All Hank, all the time.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
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.

I agree with this. But there is a difference between this and "kill all the Arabs because they hate Israel." If they hate Israel but don't have rockets, I don't much care.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I know what it is like 30 years. to be honest and telegraph my imperfect current knowledge, I would say I had a better understanding of the landscape then, than now. While there was not a strong central government 30 years ago, i.e civil war, there were leaders of various factional groups and parties. Collectively they, and the peoples they represented, failed, and Syria and Hezbollah filled the vaccum. But its not like certain masses of the people do not relate and sympathise with them.

Again with the double negative. Yes. It's not like certain of the Lebanese people do not relate and sympathize with Hezbollah. Many even voted for Hezbollah.

Hell, you voted for Bush, but it's not like that makes you culpable for his war crimes (if any).

I am not sure any large groups of people are fully innocent, except for kids.

Certainly by age three, no kid is fully innocent. Less, if you take an old-skool view of Genesis.

I think that if you create an environment, communities predicated on hate and the ideal of the destruction of your perceived mortal enemy, and you let the instrumentality of that destruction live and prosper, unchecked, within your community, its a bit disingenous to then claim you have no responsibility for their actions, in part, in your name.
[

So, Lebanese men, women and children deserved to be killed because they created communities predicated on hate and the idea of destruction of Israel, and they let Hezbollah live and prosper in their country.

The latter is my Ward Churchill/little Eichman point, about which you and I have both said enough. Tell me, though: How did your average resident of Lebanon create a community predicated on hate? I was under the impression that Lebanon was around for a while before 1948, so I'm not clear what you mean by this?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I want to point out that if I were you, I would take some huge personal offence to that and respond along the lines, "Fuck you and all of your crafty analogies, you worthless piece of shit!", but I accept strong rhetoric begets strong rhetoric, so I will ask, how you think that analogy applies?

The 911 terrorists were seeking to defend their homelands from military strikes coming out of the WTC, which had US troops hidden amongst the civilians there? Or was it that the 911 terrorists want us out of the ME so that they have free hand to drive Israel into the sea?

See, I treat the "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" stuff as pure hyperbole (and part of my using this board to vent steam). Sorry if you and other don't see it that way. I'll try to tone that down.

As for how I see the truth in Ty's analogy, it's the idea that it's okay to kill people for what they think, rather than what they do. The second part (the comparison of the 911 terrorists to Israel) is not an apt analogy, which is why I only said that there was SOME truth to what Ty said.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Think to yourself: What would Ariel Sharon do? Do you think he would have launched an invasion of Lebanon? Some retaliation, surely, but much more targeted.

But Penske seems to be saying that this whole exercise is the Kobayashi Maru, so we might as well take out as many of the non-innocent as we can along the way.

1. Despite the fact that I love you, platonically, like a blog addled co-administrator and fellow oenophile, I hate you for making me google Kobayashi Maru. I know who Badtz Maru is, and thought this must be his brother or cousin. I am sad.

2. Which Sharon, 82 version or 05 version?

3. I am not advocating killing as many civilians as possible. I am fine with Israel destroying as much of the infrastructure, military and non-military as it thinks it needs to do impact on Hezbolah's ability to operate. At this point the innocent civilians should be evacuating. Where is the UN? Let them administer that part. That organisation's institutional anti-semitism is as much a part of the long term problem here as any. They should be charged with some responsibility. to that end, to save you the trouble of asking, half seriously, I am okay with Israel bombing the UN.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Apart from the prospect of Iranian nukes, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Hezbollah and Hamas rockets don't pose an existential threat to Israel, althogh they do kill people. And if you're worried about Hezbollah and Hamas getting better arms, then you'll want to isolate and deter them. The solutions may be different for each group. For Hamas, let them try running Gaza and taking some responsibility for what goes on there, and there's reason to believe they'll moderate. For Hezbollah, it doesn't seem like this is an option, but you'll want to cut them off from Syria and Iran to deny them heavier weapons. But what Israel has done gives both groups more support inside and outside the Arab world, and makes it harder to do anything about Iranian nukes.

When does Israel stop bombing? What do you think happens then?

How do you cut off arms from Iran and Syria without bombing? (And don't say 'diplomacy')


And given the strength that Hezbollah has shown, it may not be an existential threat to Israel now but in another five years, and in conjunction with its allies, that may no longer be true.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In point of fact, I think there were a lot more people, including Arabs, prepared to be critical of Israel two weeks ago. But the military campaign since then has changed hearts and minds. And distracted from the fact that Hezbollah is not even trying to aim at military targets, but is launching rockets at Israeli cities.

Huh?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I agree with this. But there is a difference between this and "kill all the Arabs because they hate Israel." If they hate Israel but don't have rockets, I don't much care.

I agree with that. I know we have our differences, but please don't make me out to be racist and/or advocating killing all Arabs. I am not and don't take that position.

I have said I am okay with them hating Israel, but it has to go a bit beyond no rockets, it has to include no concerted intifida. Build a wall, figurative or literal, but if you can't interact, at least respect the wall. Or. Probably, with history as our guide, suffer some consequences.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I lose this rationale there. A lot of these people, as sad as it may be, are not at the wrong place at the wrong time. They are not innocent. Anymore than the mass of Germans who supported Hitler into office and during the 30s were innocent. The mass of citizenry in Lebanon and Syria and a good portion of the ME, hate the Jews, Hate Israel and support its destruction, in word or deed. they let their countries be used as harbors for terrorists and launching pads for the military apparatus that is intended to bring israel's destruction. they give aid and support to the terrorists. allow them to intermingle in their population so that they can have the "innocent citizen" shields.

assumption of the risk, you reap what you sow etc.

If Israel has the nuts to prosecute this thing as need be, it will be the winner and more secure.

Go Israel!

Hmmm. By this rationale, you are to blame for Clinton.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
See, I treat the "fuck you and the horse you rode in on" stuff as pure hyperbole (and part of my using this board to vent steam). Sorry if you and other don't see it that way. I'll try to tone that down.

As for how I see the truth in Ty's analogy, it's the idea that it's okay to kill people for what they think, rather than what they do. The second part (the comparison of the 911 terrorists to Israel) is not an apt analogy, which is why I only said that there was SOME truth to what Ty said.

I'm glad Sidd got my point, which was not put well. As I understand it, Churchill suggested that the men and women who worked in the WTC were culpable because they played of their role in the U.S. imperial hegemony (or whatever):

• As for those in the World Trade Center, well, really, let's get a grip here, shall we? True enough, they were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break. They formed a technocratic corps at the very heart of America's global financial empire, the "mighty engine of profit" to which the military dimension of U.S. policy has always been enslaved and they did so both willingly and knowingly.

link.

It was the notion of targeting civilians that I was referring to; I was not trying to suggest that there is some equivalence between the respective causes.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
ps: I didn't break it, the liberals are all preparing to be mourning as one of the last failed commie revolutionaries of the last century gets ready to bite it. A sad time for the leftist ideal.

My condolences.

He bit it a long time ago. It's just that the message is finally getting through the barbed wire.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
1. Despite the fact that I love you, platonically, like a blog addled co-administrator and fellow oenophile, I hate you for making me google Kobayashi Maru. I know who Badtz Maru is, and thought this must be his brother or cousin. I am sad.

Sorry not to link, but I didn't want anyone to think me a Trekkie, NTTAWWT.

2. Which Sharon, 82 version or 05 version?

'05 was wiser and cagier, if in worse health.

3. I am not advocating killing as many civilians as possible. I am fine with Israel destroying as much of the infrastructure, military and non-military as it thinks it needs to do impact on Hezbolah's ability to operate. At this point the innocent civilians should be evacuating. Where is the UN? Let them administer that part. That organisation's institutional anti-semitism is as much a part of the long term problem here as any. They should be charged with some responsibility. to that end, to save you the trouble of asking, half seriously, I am okay with Israel bombing the UN.

I have a problem with Israel destroying non-military infrastructure, for the reasons previously discussed. Funny, that.

Where is the UN? We ought to have an international organization prepared to come in and clean up the mess made by military intervention, if only to make military intervention more efficient and accepted. Too bad Bush didn't think of this earlier and try to strengthen the organization.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
How do you cut off arms from Iran and Syria without bombing? (And don't say 'diplomacy')

If you're going to rule out force and persuasion, that leaves less attractive options, like building a really big wall.

Can we involve Berkeley's traffic department? They would propose building traffic circles, putting in planters, and otherwise impeding the flow of traffic.

And given the strength that Hezbollah has shown, it may not be an existential threat to Israel now but in another five years, and in conjunction with its allies, that may no longer be true.

If you mean nukes, I hear you. Otherwise, I don't know what you mean. If you look at the respective populations, resources, money, technology, etc., Hezbollah isn't in the same league. Hezbollah couldn't take out Lebanon's military, Lebanon couldn't take out Syria, and Syria couldn't stay in the same room with Israel.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Where is the UN? We ought to have an international organization prepared to come in and clean up the mess made by military intervention, if only to make military intervention more efficient and accepted. Too bad Bush didn't think of this earlier and try to strengthen the organization.

Well. UN posts have been used for cover for Hezbollah, so it's not like the UN hasn't been keeping some of the people safer.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I have a problem with Israel destroying non-military infrastructure, for the reasons previously discussed. Funny, that.

So how do you stop weapons from coming in from Syria?

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Sidd Finch
____________
In point of fact, I think there were a lot more people, including Arabs, prepared to be critical of Israel two weeks ago. But the military campaign since then has changed hearts and minds. And distracted from the fact that Hezbollah is not even trying to aim at military targets, but is launching rockets at Israeli cities.
____________

Huh?


Huh?

It is too bad that most of the world seems more upset with Israel for using overwhelming force and hitting a lot of civilians unintentionally than they are with Hezbollah for using less force but shooting at civilians intentionally.