New Middle Eastern War

[Jim]

In the case' date=' the land was a British colony, who allowed Jews and Arabs to settle on the land before the state of Israel was created. The British allowed the UN to create an Israeli state. In 1948, another state was proposed right along side Israel, known as Palestine. The palestinian leaders rejected this idea, calling for 'all or nothing.'

 

For an in-depth history, click here: http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/[/quote']

 

Thanks for the link Ecoli. As is shown in the timeline you provide, this issue has a long and tragic history. Take your pick if you want to blame - the Americans, UN, Brits, European antisemitism, Persians, Arabs or Romans.

 

One question I would like to understand is the demographics of the area when Jewish immigration began. Here's a link which, as far as I can tell, seems relatively objective in providing demographic data back to 1914.

 

I'd be interested in what the area looked like in the 1880s when Jewish immigration began.

[Pangloss]

Well, i suppose I am also biased to this situation, i have family that lives in Palestine and Lebanon, i have been their many times and i can tell you i understand why they hate Israel and America for that matter. Could you imagine everynight jumping up out of bed because of Sonic booms going off overhead, the Israelis purposely do it all the time. And people know that the jets, the missles, the bullets the tanks, the gunships, the helicopters are American made. Then they say to the people elect a government democratically and they do just for Israel to say "oh, you cant choose them, choose someone else."

 

I can certainly understand the feeling of being caught in the middle that millions of innocent civilians are experiencing. There's no question that those people are getting a raw deal. I feel for them, I really do.

 

 

Many people i know also view it as this, a large, extremely powerful country does whatever it wants because its backed by an even larger, more powerful country that tells it it can. The only thing the people of those small countries have are terrorists, they dont have american made f-16s and Apache helicopters, they dont have Abrams tanks and cruise missles. All they have are the people you al lrefer to as terrorist. That's the problem, in Palestine and places like Lebanaon the "terrorist" are the only ones giving the people food and taking care of the people, its not the U.N., its not the governments of the countries, its these organizations doing it. You call them terrorists, i call them rebels fighting for the right of the people of those countries. It's unfortunate that civilians die, but its war, and it seems as long as Israel says sorry, we didnt mean to bomb that school" its alright with people?

 

You realize, don't you, that you've just excused the deliberate killing of innocent civilians, the very people you were talking about in your first paragraph? Why is it okay that innocent Jews die, but not ok that innocent Palestinians die? Why is one ok but not the other?

 

That's not a problem of slight differences in definitions. No, that's two wrongs making a right.

 

 

And even after israel pulled out of Lebanon they continued exchanging fire on the border all the time, so how they can pull this, like they are the poor innocent country. and how can Americans protect Israel so when they deliberately attacked one of your ships before, http://www.ussliberty.org/ not to mention the numerous times they steal secrets from America all the time. http://www.counterpunch.org/husseini08302004.html

http://www.aci.net/kalliste/pollard_em.htm

 

I understand that people that live in the "empire" will refer to the rebels as terrorist, because to them that's all they see and that's what they are told day in and day out, but try living in Palestine for a year, as a normal person going on your daily business and see if you don't change your views.

 

Nothing here but more two-wrongs thinking.

 

I've actually POSTED on the Liberty incident on these very boards before. I've charged Israel with covering up that incident, with human rights violations, and with just general "going too far" many times. That's because I don't believe that two wrongs make a right. You bet, I'll speak out against Israel when it does things it shouldn't. Absolutely.

 

But none of that has anything to do with what's happening right now. Two wrongs don't make a right. Not now. Not then. Not ever.

 

----------------

 

The civilians of Lebanon have known full well, for YEARS now, that they needed to do something about Hamas and Hezbollah. They've been unable to do so. Some of them PREFER not to. This in spite of overwhelming international condemnation of their actions.

 

Now they're paying a price for that inaction/inability. It sucks, no question about it. It didn't have to become violent. I hope it becomes less violent and a diplomatic solution is found. But it's absolutely reasonable for the international community to demand the end of Hamas and Hezbollah. Absolutely. No question about it.

 

It's pretty much as simple as that. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that rarely in the history of the modern Middle East conflict have things been so clear.

[ecoli]

I can certainly understand the feeling of being caught in the middle that millions of innocent civilians are experiencing. There's no question that those people are getting a raw deal. I feel for them, I really do.

 

The civilians are certainly getting the raw end of the deal. The worst part, is that they don't even know whos ultimately to blame.

 

They are taught to hate Israel for their problems, when in actually it's their own government's fault. Lebanon is unable or unwilling to disarm Hezbollah, so they allow them to stay in southern Lebanon. They fire rockets into Nothern Israel, but when Israel fires rockets back, they are called inhumane monsters for trying to kill the poor Arabs.

 

Now, Hezbollah is targeting Haifa, the third largest city in Israel, yet the press still seems stuck on how disgusting it is that Israel is trying to defend itself.

 

I'm no military person, so I don't know whether Israel is using the best methods, or why they are choosing the targets they are choosing. But, I'm sure they have good reasons for it.

 

The civilians of Lebanon have known full well, for YEARS now, that they needed to do something about Hamas and Hezbollah. They've been unable to do so. Some of them PREFER not to. This in spite of overwhelming international condemnation of their actions.

 

Just a slight correction, there really is no Hamas presence in Lebanon, as far as a I know. It's pretty much just Hezbollah. But, your point is still valid.

 

Now they're paying a price for that inaction/inability. It sucks, no question about it. It didn't have to become violent. I hope it becomes less violent and a diplomatic solution is found. But it's absolutely reasonable for the international community to demand the end of Hamas and Hezbollah. Absolutely. No question about it.

 

Except when the rest of the world sees them as freedom fighters. I find it hard to believe that nobody else seems to realize that if Hezbollah disarmed, then IDF would stop fighting them.

 

This is especially true of the Palestinians. They want to be free from Israeli occupation, but when presented that chance, they turn to terrorist organizations (Hamas) whose policies only makes things more difficult for themselves.

 

It's pretty much as simple as that. In fact, I would even go so far as to say that rarely in the history of the modern Middle East conflict have things been so clear.

 

You're probably right. There's a clear motive and a clear goal. Israeli officals have stated that they will pull out of Lebanon and end all blockades when Hezbollah is disarmed and there is a strong military presence from Lebanese army to keep an eye on things down there.

[Phi for All]

Who am I talking about?

Does it have anything to do with arms sales?

 

 

At the back of my mind, whenever I hear about new or old flare-ups of hatred, I picture someone lobbying for the arms dealers.

 

Lobbyist: "Are you going to just let them take your land like that?"

Hothead #439: "We don't like it, so we're sending someone to negotiate."

Lobbyist: "And how long will that take? You know those people never listen."

Hothead #439: "What do you suggest?"

Lobbyist: "How much is it worth getting that land back once and for all? I know these guys...."

 

Who stands to lose billions if sales are down because some sort of peace is achieved?

[Severian]

The civilians of Lebanon have known full well' date=' for YEARS now, that they needed to do something about Hamas and Hezbollah. They've been unable to do so. Some of them PREFER not to. This in spite of overwhelming international condemnation of their actions.[/b']

 

Terrorism worked for Israel. Why wouldn't it work for Lebanon and Palestine?

[ecoli]

Terrorism worked for Israel. Why wouldn't it work for Lebanon and Palestine?

 

Hezbollah are the instigators here. The use of violence only attracts more violence, as the they have learned by now. Now it's too late. Israel is not going to stop until Hezbollar is disarmed. They can't comprimise with the safety of their people.

 

 

btw... I'm pretty sure that was a strawman argument.

[Severian]

I meant there is a historical precedent in the region for the use of terrorism. I of course think attacking civilians in any form is atrocious. However, I do think that Israel is creating its own problems. If Hezbollah and Hamas were to attack only Israeli military targets I think they would get a lot more support from Europe.

[CPL.Luke]

unfortunatly when israel pulled out of palestine it looked to the majority of people living there like hamas had played a critical role in forcing the israeli's out of palestine, and hamas being the only political party with any semblance of legitamacy in the eyes of the palestinians was a logical choice to be elected. We also have to face the unfortunate fact that without hamas the israeli's would never have pulled out of palestine, while I'm not neccessarily saying that what hamas did was the only way to oust israel, it obviously did work and if the terrorism had stopped then it would have succeded and created a palestinian state.

 

I can't be certain on what would have happened if the palestinian's had engaged in a non-violent protest, but I would bet even money that the israeli's would have just called in the riot control in order to breakup the protests, and in the eyes of most palestinians America will support Israel no matter what Israel does (who could blame them for taking this point of view when faced with Israeli tanks shooting at kids in the west bank).

 

Also I believe that in the late 80's and early 90's there were a number of non-violent protests that didn't accomplish anything.

 

The only way to ensure that terrorism isn't seen as the only option for groups seeking equality is to show to the world that non-violent protest can work in the middle east. The only way to do that is to show that the US will not allow Israel to do whatever they will and cut military aid if the ISraeli's abuse their power.

 

 

The civil rights movement would not have succeded in the US if the average american didn't care when protesters were sprayed with fire hoses

[ecoli]

I meant there is a historical precedent in the region for the use of terrorism. I of course think attacking civilians in any form is atrocious. However, I do think that Israel is creating its own problems. If Hezbollah and Hamas were to attack only Israeli military targets I think they would get a lot more support from Europe.

 

Perhaps, but they don't. Extreme intepretations of the Quran causes them to think that it's not only ok to kill civilians, but it's required.

 

unfortunatly when israel pulled out of palestine it looked to the majority of people living there like hamas had played a critical role in forcing the israeli's out of palestine, and hamas being the only political party with any semblance of legitamacy in the eyes of the palestinians was a logical choice to be elected. We also have to face the unfortunate fact that without hamas the israeli's would never have pulled out of palestine, while I'm not neccessarily saying that what hamas did was the only way to oust israel, it obviously did work and if the terrorism had stopped then it would have succeded and created a palestinian state.

 

Perhaps, but I'm acutally less worried about Hamas then I thought I would be at this point. They seem to be slowly neutralizing their extreme positions. I suppose havin to deal with the real problems of their region has wised them up a bit. I hope that the relationship with Hamas may become better.

 

I can't be certain on what would have happened if the palestinian's had engaged in a non-violent protest, but I would bet even money that the israeli's would have just called in the riot control in order to breakup the protests, and in the eyes of most palestinians America will support Israel no matter what Israel does (who could blame them for taking this point of view when faced with Israeli tanks shooting at kids in the west bank).

 

You have no idea what would have happened because this didn't happen. It's foolish to assume that Israel would have the same response to violence as it would to non-violence just because the media presents them that way.

 

Also I believe that in the late 80's and early 90's there were a number of non-violent protests that didn't accomplish anything.

 

I disagree... relationships between Palestinians and Israeli's were a lot better in the 80's, I think.

 

The only way to ensure that terrorism isn't seen as the only option for groups seeking equality is to show to the world that non-violent protest can work in the middle east. The only way to do that is to show that the US will not allow Israel to do whatever they will and cut military aid if the ISraeli's abuse their power.

 

However, Americans should not feel that defending their citizens is an abuse of power. By disarming a violent terrorist organization now, Israel can save countless deaths down the road... and that's essentially on both sides.

 

The civil rights movement would not have succeded in the US if the average american didn't care when protesters were sprayed with fire hoses

It's a different situation in the middle east, though. The Palestinians aren't being suppressed simply because they are Palestinians. They are being suppresed because there are many poeple amoung them who would kill every Israeli man, woman and child if they could... and even more amoung them who support that attitude.

 

So, do I think Israel is too harsh with the Palestinians? Perhaps... but I keep wondering what I would think if it was MY life that was at risk, should the Israeli's relax their policies.

[5614]

No one seems to have yet mentioned that there are rockets falling on Haifa, a major city in Israel. Latest news is that Israel have deployed Patriot interceptor missiles (anti-ballistic missiles) within the city.

 

I was watching the news the other day and, as always, they were interviewing loads of different people showing both points of view, there was one that I think is worth mentioning, just because no one seems to even be considering this:

The guy (can't remember who, some ambassador or something) said that he remember how Israel has reacted in the past, taking control of vast areas of land. In 1982 Israel went as far as to capture Beirut, the capital of Lebanon. Comparatively, said this person on TV, Israel have shown restraint this time.

 

Otherwise, like said in the original post, I'm wondering whether this will spread to Syria and Iran. Nearest it has got to that is the recent attacks near the Lebanon-Syrian border.

 

And as for whether this is all justified... well, who can say? It is pretty big reaction. But then the sudden kidnapping of several soldiers on two fronts is pretty big (especially as the region seemed to be a bit more peaceful/stable recently). One could also argue that this has been building up for a while. One could also argue that Israel will go "all-out" for a few days before giving in to political pressure and stopping. No one knows.

 

I want to know what would happen if all the kidnapped Israeli soldier were returned, unharmed, to Israel. Sadly I don't think, realistically, this is a likely scenario. So how can/will this end?

[Pangloss]

Terrorism worked for Israel. Why wouldn't it work for Lebanon and Palestine?

 

I don't think the average citizen in Lebanon either approves or desires Hezbollah and/or its ways. They're just caught in the middle.

 

Edit: I misunderstood you there, but it's not quite the same since the Israeli targets were not civilians. But I think criticism of Israel's actions here is valid up to a point. One could draw an analogy to the situation between the US and Saddam Hussein in 2003. It's not quite the same, since Israel is responding to an attack, but they are escalating beyond the level that international opinion will support.

 

At any rate, regardless of the justification, this is where I think that Israel can (and should) stop. They have a right to defend themselves, but the effort they've embarked upon is not going to achieve the desired result -- it cannot demolish Hezbollah (or for that matter Hamas), it is unlikely to get them their soldiers back, and it will make the situation worse. (Obviously they have to respond to the rocket attacks, but the attacks on leadership and infrastructure targets have accomplished their goals and should be, at least temporarily, discontinued, as an overture towards peace.)

 

They've done a great deal of damage; in a sense, they've made their point. Very loudly. Now's the time to try the olive branch again.

[Pangloss]

Does it have anything to do with arms sales?

 

I've no idea on that one. What I was aiming at is Iran. Iran is an obvious puppet master in this conflict. It funds Hezbollah, and likely approved the attack/kidnapping that started this conflict. They're happy as clams right now, because regardless of the outcome, they win. It distracts attention from the situation with their nuclear program, it destabilizes the region at a time when destabilization favors Iran, and it makes the US look bad, all at the same time. They can't lose.

[ecoli]

No one seems to have yet mentioned that there are rockets falling on Haifa, a major city in Israel. Latest news is that Israel have deployed Patriot interceptor missiles (anti-ballistic missiles) within the city.

 

Actually, I did mention that in my last post.

 

I was watching the news the other day and, as always, they were interviewing loads of different people showing both points of view, there was one that I think is worth mentioning, just because no one seems to even be considering this:

The guy (can't remember who, some ambassador or something) said that he remember how Israel has reacted in the past, taking control of vast areas of land. In 1982 Israel went as far as to capture Beirut, the capital of Lebanon. Comparatively, said this person on TV, Israel have shown restraint this time.

 

Wow... I didn't even consider that. That's a good point.

 

Otherwise, like said in the original post, I'm wondering whether this will spread to Syria and Iran. Nearest it has got to that is the recent attacks near the Lebanon-Syrian border.

 

It's possible, but I'm hoping a peaceful solution can be reached before that becomes necesary.

 

And as for whether this is all justified... well, who can say? It is pretty big reaction. But then the sudden kidnapping of several soldiers on two fronts is pretty big (especially as the region seemed to be a bit more peaceful/stable recently). One could also argue that this has been building up for a while. One could also argue that Israel will go "all-out" for a few days before giving in to political pressure and stopping. No one knows.

 

Certainly... we'll see what happens.

 

I want to know what would happen if all the kidnapped Israeli soldier were returned, unharmed, to Israel.

It depends if they were returned voluntarily or if they were re-captured by the Israelis.

 

Sadly I don't think, realistically, this is a likely scenario. So how can/will this end?

Too many possibilities. What I hope, is that Hezbollah will be disbanded and force to give up arms. The IDF will pull out of southern Lebanon and end the blockade, and the Lebanese military will establish themselves in the region.

 

Israel will rebuild damaged infrastructure in Lebanon and Israel.. Perhaps other joint projects with the Lebanese government could help build ties between the two countries.

[5614]

ecoli, my bad, you did mention about Haifa...

 

it cannot demolish Hezbollah (or for that matter Hamas), it is unlikely to get them their soldiers back, and it will make the situation worse.

Yep. And this is the whole reason this keeps coming back.

 

As long as groups like Hamas and Hezbollah exist they will aim to destroy Israel. As they cannot be totally destroyed by the military and politics doesn't work... what is there left to do?

 

Israel can try to kill leaders and destroy HQs, and politicians put them under political pressure. It will all die down for a bit (like it has the past few months), but sooner or later violence will flare up again, as it is now.

 

Meanwhile two British Navy ships, HMS Illustrious and HMS Bulwark, will, within the next 24 hours, be departing for Lebanon. I think with the intention of safely evacuating UK citizens. Could be interesting seeing as there are Israeli warships in the water and the port to Lebanon is destroyed.

 

And Korea have already rejected the new resolutions passed by the UN.

 

World seems a pretty screwed up place!

[ecoli]

I've no idea on that one. What I was aiming at is Iran. Iran is an obvious puppet master in this conflict. It funds Hezbollah, and likely approved the attack/kidnapping that started this conflict. They're happy as clams right now, because regardless of the outcome, they win. It distracts attention from the situation with their nuclear program, it destabilizes the region at a time when destabilization favors Iran, and it makes the US look bad, all at the same time. They can't lose.

 

I think there is some intellegence going around that the kidnapped soldiers (including sharit) are being held in Iran.

[Skye]

@darkangel199: note that the UN does provide aid to Palestinian refugees under the unrwa http://www.un.org/unrwa/

 

Also, Israel doesn't use the Abrams tank, it uses its own Merkavas.

[5614]

I think there is some intellegence going around that the kidnapped soldiers (including sharit) are being held in Iran.

I haven't heard anything about the soldiers. Got a source?

[ecoli]

Part of the problem, is that if Lebanon deploys troops to fight Hezbollah, it may incite another civil war in the country.

 

Right now, the government is asking for help from the UN: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738699.html

[padren]

Part of the problem' date=' is that if Lebanon deploys troops to fight Hezbollah, it may incite another civil war in the country.

 

Right now, the government is asking for help from the UN: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/738699.html[/quote']

 

 

I think if Israel was interested in diffusing the issue as quickly as possible and removing the threat, they should have gone to the UN and demanded action while threatening to move in if action wasn't taken, while behind the scenes pushing through the UN for Lebanon to deal with Hezbollah.

 

(I am not saying they are trying to something else, but I do think they are intentionally escalating the violence and believe that is the best most certian way to deal with the problem)

 

If it had been done discreetly enough, Lebanon could have moved against Hezbollah under pressure of and with the help of the UN, but if they do so now, they would be doing so to apease an attacking force, which no civilian body will ever tolerate of its government.

 

So now, from here it will only get hotter.

[ecoli]

If it had been done discreetly enough, Lebanon could have moved against Hezbollah under pressure of and with the help of the UN, but if they do so now, they would be doing so to apease an attacking force, which no civilian body will ever tolerate of its government.

 

The Lebanase gov't has done nothing so far to stop Hezbollah. Perhaps it would only take military action from Israel for Lebanon to act.

[5614]

I think if Israel was interested in diffusing the issue as quickly as possible and removing the threat, they should have gone to the UN and demanded action while threatening to move in if action wasn't taken, while behind the scenes pushing through the UN for Lebanon to deal with Hezbollah.

I totaly disagree.

 

Political action would take a long time and even then it would be as effective at getting the soldiers back alive as it is from stopping Iran from continuing its weapons programme, ie. totaly ineffective.

 

Lebanese government have not done anything for years, why would anything change now Hezbollah has become more active? Also the importance of the Lebanese government in this whole situation is somewhat questionable. It is more about Hezbollah and the like and where they get their orders from ie. Syria & Iran.

 

Meanwhile nations including: UK, USA, Italy, Germany, France, Turkey, Greek & Spain have/are evacuation their citizens from Lebanon:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5184134.stm

 

Can I just ask; what are 10,000 Britons, 25,000 Americans and 20,000 French people doing in Lebanon???

[ecoli]

I haven't heard anything about the soldiers. Got a source?

 

Yeah, I read it in one of the Haaretz aritcles. It's unconfirmed though, and Tehren is dening it, so who knows.

 

I totaly disagree.

 

Political action would take a long time and even then it would be as effective at getting the soldiers back alive as it is from stopping Iran from continuing its weapons programme' date=' ie. totaly ineffective.[/quote']

 

And meanwhile, Hezbollah rockets fired from Lebanon would continue to kill and injure Israeli civilians... but that's ok because they're freedom fighters. [/sarcasm]

 

Lebanese government have not done anything for years, why would anything change now Hezbollah has become more active? Also the importance of the Lebanese government in this whole situation is somewhat questionable. It is more about Hezbollah and the like and where they get their orders from ie. Syria & Iran.

 

Under pressure, it's possible that Lebanon would act, but I have my doubts about that. They are still too worried about the fact that their population is still split about Israel.

 

It's a shame, because without Hezbollah, I'm sure Israel and Lebanon could do great things together.

 

Meanwhile nations including: UK, USA, Italy, Germany, France, Turkey, Greek & Spain have/are evacuation their citizens from Lebanon:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5184134.stm

 

Can I just ask; what are 10,000 Britons, 25,000 Americans and 20,000 French people doing in Lebanon???

 

Perhaps gov't related jobs?

[padren]

I totaly disagree.

 

Political action would take a long time and even then it would be as effective at getting the soldiers back alive as it is from stopping Iran from continuing its weapons programme' date=' ie. totaly ineffective.

 

Lebanese government have not done anything for years, why would anything change now Hezbollah has become more active? Also the importance of the Lebanese government in this whole situation is somewhat questionable. It is more about Hezbollah and the like and where they get their orders from ie. Syria & Iran.

[/quote']

 

The Lebanese government has not been hard on Hezbollah because many of its citizens are sympathetic (and undoubtly a number of citizens in government positions, as often happens) and it wants to survive.

At this moment, the Lebanese government is pretty much out of luck.

 

Had it been made very, very clear to them that bombing would commence if immediate action was not taken (privately - such a threat publically from Israel would destroy their credibility with their own people) they could have chosen to react "outraged" to Hezbollah's actions, and initiated action against them with UN support. (Granted UN support would not come instantly, but aid in such an urgent anti-terror operation could have been hurried)

 

Now, since Lebonese property and personel (and civilizians) are being killed along side Hezbollah terrorists by Israel, the public will only be more galvanized into siding with Hezbollah against the Israeli threat.

 

I think the Lebonese would know how serious the Israel military is and if harshly and privately threatened to take action, they would have chosen to comply. Now, compliance is out of the question, because there is no way for the government to justify compliance with a foreign attacking military unless the majority of military assets have been effectively incapacitated or destroyed.

 

It doesn't matter why people are killing your people - whether you personally did horrid things or not - surrendering without a fight is something very few cultures can tolerate, for any reason when you see your own people being killed by that enemy.

 

 

Edit:

Just as a fun exercise, what acts by US citizens or government agencies would be bad enough that we could accept capitulating to the offended nation after that nation killed a number Americans on American soil and blew up American airports and infrastructure?

[Jim]

Just as a fun exercise' date=' what acts by US citizens or government agencies would be bad enough that we could accept capitulating to the offended nation after that nation killed a number Americans on American soil and blew up American airports and infrastructure?[/quote']

 

Let's suppose a bunch of young republicans invade Mexico and kidnap a couple of Mexican soldiers. We then refuse the demands that we return the soldiers or gain control of these young ruffian republicans and instead agree with the YR's demand for a concession from Mexico.

 

Then, to make this analogy work, let's say Mexico crosses the border in force and starts kicking our butt and we have no realistic way of answering Mexican muscular response. In that event, I suspect we'd find some way to give back the soldiers if that's what it took. Alternatively, we might hint at a crack down on the young republicans very much as the Lebanese PM is now hinting.

[Pangloss]

I think there is some intellegence going around that the kidnapped soldiers (including sharit) are being held in Iran.

 

I've heard this speculation as well. I think that would be a mistake on Iran's part -- shades of 1979. But I don't know enough about the socio-political atmosphere inside of Iran to know how that would "play in Peoriabad".