All Hank, all the time.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
yes - better that than another Aushuwitz (sp)

Because those are the only two choices. Right.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In other words, Israelis should fight anti-Semitism by using overwhelming military power to kill a lot of non-combatants. That should work.

No, not anti-semitism itself. I have scant hope that mass anti-semitism in the ME will go away anytime soon. I would doubt it's not the prevailing sentiment for the rest of our lives (assuming standard acturarials tables), but the Jordanian or Egyptian breed, is probably tolerable for Israel. However, when you sizable portions of the civilian population sheltering paramilitary terrorist groups, allowing their country (or the terrority under their control, see Gaza) to be a base for launching of military operations, then I think the Israel has to do whatever is necessary to defend itself and create appropriate zones of defence. In the present case that will include destroying civilian population centers. Perhaps the "innocent" citizens of these areas, who support coexistence and do not give aid and support to the terrorists or their use of their country as launching pads, should take it up with the leaders of their countries or politcal groups who are so perverting the will of the people of that region.

If the supermajority of the populaces of these countries/regions did not support (actively and passively) the continued state of war towards the end of destroying Israel) then the issue could have been solved at least several times over the last almost 60 years. Certainly Israel has indicated (and we have no reason to doubt) that they could live in a peaceful state of coexistence. If their neighbours could behave. Civilians and military alike.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't think he does, but if the best you can do by way of response is to knock down straw men, you go right ahead.

You/that guy "war is something one should almost always avoid"

Deep shit Ty. do you think he rested up after coming up with it?

Me "but if your people are getting blown up anyway are you in a war?"

You "strawman"

or are you two looking at it from the perspective of, say god? you know overall, putting aside one might be on one side or another, it would be better if Israel stopped trying to defend itself.

Maybe Israel can start doing outreach, taking elderly Lenaese people meals on wheels or some such- win their hearts and minds!!!! you keep saying there are lots of other options- lets go girl tell us what you all would do!

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
2.


As for the original post, I think it's too early to tell what the end result will be here. Depends on how far and how successful Israel is, and how the situation is ultimately resolved. Hezbollah's leader already had ample stature; a two-week gain of some more is not particularly important in the scheme of things.

I'll reiterate that I don't wasn't saying certain parts of the civilian population deserve to die. Certainly children are fully innocent. But I stand by that there has to be consequences to actions and responsibility on the part of civilian populations for the actions they take or allow to be taken in their name. The reason children are dying or being displaced is not because the Israelis are genocidal or indiscriminate killers or military aggressors. It is because, at least in some material part, the civilian populations of Israels neighbours (and that part of the population that is in part made up of the parents of the innocent children) have chosen to allow their countries/territories to be used by terrorists to seek and further the destruction of Israel. Their motivation for creating or allowing their nation-states or autonomous territories to used as platforms for such purpose is, quite simply, because they are in favour of the destruction of Israel. Essentially its a non-electoral referendum.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Because those are the only two choices. Right.

After almost 60 years, seemingly so. How many generations of Arab populaces have had the chance to seriously adopt and effect a plan of coexistence? Why is so hard? Where are the masses of moderates who decry the hate and truly want to live in peace? Did that dream die with Nobel Peace Prize winner Arafat?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
No, not anti-semitism itself. I have scant hope that mass anti-semitism in the ME will go away anytime soon. I would doubt it's not the prevailing sentiment for the rest of our lives (assuming standard acturarials tables), but the Jordanian or Egyptian breed, is probably tolerable for Israel. However, when you sizable portions of the civilian population sheltering paramilitary terrorist groups, allowing their country (or the terrority under their control, see Gaza) to be a base for launching of military operations, then I think the Israel has to do whatever is necessary to defend itself and create appropriate zones of defence. In the present case that will include destroying civilian population centers. Perhaps the "innocent" citizens of these areas, who support coexistence and do not give aid and support to the terrorists or their use of their country as launching pads, should take it up with the leaders of their countries or politcal groups who are so perverting the will of the people of that region.

If the supermajority of the populaces of these countries/regions did not support (actively and passively) the continued state of war towards the end of destroying Israel) then the issue could have been solved at least several times over the last almost 60 years. Certainly Israel has indicated (and we have no reason to doubt) that they could live in a peaceful state of coexistence. If their neighbours could behave. Civilians and military alike.

Support for the Bush foreign policy involves thinking that we need to launch a war to bring democracy to the Middle East, except when it means that we need to support a war in the Middle East because of all the bad things caused because the people there think the wrong things.

Most of the people supporting Israel are arguing that Hezbollah is victimizing Lebanese civilians by hiding among them to launch rockets. Obviously, they're all wrong then.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
You/that guy "war is something one should almost always avoid"

Deep shit Ty. do you think he rested up after coming up with it?

Me "but if your people are getting blown up anyway are you in a war?"

You "strawman"

or are you two looking at it from the perspective of, say god? you know overall, putting aside one might be on one side or another, it would be better if Israel stopped trying to defend itself.

Maybe Israel can start doing outreach, taking elderly Lenaese people meals on wheels or some such- win their hearts and minds!!!! you keep saying there are lots of other options- lets go girl tell us what you all would do!

I don't see any point in (again) saying what I think Israel should be doing because you don't see any point in reading or responding to those posts. When you decide to leave the straw men alone, you just say so. At least Penske is half serious.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I'll reiterate that I don't wasn't saying certain parts of the civilian population deserve to die. Certainly children are fully innocent. But I stand by that there has to be consequences to actions and responsibility on the part of civilian populations for the actions they take or allow to be taken in their name. The reason children are dying or being displaced is not because the Israelis are genocidal or indiscriminate killers or military aggressors. It is because, at least in some material part, the civilian populations of Israels neighbours (and that part of the population that is in part made up of the parents of the innocent children) have chosen to allow their countries/territories to be used by terrorists to seek and further the destruction of Israel. Their motivation for creating or allowing their nation-states or autonomous territories to used as platforms for such purpose is, quite simply, because they are in favour of the destruction of Israel. Essentially its a non-electoral referendum.

I find it truly odd that you think most Lebanese have a choice about what Hezbollah does, and that you think many of them ought to die because they did not do more to stop Hezbollah. You sound like Ward Churchill.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
After almost 60 years, seemingly so. How many generations of Arab populaces have had the chance to seriously adopt and effect a plan of coexistence? Why is so hard? Where are the masses of moderates who decry the hate and truly want to live in peace? Did that dream die with Nobel Peace Prize winner Arafat?

The Lebanese moderates are on the road to Syria or hiding in their basements.

Did I pretend that most Arabs love their Israeli neighbors? I don't think so. In fact, I recall pointing out that this was a problem with our newfound love of democracy in the Middle East. But that doesn't mean they deserve what has happened in Lebanon, or that it leaves Israel better off.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I don't see any point in (again) saying what I think Israel should be doing because you don't see any point in reading or responding to those posts. When you decide to leave the straw men alone, you just say so. At least Penske is half serious.

I have no idea what you might have said in the past- this board has been rather unreadable for awhile- so I may well have missed some really bright suggestion from you- thus i will say "so"

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I find it truly odd that you think most Lebanese have a choice about what Hezbollah does, and that you think many of them ought to die because they did not do more to stop Hezbollah. You sound like Ward Churchill.

There is a degree of accuracy to this analogy.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Support for the Bush foreign policy involves thinking that we need to launch a war to bring democracy to the Middle East, except when it means that we need to support a war in the Middle East because of all the bad things caused because the people there think the wrong things.

I am not sure what this means, but over the long haul, I don't think the Bush foreign policy or war in Iraq is the driver for what is going on here. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on for almost 60 years. It would be going on regardless of Bush. St. Clinton couldn't solve it, even when he got Israel to agree to a future death sentence. The future potential was too grey for Nobel Peace Prize Winner Arafat.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop


Most of the people supporting Israel are arguing that Hezbollah is victimizing Lebanese civilians by hiding among them to launch rockets. Obviously, they're all wrong then.

Hiding? How do they get there? How do they stay there over a 20 plus year period? They are part of the population and they have a shared goal in mind. The destruction of Israel.

And I suppose Hamas is hiding amongst all the moderate peace loving Palestinians?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
At least Penske is half serious.

2.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I find it truly odd that you think most Lebanese have a choice about what Hezbollah does, and that you think many of them ought to die because they did not do more to stop Hezbollah. You sound like Ward Churchill.

that is so fucking unfair. Penske never said they should die because they allow Hezbollah to stick around. he pointed out they are all mixed in- and pointed out that Civilians who are the collateral damage are not exactly innocents. To make Penske equal Ward we'd have to have the military all hidden between stock brokers and coffee salesmen in the WTC.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I find it truly odd that you think most Lebanese have a choice about what Hezbollah does, and that you think many of them ought to die because they did not do more to stop Hezbollah. You sound like Ward Churchill.

I think its impossible to look at any one part of the larger conflictr here in a vaccuum. I think that the combined populaces of the Arab world have had multiple choices and chances over 60 years to come to grips with Israel and they chose to stay the course with the desired goal of destruction of the same. I think Lebanon and the Lebanese people have ceded their country to Syria and Hezbollah and pretending that there is some independent Lebanese government that is caught in the cross fire here and wants peace is not reality.

Offer a peace plan, short of Israel militarily destroying Hezbollah (which reality tells us will likely involve civilian casualties), that could work. I don't think you or anyone else can because the only plan that works for the mass of the greater ME is one that doesnt' include Israel, which I think that we agree, is not a tenable solution.