Thing is, the vast, VAST majority of the youth out there want to go fight Israel. While the older generations want peace, the majority opinion across lines is, "Israel should just give the Palestinians everything they have been asking for, leave the stolen land and that will bring peace."
Well, on several levels we can see how that won't work; first of all, if the Palestinians didn't accept the deal at Oslo why should anyone believe they will negotiate in good faith now? Second of all Israel will not give on several of the most crucial issues (and, mostly, for good reason). So it is basically an impasse, and the Arab side has basically said "our way or the highway."
I don't see the violence as a productive means to change "the Arab street", but I am not sure that is a realistic goal; they do not want to be changed and Israel ignites their fury by their mere existence. Furthermore, as long as there is a fight to eliminate or at least defeat Israel decisively there will be jihadis ready to fight. The miltancy has only grown since the Iranian revolution over 20 years ago, I don't see how Israel can "wait it out".
Btw, I don't want anyone to misunderstand me - I don't want war. I just don't see any other option.
well, I do not think that we will give 30% of our aid budget to a country that is not a close ally.
and I also think that, while you may not grasp them[/b] , the benefits are not intangible.
well, why don't you bama it down for me?
what are they?
thank you.
israel is on the cutting edge of technological discoveries...it ranks 3rd in military technological exports. the US relies on israel for the technology it uses in iraq right now.
I hear you in saying that you don't think there are too many options out there besides war.
Question is: how far does this spread? And what's the potential outcomes? I'm not asking this as a challenge - I genuinely am trying to figure out how bad this is going to get. And that "bad" = "very bad."
But what does that have to do with Hezbollah? Their pandering to the Palestian cause seems to be just lip service though there might be some funding thrown in, but ultimately, their mission, as an organization, isn't about Palestinian sovereignty.
My comments weren't about Hezbollah, but about the conflict in general.
Hezbollah was original formed in 1982 after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. They were mostly poor Shiite who were inspired by the Iranian revolution and wanted to fight against the Israeli invaders. Their first two goals were to liberate their country from the Israelies and form an Islamic government. Before the invasion, the Shiites were at the bottom of Lebanese society which was ruled by a Francophile Christian elite who looked down on all Muslims, but especially the Shiite. They got a lot of support from Iran, and Syria.
They took credit for Israel leaving Southern Lebanon, and have since then participated in Lebanese elections. They actually seem to be adapting quite well to parliamentary democracy. They basically run southern Lebanon, enforce their version of Islamic law, have a vast network of social services, run their own TV and radio stations, and have a large standing militia of their own. They still feel like fighting Israel is one of their prime goals. It seems like this recent attack and kidnapping of Israeli soldiers was a way to show support for the Palestinians because no one else was really doing anything. They most likely checked with Iran before they did it. I'm not sure whether Iran told them to do it though. Israel now seems to want to try to shut them down by forcing the Lebanese government to move into Southern Lebanon. Is that gonna happen? I don't know. I would doubt it. Israel will probably blow shit up for a little while longer and then international pressure is going to force them to back off and some kind of diplomacy will happen.
Thing is, the vast, VAST majority of the youth out there want to go fight Israel. While the older generations want peace, the majority opinion across lines is, "Israel should just give the Palestinians everything they have been asking for, leave the stolen land and that will bring peace."
Well, on several levels we can see how that won't work; first of all, if the Palestinians didn't accept the deal at Oslo why should anyone believe they will negotiate in good faith now? Second of all Israel will not give on several of the most crucial issues (and, mostly, for good reason). So it is basically an impasse, and the Arab side has basically said "our way or the highway."
I don't see the violence as a productive means to change "the Arab street", but I am not sure that is a realistic goal; they do not want to be changed and Israel ignites their fury by their mere existence. Furthermore, as long as there is a fight to eliminate or at least defeat Israel decisively there will be jihadis ready to fight. The miltancy has only grown since the Iranian revolution over 20 years ago, I don't see how Israel can "wait it out".
Btw, I don't want anyone to misunderstand me - I don't want war. I just don't see any other option.
CAIRO, Egypt - One of the most popular graffiti tags here is roughly translated, as "It's our mosque, not their Temple." You can find these words emblazoned on not only concrete walls of tenements, but also under framed pictures of al Aqsa Mosque in the offices of newspaper editors, politicians and lawyers. I first noticed it at the lobby of Cairo's medical syndicate, the Egyptian equivalent of the American Medical Association.
This slogan is a way to understand Arab public opinion about the latest war in Lebanon and Gaza. There is no Jewish claim to the remains of the second temple on the base of the Temple Mount. There is only the mosque where Mohammed ascended to heaven for a brief visit.
There is no equivalent academic movement in the Arab world similar to the Israeli post-Zionists of the 1990s, who sifted through Israeli archives to dissent, dubiously at times, from what they saw as the myths of their state's founding. There are no Arab equivalents of the Israeli B'tselem, who spend their hours documenting the plight of Palestinians under occupation. There are not even programs at universities to study the enemy, to understand Israeli society, to learn Hebrew. There is only this abstract noun - the Zionist entity, populated by abstractions - the Jews.
From this well of ignorance, slanders and lies flourish. The Holocaust? It never happened, a myth of the Jew-run press. Israeli scientists invented AIDS. Israelis poison Palestinian drinking water. Hezbollah is still resisting Jewish occupation, even though it celebrates how their arms drove Israeli occupiers out of southern Lebanon in 2000.
How can anyone be surprised that in this environment, when Arabs are given an electoral choice, pluralities and majorities will vote for parties that seek the destruction of the enemy abstraction? There was no serious coverage in the Arab press of Israel's withdrawal last summer from Gaza, only the line about occupation. While Israelis may have abandoned the dream of a greater Israel extending to Gaza and the West Bank, most Arabs struggle for Jerusalem.
The ruling regimes in the Middle East help proliferate this ignorance. The Saudi royal family funds the publishing house that prints Arabic translations of the old Russian forgery, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Ramadan miniseries produced in Syria and Lebanon depict the practice of rabbis using the blood of gentile children to make Matzoh. When an Egyptian playwright, Ali Salem, visited Israel in 1994 and published a book about his travels, not an apology, just an account of particulars of his time in Egypt's northern neighbor, he was kicked out of the writer's syndicate and suffered the brunt of a rumor campaign led by the state-funded press. From a professional perspective he was ruined.
The consensus in America and Europe now is that free elections in the Middle East will empower those openly seeking the elimination of Israel. This is what the sovereign families prefer. Hence the mediocre strong men and sultans of the Arab world become indispensable to the western powers that seek nothing more than stability and oil. Our diplomats sigh in relief when they read comments from anonymous members of the Saudi royal family who criticize Hezbollah. They fret when they see the Arab reporters screaming at the Arab League's secretary general for not promising Arab armies will save Lebanon from the latest Zionist invasion.
But despotism also has its costs. The corollaries of tyranny - corruption and a suffocation of rights - also drive young men to grow beards the size of their fists, read and re-read passages of the Koran and embrace the nihilism of Saudi-exported Islam. The fruits of western prosperity - iPods, cars, clothes - are not on offer to even the brightest Arabs, where almost all the spoils of the state are hoarded for friends and family of the rulers. Most college graduates in Egypt today cannot afford a furnished apartment. While there is a liberal opposition in the Middle East, its agenda is rendered moot when it sees Beirut burning and is told that at any moment, Cairo or Amman could be next.
So with no good options for a future, more and more young, educated men choose to destroy the source of temptation and reject all of the things they wanted. The jihad movement is unbending in its opposition to the West and Israel. Like the petty dictators that so often throw them in torture rooms and jail cells, the death Sheikhs benefit from the West's reliance on these jailers.
The Bush administration has labored under the illusion that the region's royal families understand this dangerous cycle and will voluntarily reform before it tips out of control. It would be nice to believe. But when reality intrudes, as it is intruding now, our ambassadors cannot be bothered to discuss the latest press laws or jailing of protestors.
No, there is peace that must be processed. If only we could get Israel talking with the right Arab leaders to extinguish the latest fire from the fundamentalists. Meanwhile, most Arabs see only a war for a mosque on a mountain and no evidence there was ever a Temple there before it.
July 17, 2006 Edition > Section: Opinion > Printer-Friendly Version
Plus, out of all those countries Guzzo listed the Palestinians, Syria, and Iran are the only countries in the region still hostile towards Israel. Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, the Saudis, etc. are not going to go to war with Israel any time soon. They'll give lip service to the Palestinians, and give them some money, but the governments would never go for a war.
although there are "good relations" between Israel and some of the countries the middle east the truth is this:
True, but it belies the overall tone of your post, which is that Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and others are not involved in the conflict at all; in fact, they are financially supportive of the groups at war with Israel.
and as far as being technologically advanced and having nuclear capabilities no one in the world is thinking Israel is simply going to squash Hezbollah with a nuke. So far, Israel has maintained a safety line, only crossing into Lebanon for a while to quell any Hezbollah forces directly on the border. Of course they have the ability to go over with ground troops and do what they want to do but there is a standard that Israel is held to so they simply have to grin and bear attacks on Haifa that are launching from just 10 miles north of their border with the worry of further Syrian and Iranian influence and force joining in the battle.
This is not a high-tech war, at least not yet. this is a war of lobbing missles and threatening ground troops. It's also a war where one side is trying to defend its right to existance while the other side (and its BFF's) are hoping for the total destruction not only of Israel but of the Jewish people.
I think this younger generation coming up on the Palestinian side is very radicalized and that means violence. They are just so factionalized you can't do anything with them right now.[/b]
How's about Israel tells them if they don't stop the violence and terrorism in 72 hours they'll wipe them off the map......and if they call Israel's bluff they're goners.....all of 'em.....bye bye.
And if any country's government can't control the terrorists within it's borders they will suffer too.......sad, but simple and true.
Either that or Israel continues to tolerate 1,000's of missile attacks, kidnappings and suicide bombings....who here would do that???? I know I wouldn't.
Anyone who's raised children knows that threatening a punishment without following through is a waste of time.
Can anyone give me ANY reasonable & justified reason for violence towards Israel AFTER their withdrawal from Gaza??
From the L.A. Times on what Israel's goals might be in this current flare up:
NEWS ANALYSIS Kidnappings open door for Israel to hunt militants Intensity of response a plan to push out Hezbollah, Hamas - Laura King, Los Angeles Times Monday, July 17, 2006
(07-17) 04:00 PDT Jerusalem -- What began as a pair of hasty military incursions intended to get back captured Israeli soldiers has evolved with breathtaking swiftness into a full-blown campaign by Israel against two of its bitterest enemies, the Islamist groups Hezbollah and Hamas.
Surprised twice by small-scale border raids less than three weeks apart, Israeli leaders have made a deliberate policy decision to seize the opportunity -- some call it a pretext -- to mount simultaneous large-scale offensives. The goal of each operation is to smash a guerrilla organization that is also deeply entrenched in the business of governance.
In both instances, Israeli and outside analysts say, Israel has embarked on a risky strategy that has two major elements: the use of overwhelming military force to reduce the opponent's power coupled with strikes that hurt the wider civilian economies and populations of Gaza and Lebanon. The aim of the second part of the strategy is to put pressure on more moderate elements of the Palestinian and Lebanese governments to strip Hamas and Hezbollah of some of their influence and prestige.
In Gaza, the fighting had gone for roughly a week before it became clear that the goal of the military operation had widened well beyond the efforts to stop Hamas from lobbing crude Kassam rockets into southern Israel and to free Cpl. Gilad Shalit, the captured 19-year-old tank gunner.
Soon after the offensive began, commentator Roni Shaked wrote in the Yediot Ahronot newspaper that Israel had a golden opportunity. Whether or not the operation succeeded in freeing Shalit, "by crushing the Hamas regime, Israel can accomplish a much greater strategic step, which could have a profound effect on the entire region," he wrote.
Within days, Israeli policymakers were speaking openly of their hopes to use the confrontation to drive Hamas from power.
Israeli leaders were faster to see the opportunity in Lebanon.
Hamas only has been in power in the Palestinian territories since January. Hezbollah has dominated southern Lebanon for years, and the Israeli army has long worked on plans for striking it if the right moment presented itself.
Only hours after Hezbollah fighters raided across the border last Wednesday, killing eight Israeli soldiers and capturing two, Israeli leaders began to talk of dealing the militant movement a devastating blow from which it could recover neither politically nor militarily.
From across the Israeli political spectrum, such declarations are now being made daily.
"We must eliminate, destroy and crush all of Hezbollah's infrastructure," lawmaker Eli Yishai of the religious Shas party said Sunday.
"We intend to break this organization," said Defense Minister Amir Peretz, of the left-leaning Labor Party.
But the policy carries several risks. Israel is uneasily aware that Hamas and Hezbollah now find themselves on common ground -- squarely in Israel's gun sights. That may strengthen ties between the two groups, which, despite common opposition to Israel, have previously been rivals. A second major risk involves the deaths and injuries to civilians.
Israel's attacks in Lebanon and Gaza have backed elected leaders in both venues into a corner: Whatever their true feelings about the militants' actions, they risk being seen as dupes of Israel if they speak out against Hezbollah or Hamas.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas saw his Fatah party lose the legislative election to Hamas in January and has watched running gunbattles between Fatah and Hamas militants. He would like nothing better than to see Hamas dislodged from its ruling perch.
But in recent days, he has been forced to issue one statement after another in support of Hamas after Israel rounded up dozens of the group's officials, bombed its government ministries and threatened to assassinate its leaders.
In Lebanon, where Hezbollah is part of a weak and divided government, the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, made the point clear to the Lebanese people in a fiery speech last week: Either follow him into battle or be seen as bowing down to Israel.
The Lebanese may relish neither choice, but the glue of solidarity against an old enemy and the sense of national suffering at Israel's hands may strengthen Hezbollah, at least in the short term, many analysts say.
In Israel, even some who have devoted their professional lives to fighting one or another of the Islamist movements acknowledge a third risk -- that Israel may overreach. The nation's leaders should coolly assess their expectations of what might be achieved by measures such as killing the leaders of Hamas or Hezbollah, these analysts say.
Others believe that with the violence increasing, the coming days could leave both sides feeling they have managed to make their point -- if only by having inflicted painful blows on the other.
"Both sides opened with their surprises, recovered and retaliated," said Eitan Ben-Eliyahu, a former Israeli air force commander. "The end always takes longer than the beginning. But once stabilization generates a feeling of satiation and exhaustion, perhaps international involvement will begin, and after this, diplomatic contacts."
and as far as being technologically advanced and having nuclear capabilities no one in the world is thinking Israel is simply going to squash Hezbollah with a nuke. So far, Israel has maintained a safety line, only crossing into Lebanon for a while to quell any Hezbollah forces directly on the border. Of course they have the ability to go over with ground troops and do what they want to do but there is a standard that Israel is held to so they simply have to grin and bear attacks on Haifa that are launching from just 10 miles north of their border with the worry of further Syrian and Iranian influence and force joining in the battle.
This is not a high-tech war, at least not yet. this is a war of lobbing missles and threatening ground troops. It's also a war where one side is trying to defend its right to existance while the other side (and its BFF's) are hoping for the total destruction not only of Israel but of the Jewish people.
You're changing topics. Your original post was about how Israel can't be considered a super power and how it's surrounded by millions of hostile Arabs and countries. My post was saying most of those countries aren't really that hosilte and that Israel would kick their ass anyways if any of them wanted some, which they don't.
Either that or Israel continues to tolerate 1,000's of missile attacks, kidnappings and suicide bombings....who here would do that???? I know I wouldn't.
Sure but Rock, I get the feeling that if it were up to you, you would have simply nuked the whole Middle East just to be thorough about it.
Either that or Israel continues to tolerate 1,000's of missile attacks, kidnappings and suicide bombings....who here would do that???? I know I wouldn't.
Sure but Rock, I get the feeling that if it were up to you, you would have simply nuked the whole Middle East just to be thorough about it.
That's an inaccurate feeling.
Any country that has radicalized and violent citizens who export their violence and the Government of said country can't control or stop them, I'm for eliminating....one way or another.
and as far as being technologically advanced and having nuclear capabilities no one in the world is thinking Israel is simply going to squash Hezbollah with a nuke. So far, Israel has maintained a safety line, only crossing into Lebanon for a while to quell any Hezbollah forces directly on the border. Of course they have the ability to go over with ground troops and do what they want to do but there is a standard that Israel is held to so they simply have to grin and bear attacks on Haifa that are launching from just 10 miles north of their border with the worry of further Syrian and Iranian influence and force joining in the battle.
This is not a high-tech war, at least not yet. this is a war of lobbing missles and threatening ground troops. It's also a war where one side is trying to defend its right to existance while the other side (and its BFF's) are hoping for the total destruction not only of Israel but of the Jewish people.
You're changing topics. Your original post was about how Israel can't be considered a super power and how it's surrounded by millions of hostile Arabs and countries. My post was saying most of those countries aren't really that hosilte and that Israel would kick their ass anyways if any of them wanted some, which they don't.
but they do want some. They just choose to go ahead and have groups fight battles that are backed by governments.
How many superpowers are checked by the world while being attacked by a force less than 20 miles from their border? Israel is simply not large enough to be deemed a superpower. They are dependent on US and world support in order to simply exist.
So to get right down to it, can anyone come up with a reason why Israel shouldn't lay waste to the openly hostile countries?
Or can anyone recommend a viable alternative?
1) I don't think Israel could do it without getting even more shit from the international community, and even in the end the U.S.
2) I don't think Israel wants to overthrow Assad in Syria because something worse could come out of it. See Iraq.
3) In the end, you're still going to have a bunch of pissed off Arabs. And the Palestinians are still going to be lobbing missiles at Israel.
4) Hezbollah and Hamas are not state entities. Showing overwhelming military force is something they already know about. Hezbollah was created BECAUSE Israel invaded Lebanon.
What that LA Times article I just posted seems to be saying is that Israel is hoping that Lebanon can crack down on Hezbollah and that the Israeli incursion into Gaza can uproot Hamas. I'm not holding my breath for either of those to actually happen. At the same time, I'm don't think this will actually escalate.
Like I said before, until the Palestinians get their shit together I think you're going to see this as the status quo. Israel will be withdrawing behind the wall. Palestinians will shoot at them every now and then, and then start yelling and shooting at each other. Every now and then Israel will have enough of it and go blow shit up, but then things will go back to the uneasy way it was before.
So to get right down to it, can anyone come up with a reason why the USA shouldn't lay waste to the openly hostile countries?
Or can anyone recommend a viable alternative?
Pulling out of settlements was a move in the right direction. But they expected Palestinians to just roll over like they all won the lottery.
I'm with you. Israel should just go ahead and lay waste to all of their neighbors., but I seriously don't think they have the balls. However, if we pull our aid they'd have to pull their Sampson Option and you'd def get some waste laid.
I like how all ya'll Bush/Rummy/Cheney haters become hawks when Israel gets checked. Why don't you pack your bags and head over? They need you. The Arabs are breeding like flies.
Frank, you seem like a smart guy but these little quips are all pretty stupid. I think you need to take a breath and allow people to have differences of opinion from you.
To reference your post earlier, you are definitely coming off ignorant, misinformed, and while I won't go so far as to call you an anti-semite your blind dislike for Israel is a bit unsettling.
and as far as being technologically advanced and having nuclear capabilities no one in the world is thinking Israel is simply going to squash Hezbollah with a nuke. So far, Israel has maintained a safety line, only crossing into Lebanon for a while to quell any Hezbollah forces directly on the border. Of course they have the ability to go over with ground troops and do what they want to do but there is a standard that Israel is held to so they simply have to grin and bear attacks on Haifa that are launching from just 10 miles north of their border with the worry of further Syrian and Iranian influence and force joining in the battle.
This is not a high-tech war, at least not yet. this is a war of lobbing missles and threatening ground troops. It's also a war where one side is trying to defend its right to existance while the other side (and its BFF's) are hoping for the total destruction not only of Israel but of the Jewish people.
You're changing topics. Your original post was about how Israel can't be considered a super power and how it's surrounded by millions of hostile Arabs and countries. My post was saying most of those countries aren't really that hosilte and that Israel would kick their ass anyways if any of them wanted some, which they don't.
but they do want some. They just choose to go ahead and have groups fight battles that are backed by governments.
How many superpowers are checked by the world while being attacked by a force less than 20 miles from their border? Israel is simply not large enough to be deemed a superpower. They are dependent on US and world support in order to simply exist.
They're not a superpower but they are the dominant military force in the region. And I don't think the Arab governments are really plotting the destruction of Israel and just using proxies to get it done. (Well maybe Syria is, but they've always been the most militant and obstructionist government out of Israel's neighbors). Is Mubarak in Egypt really plotting? Is King Hussein in Jordan really plotting? I think the Saudis are more worried about Iraq and Iran to be really plotting about Israel. etc. etc. And if you really want to get down to it, Arab governments give money to the Palestinians, but the "Arab street" is going to Iraq to go fight America right now.
I like how all ya'll Bush/Rummy/Cheney haters become hawks when Israel gets checked. Why don't you pack your bags and head over? They need you. The Arabs are breeding like flies.
Either that or Israel continues to tolerate 1,000's of missile attacks, kidnappings and suicide bombings....who here would do that???? I know I wouldn't.
Sure but Rock, I get the feeling that if it were up to you, you would have simply nuked the whole Middle East just to be thorough about it.
That's an inaccurate feeling.
Any country that has radicalized and violent citizens who export their violence and the Government of said country can't control or stop them, I'm for eliminating....one way or another.
Eliminating the country? What does that mean? Regime change? We can see how beautifully that's gone in Iraq so far. Or do you just mean destroying the entire country and then annexing it under their control, like what the U.S. did to the Philippines?
"Eliminating" Lebanon would serve nobody. Call me crazy, but wouldn't a full-scale offensive on Lebanon by Israel almost certainly pull Syria into war, not to mention whatever Iran would want to do? Would Israel then have to eliminate those countries too?
Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't have to apply to just nuclear detente.
Back to Lebanon: What allows Hezbollah to operate with impunity is not just their military power but the fact that the Lebanese got out of a civil war not that long ago. I don't think they're exactly chomping at the bit to jump into another one. Ultimately, it may prove to be necessary but the point I'm making is that you can't equate Lebanon = Hezbollah as if they are one and same any more than (to go back to a previous example) Hamas can be said to claim even the majority of Palestinians in terms of desiring endless war with Israel. The attitudes might be more widely spread but POLICY isn't. I think most Lebanese would be very happy to enjoy a peaceful relationship alongside Israel.
Just to be clear, I also agree that it's also a mistake to treat Hezbollah as a rogue militia operating fully outside of national governemnt. They're not like the Minutemen hanging out in Arizona.
Back to Lebanon: What allows Hezbollah to operate with impunity is not just their military power but the fact that the Lebanese got out of a civil war not that long ago. I don't think they're exactly chomping at the bit to jump into another one. Ultimately, it may prove to be necessary but the point I'm making is that you can't equate Lebanon = Hezbollah as if they are one and same any more than (to go back to a previous example) Hamas can be said to claim even the majority of Palestinians in terms of desiring endless war with Israel. The attitudes might be more widely spread but POLICY isn't. I think most Lebanese would be very happy to enjoy a peaceful relationship alongside Israel.
Just to be clear, I also agree that it's also a mistake to treat Hezbollah as a rogue militia operating fully outside of national governemnt. They're not like the Minutemen hanging out in Arizona.
Frank, you seem like a smart guy but these little quips are all pretty stupid. I think you need to take a breath and allow people to have differences of opinion from you.
To reference your post earlier, you are definitely coming off ignorant, misinformed, and while I won't go so far as to call you an anti-semite your blind dislike for Israel is a bit unsettling.
You're talking about why Israel shouldn't lay waste to Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia? Come on, that's fucking STOOOOOPID!
And I ask you for some tangible benefits to our massive foreign aid expenditures to Israel and someone has to jump in for you and say "military technology". Please.
I have issues with Israel's foreign policy to the same degree that I have issues with America's. So I must hate America too?
No Frank, what's stupid is not reading posts thoroughly. My question was hypothetical, meant to further explore the question I keep asking - what can possibly be done here? You also failed to note that I said "those hostile nations" directly after a post in which I agreed that Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Egypt are not hostile nations.
I don't feel that it's my duty to explain the benefits of giving aid to Israel. If you're so thick (or conversely, so hostile to Israel) that you need me to explain it to you then it is probably a waste of both of our time.
Your issue with Israel is that it exists. That is clear. You and I will probably not see eye to eye on this, yet you're the one that keeps yapping. I'm not going to give you any more attention, so please move on.
I like how all ya'll Bush/Rummy/Cheney haters become hawks when Israel gets checked. Why don't you pack your bags and head over? They need you. The Arabs are breeding like flies.
ahhhhhhh the last defense, "why don't you go!"
frank with all due respect, you are an ass
you're right that was lame. but otherwise...what due respect? why are people saying, oh Frank, "no offense, you're cool, we like you but...you are and ass etc."
Is what I'm saying really that bad? I haven't called for laying waste to Syria's enemies?
And to just add on to one of my last posts. People's gut reactions to an attack is usually to hit back even harder. That's been expressed here several times. When it comes to the Palestinians however, there is no military deterrent, nor solution to them shooting missiles. These are homemade missiles produced in small factories largely in Gaza from what I've heard. They are set up and then left and launched by remote control. There is nothing then to strike back at really unless Israel by pure chance sees some guys setting up one of these launchers.
If you want to get all philosophical about it, war is only an extension of politics anyways, and in Israel's case they're fucked because they have all the military force, but they have no one to negotiate with on the Palestinian side to do the politics part of that equation.
Going to war with Syria, or Lebanon and whoever is not going to change that. The Palestinians are the ones who need to make peace, but they don't want to right now, and don't even have any kind of coherent leadership if they did. I don't think any kind of military force is going to change that amongst them right now.
Comments
Well, on several levels we can see how that won't work; first of all, if the Palestinians didn't accept the deal at Oslo why should anyone believe they will negotiate in good faith now? Second of all Israel will not give on several of the most crucial issues (and, mostly, for good reason). So it is basically an impasse, and the Arab side has basically said "our way or the highway."
I don't see the violence as a productive means to change "the Arab street", but I am not sure that is a realistic goal; they do not want to be changed and Israel ignites their fury by their mere existence. Furthermore, as long as there is a fight to eliminate or at least defeat Israel decisively there will be jihadis ready to fight. The miltancy has only grown since the Iranian revolution over 20 years ago, I don't see how Israel can "wait it out".
Btw, I don't want anyone to misunderstand me - I don't want war. I just don't see any other option.
israel is on the cutting edge of technological discoveries...it ranks 3rd in military technological exports. the US relies on israel for the technology it uses in iraq right now.
I hear you in saying that you don't think there are too many options out there besides war.
Question is: how far does this spread? And what's the potential outcomes? I'm not asking this as a challenge - I genuinely am trying to figure out how bad this is going to get. And that "bad" = "very bad."
My comments weren't about Hezbollah, but about the conflict in general.
Hezbollah was original formed in 1982 after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. They were mostly poor Shiite who were inspired by the Iranian revolution and wanted to fight against the Israeli invaders. Their first two goals were to liberate their country from the Israelies and form an Islamic government. Before the invasion, the Shiites were at the bottom of Lebanese society which was ruled by a Francophile Christian elite who looked down on all Muslims, but especially the Shiite. They got a lot of support from Iran, and Syria.
They took credit for Israel leaving Southern Lebanon, and have since then participated in Lebanese elections. They actually seem to be adapting quite well to parliamentary democracy. They basically run southern Lebanon, enforce their version of Islamic law, have a vast network of social services, run their own TV and radio stations, and have a large standing militia of their own. They still feel like fighting Israel is one of their prime goals. It seems like this recent attack and kidnapping of Israeli soldiers was a way to show support for the Palestinians because no one else was really doing anything. They most likely checked with Iran before they did it. I'm not sure whether Iran told them to do it though. Israel now seems to want to try to shut them down by forcing the Lebanese government to move into Southern Lebanon. Is that gonna happen? I don't know. I would doubt it. Israel will probably blow shit up for a little while longer and then international pressure is going to force them to back off and some kind of diplomacy will happen.
along these lines, here's my column from today.
'Not Their Temple'
BY ELI LAKE
July 17, 2006
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/36141
CAIRO, Egypt - One of the most popular graffiti tags here is roughly translated, as "It's our mosque, not their Temple." You can find these words emblazoned on not only concrete walls of tenements, but also under framed pictures of al Aqsa Mosque in the offices of newspaper editors, politicians and lawyers. I first noticed it at the lobby of Cairo's medical syndicate, the Egyptian equivalent of the American Medical Association.
This slogan is a way to understand Arab public opinion about the latest war in Lebanon and Gaza. There is no Jewish claim to the remains of the second temple on the base of the Temple Mount. There is only the mosque where Mohammed ascended to heaven for a brief visit.
There is no equivalent academic movement in the Arab world similar to the Israeli post-Zionists of the 1990s, who sifted through Israeli archives to dissent, dubiously at times, from what they saw as the myths of their state's founding. There are no Arab equivalents of the Israeli B'tselem, who spend their hours documenting the plight of Palestinians under occupation. There are not even programs at universities to study the enemy, to understand Israeli society, to learn Hebrew. There is only this abstract noun - the Zionist entity, populated by abstractions - the Jews.
From this well of ignorance, slanders and lies flourish. The Holocaust? It never happened, a myth of the Jew-run press. Israeli scientists invented AIDS. Israelis poison Palestinian drinking water. Hezbollah is still resisting Jewish occupation, even though it celebrates how their arms drove Israeli occupiers out of southern Lebanon in 2000.
How can anyone be surprised that in this environment, when Arabs are given an electoral choice, pluralities and majorities will vote for parties that seek the destruction of the enemy abstraction? There was no serious coverage in the Arab press of Israel's withdrawal last summer from Gaza, only the line about occupation. While Israelis may have abandoned the dream of a greater Israel extending to Gaza and the West Bank, most Arabs struggle for Jerusalem.
The ruling regimes in the Middle East help proliferate this ignorance. The Saudi royal family funds the publishing house that prints Arabic translations of the old Russian forgery, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Ramadan miniseries produced in Syria and Lebanon depict the practice of rabbis using the blood of gentile children to make Matzoh. When an Egyptian playwright, Ali Salem, visited Israel in 1994 and published a book about his travels, not an apology, just an account of particulars of his time in Egypt's northern neighbor, he was kicked out of the writer's syndicate and suffered the brunt of a rumor campaign led by the state-funded press. From a professional perspective he was ruined.
The consensus in America and Europe now is that free elections in the Middle East will empower those openly seeking the elimination of Israel. This is what the sovereign families prefer. Hence the mediocre strong men and sultans of the Arab world become indispensable to the western powers that seek nothing more than stability and oil. Our diplomats sigh in relief when they read comments from anonymous members of the Saudi royal family who criticize Hezbollah. They fret when they see the Arab reporters screaming at the Arab League's secretary general for not promising Arab armies will save Lebanon from the latest Zionist invasion.
But despotism also has its costs. The corollaries of tyranny - corruption and a suffocation of rights - also drive young men to grow beards the size of their fists, read and re-read passages of the Koran and embrace the nihilism of Saudi-exported Islam. The fruits of western prosperity - iPods, cars, clothes - are not on offer to even the brightest Arabs, where almost all the spoils of the state are hoarded for friends and family of the rulers. Most college graduates in Egypt today cannot afford a furnished apartment. While there is a liberal opposition in the Middle East, its agenda is rendered moot when it sees Beirut burning and is told that at any moment, Cairo or Amman could be next.
So with no good options for a future, more and more young, educated men choose to destroy the source of temptation and reject all of the things they wanted. The jihad movement is unbending in its opposition to the West and Israel. Like the petty dictators that so often throw them in torture rooms and jail cells, the death Sheikhs benefit from the West's reliance on these jailers.
The Bush administration has labored under the illusion that the region's royal families understand this dangerous cycle and will voluntarily reform before it tips out of control. It would be nice to believe. But when reality intrudes, as it is intruding now, our ambassadors cannot be bothered to discuss the latest press laws or jailing of protestors.
No, there is peace that must be processed. If only we could get Israel talking with the right Arab leaders to extinguish the latest fire from the fundamentalists. Meanwhile, most Arabs see only a war for a mosque on a mountain and no evidence there was ever a Temple there before it.
July 17, 2006 Edition > Section: Opinion > Printer-Friendly Version
although there are "good relations" between Israel and some of the countries the middle east the truth is this:
and as far as being technologically advanced and having nuclear capabilities no one in the world is thinking Israel is simply going to squash Hezbollah with a nuke. So far, Israel has maintained a safety line, only crossing into Lebanon for a while to quell any Hezbollah forces directly on the border. Of course they have the ability to go over with ground troops and do what they want to do but there is a standard that Israel is held to so they simply have to grin and bear attacks on Haifa that are launching from just 10 miles north of their border with the worry of further Syrian and Iranian influence and force joining in the battle.
This is not a high-tech war, at least not yet. this is a war of lobbing missles and threatening ground troops. It's also a war where one side is trying to defend its right to existance while the other side (and its BFF's) are hoping for the total destruction not only of Israel but of the Jewish people.
How's about Israel tells them if they don't stop the violence and terrorism in 72 hours they'll wipe them off the map......and if they call Israel's bluff they're goners.....all of 'em.....bye bye.
And if any country's government can't control the terrorists within it's borders they will suffer too.......sad, but simple and true.
Either that or Israel continues to tolerate 1,000's of missile attacks, kidnappings and suicide bombings....who here would do that????
I know I wouldn't.
Anyone who's raised children knows that threatening a punishment without following through is a waste of time.
Can anyone give me ANY reasonable & justified reason for violence towards Israel AFTER their withdrawal from Gaza??
NEWS ANALYSIS
Kidnappings open door for Israel to hunt militants
Intensity of response a plan to push out Hezbollah, Hamas
- Laura King, Los Angeles Times
Monday, July 17, 2006
(07-17) 04:00 PDT Jerusalem -- What began as a pair of hasty military incursions intended to get back captured Israeli soldiers has evolved with breathtaking swiftness into a full-blown campaign by Israel against two of its bitterest enemies, the Islamist groups Hezbollah and Hamas.
Surprised twice by small-scale border raids less than three weeks apart, Israeli leaders have made a deliberate policy decision to seize the opportunity -- some call it a pretext -- to mount simultaneous large-scale offensives. The goal of each operation is to smash a guerrilla organization that is also deeply entrenched in the business of governance.
In both instances, Israeli and outside analysts say, Israel has embarked on a risky strategy that has two major elements: the use of overwhelming military force to reduce the opponent's power coupled with strikes that hurt the wider civilian economies and populations of Gaza and Lebanon. The aim of the second part of the strategy is to put pressure on more moderate elements of the Palestinian and Lebanese governments to strip Hamas and Hezbollah of some of their influence and prestige.
In Gaza, the fighting had gone for roughly a week before it became clear that the goal of the military operation had widened well beyond the efforts to stop Hamas from lobbing crude Kassam rockets into southern Israel and to free Cpl. Gilad Shalit, the captured 19-year-old tank gunner.
Soon after the offensive began, commentator Roni Shaked wrote in the Yediot Ahronot newspaper that Israel had a golden opportunity. Whether or not the operation succeeded in freeing Shalit, "by crushing the Hamas regime, Israel can accomplish a much greater strategic step, which could have a profound effect on the entire region," he wrote.
Within days, Israeli policymakers were speaking openly of their hopes to use the confrontation to drive Hamas from power.
Israeli leaders were faster to see the opportunity in Lebanon.
Hamas only has been in power in the Palestinian territories since January. Hezbollah has dominated southern Lebanon for years, and the Israeli army has long worked on plans for striking it if the right moment presented itself.
Only hours after Hezbollah fighters raided across the border last Wednesday, killing eight Israeli soldiers and capturing two, Israeli leaders began to talk of dealing the militant movement a devastating blow from which it could recover neither politically nor militarily.
From across the Israeli political spectrum, such declarations are now being made daily.
"We must eliminate, destroy and crush all of Hezbollah's infrastructure," lawmaker Eli Yishai of the religious Shas party said Sunday.
"We intend to break this organization," said Defense Minister Amir Peretz, of the left-leaning Labor Party.
But the policy carries several risks. Israel is uneasily aware that Hamas and Hezbollah now find themselves on common ground -- squarely in Israel's gun sights. That may strengthen ties between the two groups, which, despite common opposition to Israel, have previously been rivals. A second major risk involves the deaths and injuries to civilians.
Israel's attacks in Lebanon and Gaza have backed elected leaders in both venues into a corner: Whatever their true feelings about the militants' actions, they risk being seen as dupes of Israel if they speak out against Hezbollah or Hamas.
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas saw his Fatah party lose the legislative election to Hamas in January and has watched running gunbattles between Fatah and Hamas militants. He would like nothing better than to see Hamas dislodged from its ruling perch.
But in recent days, he has been forced to issue one statement after another in support of Hamas after Israel rounded up dozens of the group's officials, bombed its government ministries and threatened to assassinate its leaders.
In Lebanon, where Hezbollah is part of a weak and divided government, the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, made the point clear to the Lebanese people in a fiery speech last week: Either follow him into battle or be seen as bowing down to Israel.
The Lebanese may relish neither choice, but the glue of solidarity against an old enemy and the sense of national suffering at Israel's hands may strengthen Hezbollah, at least in the short term, many analysts say.
In Israel, even some who have devoted their professional lives to fighting one or another of the Islamist movements acknowledge a third risk -- that Israel may overreach. The nation's leaders should coolly assess their expectations of what might be achieved by measures such as killing the leaders of Hamas or Hezbollah, these analysts say.
Others believe that with the violence increasing, the coming days could leave both sides feeling they have managed to make their point -- if only by having inflicted painful blows on the other.
"Both sides opened with their surprises, recovered and retaliated," said Eitan Ben-Eliyahu, a former Israeli air force commander. "The end always takes longer than the beginning. But once stabilization generates a feeling of satiation and exhaustion, perhaps international involvement will begin, and after this, diplomatic contacts."
Yes. "The jews must be pushed into the sea."
Gotcha.....I should have known that one!
You're changing topics. Your original post was about how Israel can't be considered a super power and how it's surrounded by millions of hostile Arabs and countries. My post was saying most of those countries aren't really that hosilte and that Israel would kick their ass anyways if any of them wanted some, which they don't.
Sure but Rock, I get the feeling that if it were up to you, you would have simply nuked the whole Middle East just to be thorough about it.
Or can anyone recommend a viable alternative?
how's that going?
That's an inaccurate feeling.
Any country that has radicalized and violent citizens who export their violence and the Government of said country can't control or stop them, I'm for eliminating....one way or another.
but they do want some. They just choose to go ahead and have groups fight battles that are backed by governments.
How many superpowers are checked by the world while being attacked by a force less than 20 miles from their border? Israel is simply not large enough to be deemed a superpower. They are dependent on US and world support in order to simply exist.
1) I don't think Israel could do it without getting even more shit from the international community, and even in the end the U.S.
2) I don't think Israel wants to overthrow Assad in Syria because something worse could come out of it. See Iraq.
3) In the end, you're still going to have a bunch of pissed off Arabs. And the Palestinians are still going to be lobbing missiles at Israel.
4) Hezbollah and Hamas are not state entities. Showing overwhelming military force is something they already know about. Hezbollah was created BECAUSE Israel invaded Lebanon.
What that LA Times article I just posted seems to be saying is that Israel is hoping that Lebanon can crack down on Hezbollah and that the Israeli incursion into Gaza can uproot Hamas. I'm not holding my breath for either of those to actually happen. At the same time, I'm don't think this will actually escalate.
Like I said before, until the Palestinians get their shit together I think you're going to see this as the status quo. Israel will be withdrawing behind the wall. Palestinians will shoot at them every now and then, and then start yelling and shooting at each other. Every now and then Israel will have enough of it and go blow shit up, but then things will go back to the uneasy way it was before.
Pulling out of settlements was a move in the right direction. But they expected Palestinians to just roll over like they all won the lottery.
I'm with you. Israel should just go ahead and lay waste to all of their neighbors., but I seriously don't think they have the balls. However, if we pull our aid they'd have to pull their Sampson Option and you'd def get some waste laid.
I like how all ya'll Bush/Rummy/Cheney haters become hawks when Israel gets checked. Why don't you pack your bags and head over? They need you. The Arabs are breeding like flies.
To reference your post earlier, you are definitely coming off ignorant, misinformed, and while I won't go so far as to call you an anti-semite your blind dislike for Israel is a bit unsettling.
They're not a superpower but they are the dominant military force in the region. And I don't think the Arab governments are really plotting the destruction of Israel and just using proxies to get it done. (Well maybe Syria is, but they've always been the most militant and obstructionist government out of Israel's neighbors). Is Mubarak in Egypt really plotting? Is King Hussein in Jordan really plotting? I think the Saudis are more worried about Iraq and Iran to be really plotting about Israel. etc. etc. And if you really want to get down to it, Arab governments give money to the Palestinians, but the "Arab street" is going to Iraq to go fight America right now.
ahhhhhhh the last defense, "why don't you go!"
frank with all due respect, you are an ass
Eliminating the country? What does that mean? Regime change? We can see how beautifully that's gone in Iraq so far. Or do you just mean destroying the entire country and then annexing it under their control, like what the U.S. did to the Philippines?
"Eliminating" Lebanon would serve nobody. Call me crazy, but wouldn't a full-scale offensive on Lebanon by Israel almost certainly pull Syria into war, not to mention whatever Iran would want to do? Would Israel then have to eliminate those countries too?
Mutually Assured Destruction doesn't have to apply to just nuclear detente.
Back to Lebanon: What allows Hezbollah to operate with impunity is not just their military power but the fact that the Lebanese got out of a civil war not that long ago. I don't think they're exactly chomping at the bit to jump into another one. Ultimately, it may prove to be necessary but the point I'm making is that you can't equate Lebanon = Hezbollah as if they are one and same any more than (to go back to a previous example) Hamas can be said to claim even the majority of Palestinians in terms of desiring endless war with Israel. The attitudes might be more widely spread but POLICY isn't. I think most Lebanese would be very happy to enjoy a peaceful relationship alongside Israel.
Just to be clear, I also agree that it's also a mistake to treat Hezbollah as a rogue militia operating fully outside of national governemnt. They're not like the Minutemen hanging out in Arizona.
SPOT ON.
You're talking about why Israel shouldn't lay waste to Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia? Come on, that's fucking STOOOOOPID!
And I ask you for some tangible benefits to our massive foreign aid expenditures to Israel and someone has to jump in for you and say "military technology". Please.
I have issues with Israel's foreign policy to the same degree that I have issues with America's. So I must hate America too?
Come off.
I don't feel that it's my duty to explain the benefits of giving aid to Israel. If you're so thick (or conversely, so hostile to Israel) that you need me to explain it to you then it is probably a waste of both of our time.
Your issue with Israel is that it exists. That is clear. You and I will probably not see eye to eye on this, yet you're the one that keeps yapping. I'm not going to give you any more attention, so please move on.
you're right that was lame. but otherwise...what due respect? why are people saying, oh Frank, "no offense, you're cool, we like you but...you are and ass etc."
Is what I'm saying really that bad? I haven't called for laying waste to Syria's enemies?
If you want to get all philosophical about it, war is only an extension of politics anyways, and in Israel's case they're fucked because they have all the military force, but they have no one to negotiate with on the Palestinian side to do the politics part of that equation.
Going to war with Syria, or Lebanon and whoever is not going to change that. The Palestinians are the ones who need to make peace, but they don't want to right now, and don't even have any kind of coherent leadership if they did. I don't think any kind of military force is going to change that amongst them right now.