Is it World War III

[horizon]

I can't imagine the suffering of the Holocaust. The unrelenting, evil madness of it all. I think that people who make sweeping generalisations about 'Jews', even for a moment, without having let themselves absorb the meaning of what went on for those entire years, have no right to say anything. I understand Israel's precarious position where it is located.

But...if the civilised, Western world decided to put Israel there, it's surely doing fuck all (compared to what it could do) to actually help solve the conflict. And, no matter how much I think Israel has a right to defend itself, I think that some of what's going on is horrendous.

Just to put our discussion into perspective... the following link has been e-mailed to me by one of my good friends, who happens to be Lebanese (and, just in case you are wondering, we have a common good friend who is a Jew. So I'm not biased simply because I know someone from Lebanon).

Imagine for a moment that one of these pictures was of the child or relative or friend of someone you knew.

http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.info/

[Ripzalot]

I can't imagine the suffering of the Holocaust. The unrelenting, evil madness of it all. I think that people who make sweeping generalisations about 'Jews', even for a moment, without having let themselves absorb the meaning of what went on for those entire years, have no right to say anything. I understand Israel's precarious position where it is located.

But...if the civilised, Western world decided to put Israel there, it's surely doing fuck all (compared to what it could do) to actually help solve the conflict. And, no matter how much I think Israel has a right to defend itself, I think that some of what's going on is horrendous.

Just to put our discussion into perspective... the following link has been e-mailed to me by one of my good friends, who happens to be Lebanese (and, just in case you are wondering, we have a common good friend who is a Jew. So I'm not biased simply because I know someone from Lebanon).

Imagine for a moment that one of these pictures was of the child or relative or friend of someone you knew.

http://www.fromisraeltolebanon.info/

that is a full-on propaganda site. it even leads with the "israeli children writing messages on artillary shells" which was STAGED by "journalists".

all the dead bodies pictured, well you can again thank hezzbollah.

[horizon]

Oh I know it's full-on propaganda. I think I made it clear by saying that it's been sent to me by a Lebanese friend (she's not Moslem, btw, if that matters). I'm assuming, however, that the photos of dead bodies aren't doctored.

I think, how shall I say it, that you're a bit callous with your 'thank Hezbollah' comment. In any case, I only said that some of what's going on is horrendous and that the world as a whole is doing fuck all to solve it.

It's easy to close your eyes and always, always, always blame someone else. Especially if, by and large, that person/organisation really should be blamed. My idealistic self would sometimes want to see a more solid attempt at a solution, rather than all this old you're with me or against me shit.

[bad_roo]

I think we should give Wales to the Israelis.

It's a dumb idea but there are many dumber sentiments on this thread.

[Ripzalot]

it can never make sense to rationalize the death of a child. but you can rationalize the bigger picture - which is the survival of a nation of people. that is what israel is fighting for. hezzbollah are not fighting for their survival. they are fighting for the destruction of israel. keep that in mind.

[Baaahb]

Imagine for a moment that one of these pictures was of the child or relative or friend of someone you knew.

Although well-meaning I'm sure, it is this sentiment that breeds an eye-for-an-eye mentality of endless retaliation. If you want to resolve this conflict, you have to look beyond the deaths of the innocent civilians to WHOM is doing the killing and WHY.

As to attempting a seriously resolution of the dispute....almost all the great leaders of the world over the last 75 years have attempted in some manner to resolve the greater Arab-Israeli conflict. I'm not just talking about the Nixons and the Kissingers (and Nixon, despite his faults, was better than most at this sort of international reconciliation) and the Clintons and the Christophers, but leaders of western Europe, of Asia....the best and brightest minds of the world have attempted a rational solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Being an optimist, I think it will eventually find a resolution that allows all to live in peace, but I'm not such an optimist to dream that this will happen overnight, or even in the next ten years. Thirty years, maybe.

It will take a forecible end to the violence, and the passing of generations.

[DisArray]

Ripzalot, I see what you are saying, however I find your avatar to be very disturbing.

[Meathelmet]

israel's actions are motivated by survival.

Like forcing 1.4million people to live literally (say,like gaza),not proverbally, in a concentration camp but cutting them source to food,water and general income.
UNICEF is reporting that over half of the gaza children are allready malnutrioned by the Israeli sanctions.Elderly people and adults are going fast that way.

I am so frigging sic of this "boohoo-israelis figh for their survival" shite.
They have actively bogged them in this shit by actively promoting utterly retarded politics for the last 60 years.
Even some ex-pats that i talked to,are dumfounded by the last 5 year of politics of the goverment.

It is tireing just to watch when two (well,unless you count in iran and syria and...) pricks are picking a fight at every possible chance.
Pity that civilians have to suffer in the end.On both sides.



Politics and religious fanatism make a ugly party.Especialy when it is happening on both side of the fence.








U-uh..i guess the last sentence made me a anti-semite too. Better start to wear a Giro like Roo does..

[bad_roo]

the best and brightest minds of the world have attempted a rational solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Nobody's got past the first step of figuring out which side are the ninjas and which are the pirates.

[Ripzalot]

Like forcing 1.4million people to live literally (say,like gaza),not proverbally, in a concentration camp but cutting them source to food,water and general income.
UNICEF is reporting that over half of the gaza children are allready malnutrioned by the Israeli sanctions.Elderly people and adults are going fast that way.

I am so frigging sic of this "boohoo-israelis figh for their survival" shite.
They have actively bogged them in this shit by actively promoting utterly retarded politics for the last 60 years.
Even some ex-pats that i talked to,are dumfounded by the last 5 year of politics of the goverment.

It is tireing just to watch when two (well,unless you count in iran and syria and...) pricks are picking a fight at every possible chance.
Pity that civilians have to suffer in the end.On both sides.



Politics and religious fanatism make a ugly party.Especialy when it is happening on both side of the fence.

when you can't convince your enemy to not kill you, you have to contain them. simple as that. what action would you suggest israel take that wouldn't jeopardize the lives of it's people? you simply cannot grasp the concept that hezbollah and hamas' stated purpose of being is the destruction of israel. full stop. israel's stated purpose is ..... to exist.

again, which is rational? which is acceptable?

[Ripzalot]

Ripzalot, I see what you are saying, however I find your avatar to be very disturbing.

yeah, it even disturbs me! just don't look me in the eye...

[Ripzalot]

As to attempting a seriously resolution of the dispute....almost all the great leaders of the world over the last 75 years have attempted in some manner to resolve the greater Arab-Israeli conflict. I'm not just talking about the Nixons and the Kissingers (and Nixon, despite his faults, was better than most at this sort of international reconciliation) and the Clintons and the Christophers, but leaders of western Europe, of Asia....the best and brightest minds of the world have attempted a rational solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

it will never end as long as muslim countries continue to pour billions in financial support to terrorist organizations such as hezbollah and hamas.

here's a novel solution - why don't these muslim countries take that money and build the palestinians (and hezbollah lebanese) their own city in another arab country? after all, it's just fucking land. i'm sure that at the end of the day, people just want a safe and comfortable place to live and raise their families.

[fez]

Transformation's Toll


By George F. Will
Tuesday, July 18, 2006; Page A19

"Grotesque" was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's characterization of the charge that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was responsible for the current Middle East conflagration. She is correct, up to a point. This point: Hezbollah and Hamas were alive and toxic long before March 2003. Still, it is not perverse to wonder whether the spectacle of America, currently learning a lesson -- one that conservatives should not have to learn on the job -- about the limits of power to subdue an unruly world, has emboldened many enemies.

Speaking on ABC's "This Week," Rice called it "shortsighted" to judge the success of the administration's transformational ambitions by a "snapshot" of progress "some couple of years" into the transformation. She seems to consider today's turmoil preferable to the Middle East's "false stability" of the past 60 years, during which U.S. policy "turned a blind eye to the absence of the democratic forces."

There is, however, a sense in which that argument creates a blind eye: It makes instability, no matter how pandemic or lethal, necessarily a sign of progress. Violence is vindication: Hamas and Hezbollah have, Rice says, "determined that it is time now to try and arrest the move toward moderate democratic forces in the Middle East."

But there also is democratic movement toward extremism. America's intervention was supposed to democratize Iraq, which, by benign infection, would transform the region. Early on in the Iraq occupation, Rice argued that democratic institutions do not just spring from a hospitable political culture, they also can help create such a culture. Perhaps.

But elections have transformed Hamas into the government of the Palestinian territories, and elections have turned Hezbollah into a significant faction in Lebanon's parliament, from which it operates as a state within the state. And as a possible harbinger of future horrors, last year's elections gave the Muslim Brotherhood 19 percent of the seats in Egypt's parliament.

The Bush administration has rightly refrained from criticizing the region's only democracy, Israel, for its forceful response to a thousand rockets fired at its population. U.S. reticence is seemly, considering that terrorism has been Israel's torment for decades, and that America responded to two hours of terrorism one September morning by toppling two regimes halfway around the world with wars that show no signs of ending.

The administration, justly criticized for its Iraq premises and their execution, is suddenly receiving some criticism so untethered from reality as to defy caricature. The national, ethnic and religious dynamics of the Middle East are opaque to most people, but to the Weekly Standard -- voice of a spectacularly misnamed radicalism, "neoconservatism" -- everything is crystal clear: Iran is the key to everything .

"No Islamic Republic of Iran, no Hezbollah. No Islamic Republic of Iran, no one to prop up the Assad regime in Syria. No Iranian support for Syria . . ." You get the drift. So, the Weekly Standard says:

"We might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there would be repercussions -- and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong America that has rejected further appeasement."

"Why wait?" Perhaps because the U.S. military has enough on its plate in the deteriorating wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which both border Iran. And perhaps because containment, although of uncertain success, did work against Stalin and his successors, and might be preferable to a war against a nation much larger and more formidable than Iraq. And if Bashar Assad's regime does not fall after the Weekly Standard's hoped-for third war, with Iran, does the magazine hope for a fourth?

As for the "healthy" repercussions that the Weekly Standard is so eager to experience from yet another war: One envies that publication's powers of prophecy but wishes it had exercised them on the nation's behalf before all of the surprises -- all of them unpleasant -- that Iraq has inflicted. And regarding the "appeasement" that the Weekly Standard decries: Does the magazine really wish the administration had heeded its earlier (Dec. 20, 2004) editorial advocating war with yet another nation -- the bombing of Syria?

Neoconservatives have much to learn, even from Buddy Bell, manager of the Kansas City Royals. After his team lost its 10th consecutive game in April, Bell said, "I never say it can't get worse." In their next game, the Royals extended their losing streak to 11 and in May lost 13 in a row.

georgewill@washpost.com

[bad_roo]

it will never end as long as muslim countries continue to pour billions in financial support to terrorist organizations such as hezbollah and hamas.

here's a novel solution - why don't these muslim countries take that money and build the palestinians (and hezbollah lebanese) their own city in another arab country? after all, it's just fucking land. i'm sure that at the end of the day, people just want a safe and comfortable place to live and raise their families.

I'm sure the US would have objected if Brezhnev had used that argument during the Eighties. "Hey, why can't we have Washington, Oregon, Alaska and California? It's just fucking land."

[snow_slider]

It isn't just land to them. It is holy ground.

[Ripzalot]

It isn't just land to them. It is holy ground.

if claim to holy ground takes primacy then obviously the jews win.

the israelis have been very generous concerning this. the muslims still have their fucking dome of the rock, stolen from the jews in about 700AD, built on the site of israels' holy temple mount. israel could easily decide take over and raze it and rebuild their temple. but have they done so?

but the problem is that it's not simply about ownership holy land but of explicit hatred of jews and the establishment of islam over all others.

[Cono Este]

It isn't just land to them. It is holy ground.

Thats the stupidity of it all.

[horizon]

Has anyone here actually changed their views, or even refined them, after reading stuff on this thread?

[QUOTE=Baaahb]Although well-meaning I'm sure, it is this sentiment that breeds an eye-for-an-eye mentality of endless retaliation. If you want to resolve this conflict, you have to look beyond the deaths of the innocent civilians to WHOM is doing the killing and WHY.
QUOTE]

You make measured points overall, and I prefer this kind of discussion to many others. However, I gotta point out that eye-for-an-eye is precisely what I'm arguing against.

[greg]

again, which is rational? which is acceptable?

it can never make sense to rationalize the death of a child.

I don't know what your problem is. you are trying to push me into a corner where I do not belong. just because I don't agree with you? just because I think hizbollah's actions aren't irrational?

to make this clear to you. all I was trying to do is give you a hint for another reading of roo's postings.

I don't think hizbollah acts irrational. I think they know exactly what they are doing. They are percieving a goal you might not share but they are doing it in a very logical and well orchestrated manner. Timing of attacks by hamas and hizbollah is perfect. You could actually set a watch by the time you had to expect the next selfbomber in Tel Aviv. Uproars on the streets are not spontaneous and unprepared. If you believe they act out of pure desparation and blind hatred I think their propaganda let you exactly where they wanted you to be.

But that is just my personal opinion.

On the other hand you can observe a relatively new Isrealien "rational irrationality." If you weren't surprised by the dimension of the backstroke and how fast they escalated it into a full scale war you are probably the only person in the western and arabien world. I believe it was long prepared and is part of a new strategy: retreating from occupied territories but defending the boarders with furious and seemingly completely of the scale reactions. In fact I believe it is a reaction to hamas' and hisbollah's propaganda war starting in the mid ninties which tried to interprete every sign of retreat and peace treaty as a success of terror attacks and as a sign of isrealien weakness and fatigue (which might actually be true concerning fatigue). Of course there are other factors that might play a role in this specific situation, but I believe it is an overall completely new strategy. Being completely erratic and irrational in their reactions is exactly what they want to appear. Maybe they have learned from hamas in the end.

But again, this is just my very personal reading.

If this is all going to work out and bring us peace in the end? I don't have a fucking clue.

[Cono Este]

This Israeli ambassador is right. Kofi mentioned Hezbollah once in his speech and Iran not even once. You need a ceasefire for terrorism as well as all hostilities. Why no mention of the daily rocket attacks by hezbolah even before this all started?

You have to start holding Iran and Syria accountable or it will never end.

[fez]

Now CNN is reporting that there were Iranian representatives in N. Korea for their long range missile tests last month.

[Ripzalot]

I don't know what your problem is. you are trying to push me into a corner where I do not belong. just because I don't agree with you? just because I think hizbollah's actions aren't irrational?

to make this clear to you. all I was trying to do is give you a hint for another reading of roo's postings.

I don't think hizbollah acts irrational. I think they know exactly what they are doing. They are percieving a goal you might not share but they are doing it in a very logical and well orchestrated manner. Timing of attacks by hamas and hizbollah is perfect. You could actually set a watch by the time you had to expect the next selfbomber in Tel Aviv. Uproars on the streets are not spontaneous and unprepared. If you believe they act out of pure desparation and blind hatred I think their propaganda let you exactly where they wanted you to be.

But that is just my personal opinion.

On the other hand you can observe a relatively new Isrealien "rational irrationality." If you weren't surprised by the dimension of the backstroke and how fast they escalated it into a full scale war you are probably the only person in the western and arabien world. I believe it was long prepared and is part of a new strategy: retreating from occupied areas but defending the boarders with furious and seemingly completely of the scale reactions. In fact I believe it is a reaction to hamas' and hisbollah's propaganda war starting in the mid ninties which tried to interprete every sign of retreat and peace treaty as a success of terror attacks and as a sign of isrealien weakness and fatigue (which might actually be true concerning fatigue). Of course there are other factors that might play a role in this specific situation, but I believe it is an overall completely new strategy. Being completely erratic and irrationable in their reactions is exactly what they want to appear. Maybe they have learned from hamas in the end.

But again, this is just my very personal reading.

If this is all going to work out in the end and bring us peace? I don't have a fucking clue.

my problem would then be pressing you for clarity. sorry if you took it wrong, but you floated something that sounded absurd to me. i understand where you are coming from, but you are coming from a position that seeks to understand, and therefore justify hezzbollah and/or hamas's actions. you call the perceived disproportionate response of israel as irrational (or pretending to be) while not saying boo about the disproportionate attacks by hezbollah and hamas over the last two decades (and other orgs before then).

if that is your view, then fine. we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Dexter Rutecki]

you call the perceived disproportionate response of israel as irrational (or pretending to be) while not saying boo about the disproportionate attacks by hezbollah and hamas over the last two decades (and other orgs before then).

This is the way the world works. Israel gets bombed=status quo, yawn; Israel does something about it=international outrage.

[Meathelmet]

when you can't convince your enemy to not kill you, you have to contain them.

It has allready been tried.
And i love the word "contain". You know,guards,barbed wire,random killings,removing human rights? Does your rant strike a chord?
What are you suggesting next,if the attacks dont stop.
That israelis should start to build showers in gaza?

What action would you suggest israel take that wouldn't jeopardize the lives of it's people?

How about creating a enviroment where the people can start to live a life and build prosperity,for frigging sake?!
The best,and maybe ultimate tool to erase wars and terrorism is to provide the people a chance of economical growth and success.It has been studied and stated that populations with good economical infrastructures are less prone to start wars and create terrorism.
And why?
Maybe because finally you have something to loose and something to live for?

You simply cannot grasp the concept that hezbollah and hamas' stated purpose of being is the destruction of israel. full stop.

Can you grasp this?

Stop being such a patronising prick and stop guessing without knowing me what I can or cannot grasp.
Mmmmkay?







AAnd once again i remeber why i dont participate in political threads..

[freshie247]

I'm flashing back to a few months ago when I said that many people including myself felt that Iran was the worlds major exporter of terrorism & extremely adept at drawing attention away from it's role. Somebody said I was crazy & attempted to chastise me for my thoughts,saying I was a right winger(which is hilarious BTW).

I wonder what their thoughts are on this subject today? Probably no different as the facts will be changed to fit the views.