Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I don't think that there is a clear cut answer. I am not arguing for thought crimes. I believe that regardless of the state of war or peace, large portions of the population of the ME will remain anti-semitic. Not unlike how large portions of the South remained racist after the civil war or anti-semitism in W. Europe after WWII. Truly changing mindsets in that region will take generations beyond our lifetimes.
Going beyond just hateful thought (which, however does breed attitudes, actions and behaviours based on the thought), I am not saying any pure civilian DESERVES to die. NO CHILD does. they are the one true absolutely universally innocent victim. What I am saying is that large parts of the civilian population give aid, shelter, comfort and political support to Hezbollah and their Syrian sponsors because of their hatred of Israel and desire to destroy the same. Over time, a lot of time. 20-30 years they have ceded the autonomous nature of their country to Syria and Hezbollah. At some point there has to be responsibility for what you have done or passively allowed to be done in your name. Are the masses of refugees coming out and decrying Hezbollah or Syria. Is their blame spread all around? What would these same innocent cilivilans be saying if the battle went the other way and Hezbollah moved into large parts of Israel and Syria moved into the Golan? I think that in part speaks to their neutrality and innocence.
|
You sound like Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, blaming the Russians for going meekly like sheep when the KGB knocked at the door, or like those who don't necessarily deny the Holocaust, but blame the Jews for not rising up against the guards and storming the walls of the camps.
I agree that the problem calls for a significant military component if it is to be solved. However, I don't really think you can say that the Lebanese children deserve to die because some people who live in their villages shoot rockets that kill Jewish children.
I will submit, once again, that neither Israel nor the Arabs have proven themselves capable of solving the crisis. Withdrawal from the Gaza doesn't count for shit when they use it as an excuse to wall off the area, split up families, and send in the tanks and helicopters under the guise of "maintaining security."
Israel goes into Gaza to kill members of Hamas. They don't particularly care how many civilians get killed in the process. Two soldier get kidnapped and taken over the Lebanese border, and Israel softens up the countryside with a couple weeks of bombing, then sends in the troops.
Israel needs to be there. Israel needs to be safe. But Israel will never be safe until there is a Palestine that is also safe. They can't do it on their own. Sidd and Club have scoffed at this notion, but the only way this problem will be solved is if we go in and take it all, then make both sides go stand in opposite corners while we separate out the troublemakers.
It will take decades. It will be incredibly expensive. So what. Britain and France created the problem, just as they did in so very many parts of the world. Maybe we should bill them for the clean up. But we either live (or die) with the conflict or we solve it.
We need to find a rational way to divide the territory. We need to help create infrastructure. We need to adminster schools and hospitals, build kibbutzes, and shelter families so that they have hope for their children. We need to maintain order with just enough force that legitimate debate can take place without degenerating into war.
If we succeed there, then maybe we can try to do the same thing at home.
