Blog | Admin | Archives | Random | Recent | Thanks

To Israel

Go get ’em.

9 Responses to “To Israel”

  1. Ben McElroy Says:

    I agree. The Palestinians could have had their own state since 1946 but no…the Arab world in all their stupid misguided pride said no. So we end up with constant low-level warfare with a couple of larger breakout wars. And then thousands of rockets later, Hamas has the stupidity to attack Israel and capture one of their soldiers. What part of the Gaza strip did they not like? Israel should just bomb the whole strip until the Palestinians sue for peace ala WW2. Hezbollah, probably under the urging of Syria and Iran, does a similar operation as the Palestinians thinking they got Israel in a tight corner. Unfortunately what they thought was a tabby actually was a tiger. But this could be useful to Lebanon by ridding them of Iranian and Syrian influence. The average Lebanese (those not of Shiite Hezbollah persuasion) are mad because Hezbollah, a small faction of the Lebanese government, got the entire Lebanese state embroiled in a war with Israel that no one wanted. I suppose Lebanon could side with Israel in a temporary alliance to rid itself of Syrian and Iranian influence. Otherwise, maybe they should just sit back and let the Israeli’s kick some terrorist butt. And Iran is busy trying to get as many political points out of this as possible and trying to deflect attention away from its nuclear weapons program. And yes, it is nuclear weapons because its the simplest and most rational explanation. Interesting times.

  2. Daniel Marsh Says:

    There have been times where I have felt more sympathy for the Palestinians. While not exactly a nation in the western sense, they were displaced from their land by the well meaning declaration of foreign powers. I can understand their willingness to fight and their desire for a recognized international identity beyond what Israel is willing to grant. However, after generations of failure to drive Israel into the sea, one would think that the various Palestinian militant organizations would get the hint that Israel isn’t going anywhere anytime soon. All the daily mortar attacks and car bombings haven’t yielded any positive gains for the Palestinians. Isreal has shown remarkable restraint and even generosity in the last few years, with their withdrawl from various Israeli settled areas. Their building of the wall to me said “well if we can’t live together in peace, maybe we can live apart.” The answer to this offering of a sort of Detente has been continued mortar and rocket fire. I don’t know why the recent kidnappings have been the straw that broke the camel’s back, but it is my opinion that Israel has been remarkeably restrained up until now. Maybe it is time for an utterly disproportionate response in the middle east, one brutal enough that common people will stand up to the millitants whose actions reign fire down on their homes. The Roman empire enforced the peace across a huge region, at least in part by the threat of absolute disaster being brought down at the slightest provocation. Whether this tactic can work in the era of asymetric warfare and terrorism is anyone’s guess, but tollerance of minor provocations by a millitant minority in the hopes of growing a larger, moderate populace, is not a tactic that seems to work in this region. You hold democratic elections and you get an unrepetant Hamas in power. While bringing me to tears, maybe saturation bombing suburbs and creating a huge human exclusion zone around Israel, leaving thousands dead and many many thousands more as refugees, is what is needed for a lasting peace in the region. Those who say violence never solved anything haven’t been paying attention in history class.

  3. Shai Oren Says:

    The only way lasting peace will be brought to the area is by killing off one side. Of course, I favor Israel.

    Anyway, the Iranian president is insane, so who knows what he’ll do. The Syrian president doesn’t want war at all though. At least not open war. I’m sure they’re doing something behind the scenes with Hezbollah though.

    Perhaps if the Lebanese government wasn’t so weak they’d do something instead of bowing down to Hezbollah all the time. As for Hamas, I’ve always felt the palestinians were more trouble than they were worth. Drive em into the ground.

  4. Bernie Zimmermann Says:

    All of this boils down to religious differences, am I right? Real shame…

  5. Ryan Says:

    Hm, after reading the most recent articles, it sure seems that Israel should be able to do somewhat more to go after Hezbollah directly. This is just the impression I get, but it seems they are concentrating almost exclusively on civillian targets. I’ve always through some civilian casualties are unavoidable, but right now it does seem awful callous on Israel’s part.

    I think Israel walks a fine line here. Talking to Bobby earlier, I compared it to a teacher punishing an entire class for one student’s actions, which is generally a very effective method to make that one student loathe to act again. However, if Israel goes too far, it is quite possible that all they will do is breed all-out contempt among nearly all of Lebanon. It seems to me that right now, they are probably going too far.

    But what can Israel do to stop the rockets and the incursions.

    In other news, Bobby informed me that the original kidnapping by palestinians of the first Israeli soldier was sparked by an Israeli incursion and kidnapping of two suspected terrorists. Certainly this is something that I had not heard from any of the reports I had read so far. Question is, does it change anything?

    For me, Israel has earned the benefit of the doubt in this conflict. But that doesn’t mean Israel is free of their own crimes. It is a shame, as Bernie said (although I think it goes deeper than just religious differences), but I still feel that Israel would hapily give up all its occupied territories and leave peacefully within their own internationally-accepted borders if they could recieve a believable assurance that they would not face any more attacks.

    Unfortunately, in this world, that assurance is almost certainly always unbelievable (as it has proved time and time again), so I don’t see any non-violent resolution to this conflict.

  6. Bernie Zimmermann Says:

    I’m sure it goes deeper than religious differences at this point, but doesn’t it all stem from that originally? You have to forgive my ignorance here, but I’m participating in a conversation where I’m out of my league. When I try to understand the Middle East my brain starts to hurt. I just think it’s a shame when something like this happens and it all stems from religious beliefs that, in the end, may be of no real significance at all.

  7. Ryan Says:

    Bernie, its not like I’m a mideast scholar. I just say it as I see it. I think the original conflict, however, stems from the fact that a bunch of land that was inhabited by some people was given to make a new state called Israel, and a lot of the people in that area given away, plus most of the neighbors, didn’t like that very much. Certainly religious animosity helps fuel the fire, but without the UN giving the land in the first place, none of this would be happening.

    Don’t mistake this to mean that I don’t think Israel should be there. Certainly Israel has done with the land far more than anyone was doing before them, and the Jews after the Holocaust got a place of their own to gather together. I’m all for Israel, and I’m all for their neighbors to live together in peace. Most of them seem to be content to do so these days. Just not a few that take it upon themselves to ruin it for the rest.

  8. nordsieck Says:

    I think that part of the problem is that it has become a status symbol in the Muslim world to attack Israel. There is a fair amount of evidence that most of the attacks against Israel by actual countries were not intentional per se, but instead, caused by pressure internal to the Middle East muslim community; leaders can’t afford to show weakness to eachother, so they have to posture for one another. One way to do that is to attack Israel, although doing so usually has dramatic consequences.

    As far as the actual attacks in this particular case, I think that the overarching factor in the conflict is that it is between Israel, a nation, and Hezbollah, essentially a gang. In that context, I think that it is all togather reasonable for Israel to attack Lebanon, because Lebanon is either supporting Hezbollah, or they are unable to police after themselves, and are effectively run by Hezbollah.

    As far as Israel specifically targeting civilian facilities, that is perfectly understandable, in the context of Nation vs gang. Technically, no Hezbollah personel are considered military – they are all civilian. Therefore, it would be impossible for Isreal to respond appropriately without targeting civilian facilities. As to the particular targets chosen, I could not say if they are appropriate. As per Ryan’s observations, it does seem like Israel is displaying a controlled use of force – essentially a threat that things could be much worse.

    Legally speaking, I think that it would be perfectly acceptable for Lebanon to retaliate (although they should be willing to accept the consequences), but for Hezbollah to retaliate has, along with the rest of their attacks, no standing, as they lack nation status, and so far, their actions are largely disavowed by their host nation.

  9. Ben McElroy Says:

    Religion is only an excuse (and really pathetic at that – what they really want is power, prestige, and/or wealth). Back in 1948, the UN devised a 2 state entity to be called Israel. One state was for the Arabs, the other for native and immigrating Jews. The Jews accepted the plan as it was, while the Arabs didn’t. Thus resulted the first Israeli-Arab conflict which announced the birth of the Israeli nation. The Israeli’s obviously won. This offended neighboring Arab countries and war has been fought ever since through both state and non-state actors. Israel has been in southern Lebanon before (back in the 1980s) and for the exact same reasons (Syrian-backed Hezbollah rocket fire) … and trying to calm a simmering and dangerous civil war then plaguing Lebanon. Nordsieck also points out how Israel is sending a message to the Lebanese of “we really don’t want to do this but since you can’t control your citizens…” Really, all Hezballah has to do is to return the Israeli soldiers and quit firing rockets. End of war. But then they lose political face. So the question then becomes what’s the right mix of punishment and incentives to get Hezballah to back down? As for the Palestinians, I say no more aid to them until they can prove they can sit quietly for a year without blowing something up or shooting at somebody and actually build a productive society (as in they produce more then they consume). I think Hamas and Hezballah blew their goodwill capital big time, unless their acting on the behest of Iran to get the world distracted from its nuclear issue.

Leave a Reply