knows that these two soldiers death is a cost Israel is ready to pay…

    Prisoners of war are taken after war starts, they are not the reason the war starts. These soldiers are kidnap victims not prisoners of war.

    According to Israel, it seems that these two kidnaped soldiers (and the 7 killed) by Hezbollah is, actually, the reason the war against Lebanon just starts. Bombing airport, bridge, power plant, TV stations, roads, harbor and put a sea blocus does taste all like a war, doesn’t it? Sure Hezbollah start it all, using the South Lebanon as their base. But the conflict move from Hezbollah vs Israel to Israel vs Lebanon as a whole. Aka a war against a nation.

    And every negociator will tell you that if these soldiers lifes where that important to Israel, they’ll have get back alive already.

    Israel gave land and angered their own people and forced them out of their houses to make peace with those bastards. What is their thanks? They invade Israel’s land from land given back to them from Israel, KILL and KIDNAP their soldiers.

    Lebanon is not Gaza strip nor West Bank. I’m not talking about Gaza current crisis, which I think Hamas deserves and every palestinians who happens to elect them too. I’m talking about Israel war on Lebanon here. Lebanon was not given back by Israel. And never was an Israel land property.

    They started the war. If they want it ended they should return the KIDNAP VICTIMS in unharmed condition.

    The issue here is that Hezbollah (and Iran and Syria behind them) don’t want to end the war they obvioulsy start and can’t care less about these two soldiers.

    But, as a member of international community, I, for one, care about the VICTIMS (to reuse your enphased style) killed by this war, which so far have made more than hundred deads in lebanese civilians, a very few of them being from Hezbollah. Do you care about all VICTIMS or only the one that happened to be both KINAPED and soldiers?

    You say that war isn’t the answer. Well neither is this peace you are speaking of. They were at peace when this started. If the police would not be there to help for a month and really didn’t care would you leave your children to suffer and die in the mean time?

    Nope. But Israel don’t call the police, and had publicly and in several times refuse any formal international community proposition of a peacekeeper force. From memory, it’s an international peacekeeper force that indeed win the peace after the previous Lebano - Israel war around 1988.

    If you look at Middle East crisis in last 50 years, 20 years of (weak, sure, but still) peace between Lebanon and Israel is quite a very good result considering the Palestinian issue still unresolved since this period…

    What are we to do when the kidnappers don’t want to stop? Are we to let them kidnap some more people? Why do they refuse to give back the people and cease fire? Hezbollah refuses to stop unless Israel stops. Well they should stop when they started it.

    Yeah, again the childish “he did first”, “*you* stop first”, etc.
    That why I’m advocating than nor Israel nor its Arabs neighboors could solve the crisis here: none are neutral enough and have enough will to break this silly eye(s) for an eye cycle.

    BTW, in my “I’ll call the police” analogy, if I happen to refuse to call them and were planning instead to make justice myself, I hope someone will call the police or police will come on its own will. Because in whatever case, I need help.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 19, 2006 4:01 AM
    Comment #168764

    Kevin23,

    I never said every citizen evacuated, I DID say they were afforded the opportunity.

    Hum, no.
    What you said was:

    Most citizens have evacuated, so who needs power in the city besides the enemies?

    You didn’t claim they were afforded the opportunity to evacuate but claim instead they did in so massive way than nobody anymore needs power except the remaining people that you go even as tagging all of them as being “the” enemies.

    You got reactions to this (unbacked, BTW) first claim. Mine was one of them.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 19, 2006 5:20 AM
    Comment #168782

    Philippe,

    Who amongst the international community cared about the 1st soldier kidnapped in Gaza or the settler kidnapped or killed there? No one from the U.N. was rushing to get their soldier back or to negotiate any peace talk until Israel pulled out the big stick and started cracking heads. The french government maybe fine with their borders being invaded but that is just irresponsible leadership.

    Government is suppose to provide order not anarchy. Letting terrorist use your country as a base is just asking for trouble. When did the Lebonanese government ask the world community for help to get rid of hezbollah? I still haven’t heard them ask for help to get rid of them, so anything done from within their borders by people they still refuse to hold responsible is their fault.

    What happens when an American soldier is accused,not convicted mind you, of a war crime? That whole ungly American thing starts. Hezbollah and hamas brag about crimes against humanity, but apologist say we need to sit done and talk with them. Your mighty U.N. said to disarm them. If they were disarmed this wouldn’t be happening. Frenchies and all other terror apologist go to the middle east and back up the U.N. resolution befor you tell Israel to sit down for anyother resolutions. You should go disarm the terrorist groups and make sure they dtay disarmed. If you kept getting attacked from an island off your west coast how long would you wait for that island or the U.N. to control its citizens?

    Posted by: lllplus2 at July 19, 2006 9:15 AM
    Comment #168808

    lllplus2,

    Who amongst the international community cared about the 1st soldier kidnapped in Gaza or the settler kidnapped or killed there? No one from the U.N. was rushing to get their soldier back or to negotiate any peace talk until Israel pulled out the big stick and started cracking heads. The french government maybe fine with their borders being invaded but that is just irresponsible leadership.

    Indeed, nobody in the international community will rush to save two or three lives. And kidnapping three people over borders is not invading a nation. Stop kidding yourself.

    When did the Lebonanese government ask the world community for help to get rid of hezbollah?

    Since years, and in particular by previous Lebanon president and right after he was assassined. The end result was UN 1559 resolution.

    Your mighty U.N. said to disarm them. If they were disarmed this wouldn’t be happening. Frenchies and all other terror apologist go to the middle east and back up the U.N. resolution before you tell Israel to sit down for anyother resolutions.

    Thanks for crediting frenchies for the 1559 UN resolution, but that resolution was pushed by both France and US in september 2004. Two well known bad terror apologist nations, indeed.

    This resolution was never followed by action mostly because nobody want to commit the troops it needs, maybe because some of their troops are already busy otherwhere like Afghanistan and Iraq (for US)…

    You should go disarm the terrorist groups and make sure they stay disarmed. If you kept getting attacked from an island off your west coast how long would you wait for that island or the U.N. to control its citizens?

    I’ve already said that I 100% agree about disarming Hezbollah. What I disagree is that Israel bombs killing 300 civilians are NOT achieving this goal, contrary to what many here think.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 19, 2006 11:40 AM
    Comment #168848

    Where are the french troops? What has kept them from sending troops to disarm? They talk about solutions, but where is the blood and sweat to get it done?

    Would the french government be ok with say the ira coming into France to kidnap soldiers and running back home to brag about it?

    Posted by: lllplus2 at July 19, 2006 1:54 PM
    Comment #168863

    Philippe-

    If you read more than one line of my post you’ll see that the point was that there WAS warnings given to Lebenese citizens, and they CERTAINLY knew that Israel was under fire from their militias. So your knee jerk reaction put words in my mouth that were not written. So I stand by my words…I’m just fairly certain you didn’t give them much thought. Instead you are pretending that I said “Every last citizen of Lebenon has evacuated”. I said most have left…why? because they KNEW what was hapenning and what was going to happen. It is on the news every night. Meanwhile, the enemies DID stay, and Israel has great reason to ensure Hezbollah forces cannot use power, travel, organize, or attack. They ARE the enemy! How did I lie? Oh that’s right, you misunderstood. NOT the same thing there mister literalist. You REALLY don’t want me to start using literalist arguments against you…you’ll look completely foolish, trust me. And I will not have contributed anything to the debate. So I try not to do that. Don’t push it.

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 19, 2006 2:32 PM
    Comment #169070

    lllplus2,

    Where are the french troops? What has kept them from sending troops to disarm? They talk about solutions, but where is the blood and sweat to get it done?

    French troops contribute since years to UN’s FINUL troops in South Lebanon. And you could bet that as soon as UN give its go to send more, France will.
    We’re not the ones blocking international intervention here and AFAIK our rescue operation in process these days to evacuate the expats from Lebanon show at least we’re commit to sweat (and eventually blood as more than 450 french soldiers contribute to the operation) in this conflict resolution.

    Would the french government be ok with say the ira coming into France to kidnap soldiers and running back home to brag about it?

    Nope. But french government will not launch in the next hour a strong air strikes and a blocus of Irland either.
    I’m nor pro-hezbollah nor pro-israel, I’m against disproportionate and counterproductive usage of violence.
    Being hurt, even again and again and again by someone doesn’t get you the right to hit harder everyone on sigh near him, sorry.

    PS: IRA disarmed recently, IIRC.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 20, 2006 5:36 AM
    Comment #169135

    Kevin23,

    you are pretending that I said “Every last citizen of Lebenon has evacuated”. I said most have left…

    I stand corrected. My first post reacting to your claim is indeed saying “every”, not “most”.

    why? because they KNEW what was hapenning and what was going to happen. It is on the news every night.

    Can you tell us where civilians could have flee for their safety when every part, not only Lebanon borders, are under attack, and pretty much every roads between south and the rest of Lebanon are unpraticable since days? Did you catch on the news that any vehicule, yes cars too, are systematically stroke by Israel F16? How F16 pilots could know who’s in those cars? How civilians in south lebanon are supposed to evacuate thousand kilometers to the north without a car? By feets???

    How one could expect that most civilians in south lebanon could have successfully evacuate in such conditions? Why many foreigners are still locked in south lebanon, as at Tyr’s hotel under FUNIL “protection”, waiting for an UN boat to eventually come, if they could have evacuate as you claim they could and should have days before? If rich foreigners can’t, it’s telling for far more poor south lebanese, isn’t it?

    Even the Beyrut’s Christian zone was bombed last night. And no one could think Hezbollah could be friendly hidding there. No one who remember the 1972-1988 Lebanon inter-communities war…

    Evacuate is a dead end when there is no safe area you could move to.

    Claiming that nobody needs anymore the power plant energy in Lebanon except Hezbollah is bullshit.

    You REALLY don’t want me to start using literalist arguments against you…you’ll look completely foolish, trust me.

    Both english not being my native language and being french, I’m used to make myself look completely foolish sometimes. No big deal. It’s even healthy, like a wakeup call.

    Thanks for call, so.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 20, 2006 11:40 AM
    Comment #169159

    “Can you tell us where civilians could have flee for their safety when every part, not only Lebanon borders, are under attack, and pretty much every roads between south and the rest of Lebanon are unpraticable since days? Did you catch on the news that any vehicule, yes cars too, are systematically stroke by Israel F16? How F16 pilots could know who’s in those cars? How civilians in south lebanon are supposed to evacuate thousand kilometers to the north without a car? By feets???”

    Again, you know nothing about why Israel targets those cars. Maybe they know something. Either way, I never said they need to flee by foot a thousand miles. They just follow the hoards of people going to the mountains…just like they did during the Civil War. I watch BBC news and the people would immediately say “I guess its back to the countryside until this is over”. They know the routine. The problem is that you and I do not, so you assume they don’t either.

    Now I don’t want to sound cold…I feel for the evacuated and displaced. They just want to live their lives. But again, they were living in a hotbed of terrorism…they can’t expect life to be good and uninterupted when acts of war are being committed by those you’ve elected. Sad state of affairs to be sure, but at least they had warning.

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 20, 2006 12:28 PM
    Comment #169416

    Kevin23,

    Again, you know nothing about why Israel targets those cars.

    Well, I guess we could both agree they’re not targets for F16s self-defense, right?

    They know the routine. The problem is that you and I do not, so you assume they don’t either.

    No, I’m assuming being warned doesn’t protect you from being killed by weapons. I’m assuming that the people actually firing these weapons can’t have NO responsability of their acts whatever justification they could bring.

    Huge collateral damage among lebanese civilians is easily explain by Hezbollah using them as human shield.
    It does NOT give Israel an excuse to keep fire at these same shield.

    But again, they were living in a hotbed of terrorism…they can’t expect life to be good and uninterupted when acts of war are being committed by those you’ve elected.

    Hezbollah and resistance parties are far from being the majority in Lebanon executive (2 ministers are pro-Hezbollah) and legislative (on 128 seats, only 35 are pro-syrian) branches.
    These hezbollah attacks was never approved by any of these branches. Beside, the internationl community never answer successfully to Lebanon democratically elected government call for help in disarming Hezbollah. Lebanese pay also our (international community) failure right now.

    Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at July 21, 2006 6:59 AM
    Comment #169490

    I think that Lebanon are implicit in Hezbollah lobbing rockets and in the capture of Israeli soldiers. They did nothing to prevent it. Now Israel are threatening to invade they say they will deploy their army to defend their territory. Why didn’t they deploy their army to prevent these Hezbollah terrorists from doing things in the first place. I’m afraid they got what they deserved. They washed their hands and let Hezbollah do their thing. They sowed the wind and now they are reaping the whirlwind.

    Posted by: Pidgie at July 21, 2006 12:21 PM
    Comment #169517

    So Philippe,

    We are not allowed to fire at enemy targets under what cicumstances exactly? Tell me what rule you would have all military personnel obey during a battle that would allow them to easily distinguish when they are, and when they are not allowed to fire. Seems to me that by making any rule, you are giving your own cause a severe disadvantage, and the enemy a clear working strategy.

    Where is that line drawn, and how are we supposed to be able to tell? No, I refuse to weaken myself to help the enemy. Instead, I’ll tell everyone who I’m going after and then do it. I’m very sorry that they use human shields, but those sheilds have minds of their own, and they should use them more couragiously to stand up to those who would diminish their lives. It is not up to Israel to be police. They need to ensure their security first, then they will worry about the long term stability of their neighbors. If they do not, then you can bash them.

    Posted by: Kevin23 at July 21, 2006 2:06 PM
    Comment #239794

    This price of gas ‘crap’ needs to end!
    Why can’t it get closer to what we used to pay?
    These ‘gas pirates’ need to get over this garbage.
    we have been paying way too much for too long now,and it needs to end. Too bad to the ones that are making way too much because of how we are now,
    after all they may have ‘reveled’ in this for too long already. ‘They’ are the ones that now, love how the price is!!!!!

    Posted by: Albert Cantin at December 1, 2007 5:42 PM
    Comment #315286

    Sounds just like bullshit to me.

    The unjust reparitions following the Armistice of WWI caused WWII.

    This is the kind of subterfuge and Militaristic Industrial Complex crap that eat up tax monies and the welfare of people just to profit the imperialist Fascist corporate fascists.

    Peddle that from your pulpits of hypocrisy!!!!

    Posted by: Radio UpNorth at December 15, 2010 9:16 PM
    Post a comment