"Stop the war now" - I'd rather die tommorow

[Bettina]

Waiting with abated breath....

 

Bee

[Severian]

So do you think Israel should have gone to war' date=' but in a different way, how? Or do you think Israel should have never gone to war?

[/quote']

I don't have a problem with Israel going to war in principle - but I don't like the way they did it.

 

They should have given an ultimatum to the Lebanese government itself: either

 

1. Kick Hezbollah out of the Lebanese government for firing rockets into Israel, and cooperate with Israel in apprehending the 'criminals'.

 

OR

 

2. Accept implicit responsibility for Hezbollah's actions.

 

This ultimatum would have appeared very reasonable to the west; either Hezbollah are part of the Lebanese government, in which case the Lebanese government is sanctioning their actions, or it is not.

 

Undoutedly Lebanon would not have chosen No 1. They wouldn't explicitly choose 2 either, but once the deadline set by the ultimatum is past they have implicitly accepted 2.

 

Israel then has reasonable grounds to declare war on Lebanon - and not some half assed 'lets create a buffer in southern Lebanon' bull. They would have grounds for a complete regime change.

 

They should have gone in on the ground, and made sure that they minimized civilian casualties and try to behave like a liberating force. Give out food and shelter to the dispossessed; help refugees on the roads rather than bombing them; bring in medical supplies. They could even have invited and funded aid agencies to come in and help. They would have taken a lot of Isareli casualties, but hey, that's war.

 

They should have moved on to Beruit, overthrown the Lebanese government, announced new elections and outlawed Hezbollah. Then they should have invested heavily in Lebanon to encourage growth and liberalism.

 

The reason they didn't do this is obvious: it would be rather militarily costly. The government would find itself in trouble when the body bags returned home. The Israeli public would also not have approved of investing money in rebuilding Lebanon.

 

Also, if they admit that Hezbollah are not terrorists (and they are not) they would lose the support of the US's 'war on terror' because it would become a conventional war between two nations.

 

Israel's big problem is that they refuse to approach the world as a nation-state. They insist on approaching the world as 'the Jewish people'. That makes their conflicts religious wars of Jew vs Muslim, rather than the more easily settled Israel vs Lebanon.

[Sisyphus]

Completely agreed with the above. However, I'd also like to add that the cost of invading Lebanon, occupying the country and forcing a regime change would be even higher than that. The Lebanese would certainly be hostile to it, and it would be a horrible quagmire that would occupy their military (which they need strong), probably for decades, during which the world would forget the original reasons for being there and just see an occupying army in a religious war. And if it did work, the rest of the Middle East would just become hostile to Lebanon as well, maybe even more than towards Israel for being "traitors." No puppet government of Israel could possibly survive. Even worse, though, they would pretty much have to declare war on Syria and Iran as well, for which "catastrophe" would be something of an understatement.

[5614]

Severian: you're idea sounds alright, but there are many reasons why that couldn't and wouldn't happen.

 

> Initial political process (with the ultimatium) would take too long for a country which wanted a quick response to the kidnapping.

> Too many Israeli deaths.

> Too much financial cost.

> The Israeli public would not like it.

> Even if Israel gave out food/medical supplies the Lebanese people would not like Israelis invading and taking control of their country.

> Just like many years ago when Hezbollah was formed to force Israel to withdraw from Lebanon the same thing would happen now. Fights would break out everywhere as Lebanese tried to prevent Israel taking total control.

> Terrorist groups like Hezbollah do not easily respond to political talk.

 

And also if you think about how long it took for the Israelis to capture a few southern villages. Hezbollah are guerilla fighters who have had years to build bunkers and tunnel networks. It would be very hard to take over Lebanon, militarily. And what of the thousands of Hezbollah militants? And of the thousands of civilians who become militants as there country is invaded?

 

And what would the rest of the world say if Israel went and invaded Lebanon, overthrowing the governement?

 

Remember the Lebanese government can't fight against Hezbollah, militarily, as Hezbollah is a part of the government and anyway it would most likely cause a civil or internal war. And Hezbollah would win the fight anyway.

[Jim]

I don't have a problem with Israel going to war in principle - but I don't like the way they did it.

 

They should have given an ultimatum to the Lebanese government itself: either

 

Isreal was in a race against the clock before international, and ultimately US pressure, built to a fevered pitch... as it ultimately did. An argument that they should have waited is an argument t that they should have done nothing.

[budullewraagh]

I still don't see how not invading Lebanon was a bad option.

[5614]

For two reasons bud:

 

Firstly the captured soldiers situation. In the past Israel has had to exchange hundreds of personnel for just one or two Israelis, sometimes the Israelis were dead, and Israel still exchanged hundreds of prisoners just for the one or two dead bodies. This is a very bad exchange on Israel's behalf, they did not want to be forced into another "exchange".

 

Also by reacting this way and not doing a prisoner exchange, as they have in the past, they have shown Hezbollah and Hamas that capturing Israelis and demanding the release of hundreds of prisoners simply will not work. This is an important message to get across to prevent future kidnapping.

 

Secondly the missile situation. Missiles have been hitting northern cities in Israel almost daily for many months (probably years, moo will know). Just as you don't hear much about deaths in Africa, so you don't normally hear about rockets landing in Israel, but they were there and they were very real.

 

With the rocket attacks so frequent you could almost argue that this war had been brewing up for a long time, and with each rocket Hezbollah fired into Israel the war got a little closer.

 

They also had all of the Israeli public behind them. And were supported by countries like the USA for helping in the fight against terror.

[budullewraagh]

Who said they had to make a trade? If I were the Israeli PM I'd rather have two of my soldiers executed than suffer the losses Israel has suffered during this war.

 

Plus, they failed to make much of a message. They attacked and Hezbollah used their attacks to further its agenda. In effect Hezbollah was unharmed.

 

Israel is no better off than they were before- sure, UN peacekeepers will arrive in 10 days but if Hezbollah wants to attack, they will. UN forces certainly are not nearly as effective as the IDF was and the IDF failed miserably at diminishing Hezbollah's attacks.

[john5746]

Who said they had to make a trade? If I were the Israeli PM I'd rather have two of my soldiers executed than suffer the losses Israel has suffered during this war.

 

It's not that simple. They need to worry about FUTURE kidnappings, etc. That's like saying you would rather pay the bully $1.00 then risk getting beat up. Sounds ok until you total the monies over years.

 

Plus' date=' they failed to make much of a message. They attacked and Hezbollah used their attacks to further its agenda. In effect Hezbollah was unharmed.

 

Israel is no better off than they were before- sure, UN peacekeepers will arrive in 10 days but if Hezbollah wants to attack, they will. UN forces certainly are not nearly as effective as the IDF was and the IDF failed miserably at diminishing Hezbollah's attacks.[/quote']

 

The only thing keeping Hezbollah from exterminating Israel is the threat of force. I don't beleive they just want to be martyrs, if they did they would line up against the army and charge against them, not hide. So, they are afraid of dying. If all they get are bombs when they take hostages, maybe they will do less of it in the future. I think you need more of a special ops ground forces to fight these guys, rather than bombing the place excessively, but I think a show of force, rather than a barter is a better response.

[john5746]

I know' date=' and since I understood from your point where the idea that Israel doesn't care about children came from, I decided to point out why I think this idea is flawed.

 

The meaning was not to say the picture you've given is wrong, it was just to say it's irrelevant.. pictures are usually one sided. Mine are too, obviously.

 

By the way; NOW - after the gun fire died out in the ceasefire - israel starts to look into its own actions. As I said before, Israel is far from being an angel, and the country itself knows it. There are already (quite soon) inquiries into the behaviour and decision making of the government and military.[/quote']

 

Looking at it from another perspective, if Hezbollah somehow took control of Northern Israel, would Israel bomb them as much as they did in Lebanon, or would they concentrate on ground attack? I think it is clear that people in a nation do not value the lives of other civilians as much as their own.

 

The fact that there will be inquiries and admission to mistakes and regrets clearly seperates Israel from Hezbollah. It makes things more difficult for Israel, because caring is more difficult than not caring.

[Bettina]

Who said they had to make a trade? If I were the Israeli PM I'd rather have two of my soldiers executed than suffer the losses Israel has suffered during this war.

Really.... what about two more soldiers.....then civilians.... etc.

 

Israel is no better off than they were before- sure' date=' UN peacekeepers will arrive in 10 days but if Hezbollah wants to attack, they will.[/quote']

Wrong. They are much better off as was already discussed in other threads. The world will pass judgement on Hezbollah if they don't behave in front of U.N. peacekeepers.

 

UN forces certainly are not nearly as effective as the IDF was and the IDF failed miserably at diminishing Hezbollah's attacks.

Have their been any more attacks?

 

Where are you going with this anyway?

 

Bettina

 

EDIT>>>> oops... others beat me to it.

[gcol]

I think you need more of a special ops ground forces to fight these guys, rather than bombing the place excessively,

 

Whichever side actually came out on top, I think Hezbullah scored a resounding points victory for their tactics. Special ops ground forces would involve a greater loss of military personnel rather than bombing the fuzzywuzzies from a few thousand feet, out of range of their spears.

 

Losses of Western and Israeli forces' (let's call them coalition) military personnel seem to inflame western political opinion more than colateral civilian casualties.

[john5746]

Whichever side actually came out on top, I think Hezbullah scored a resounding points victory for their tactics. Special ops ground forces would involve a greater loss of military personnel rather than bombing the fuzzywuzzies from a few thousand feet, out of range of their spears.

 

Yes, similar to a criminal taking hostages. Instead of bombing the building, you try and talk them down, then spring the special forces if that doesn't work. It risks the policeman's life for the sake of the hostages. I realize Hezbollah is more than a rag tag bunch of terrorists and do have some support in Lebanon, but as a rule, less bombing and more ground attacks should be more effective in killing the actual bad guys and less of the innocents.

 

Losses of Western and Israeli forces' (let's call them coalition) military personnel seem to inflame western political opinion more than colateral civilian casualties.

 

I think it is the opposite. More military deaths and less civilian deaths would find more international support, but less national support.

[budullewraagh]

It's not that simple. They need to worry about FUTURE kidnappings, etc. That's like saying you would rather pay the bully $1.00 then risk getting beat up. Sounds ok until you total the monies over years.

 

No, it's more like walking by and hoping the bully doesn't beat you up, then running away when he takes a swing at you. According to this analogy Israel's actions could be equated with the kid punching the bully, then getting punched back before running away. In the end we know that tomorrow the kid (Israel) is going to have to walk by that bully the next day with the hopes that the bully doesn't attack again.

 

Actually, to make this a bit more accurate, Izzy (Israel) has to punch Hezekiah's (Hezbollah's) best friend's mom in the process, prompting the new friend to join Hezekiah's cause.

 

The only thing keeping Hezbollah from exterminating Israel is the threat of force. I don't beleive they just want to be martyrs, if they did they would line up against the army and charge against them, not hide. So, they are afraid of dying. If all they get are bombs when they take hostages, maybe they will do less of it in the future. I think you need more of a special ops ground forces to fight these guys, rather than bombing the place excessively, but I think a show of force, rather than a barter is a better response.

There are a few things wrong with y our logic. Firstly, Hezbollah, you and I are fully aware that Hezbollah lacks the ability to invade and/or destroy Israel. They can, however, have economic and social effects on Israel by firing 200 or so rockets into northern Israel, killing 2-3 people daily. Secondly, as I've said on numerous occasions, Hezbollah was strengthened by this war. They are now able to exploit the situation they were given: they are doing the reconstruction and they are also telling everyone how bad Israel was for killing civilians and destroying the Lebanese infrastructure.

Finally, Hezbollah wants to actually do their best to make life hellish for everyone in Israel. If they all charge into Israel they're stupid and self-destructive. The fact that they don't charge towards Israel en masse, stand in a big line waiting for Israeli guards to shoot them, or burn themselves to death does not mean that they are not willing to die for their cause if they lose a fight. Besides, what could a deserter do? He'd be shot on the spot!

 

Really.... what about two more soldiers.....then civilians.... etc.

Better to lose them than strengthen the enemy.

 

Wrong. They are much better off as was already discussed in other threads. The world will pass judgement on Hezbollah if they don't behave in front of U.N. peacekeepers.

Har har. Who liked Hezbollah before the war? Iran? Syria? Think they'll start hating Hezbollah now? Nah- Iran just gave Hezbollah a blank check for reconstruction. Now, think that Hezbollah really cares what ANYONE (save Iran and Syria) thinks of them? Nope.

 

Have their been any more attacks?

 

Where are you going with this anyway?

No, but in case you didn't notice, every day reports came in of 200+ rocket attacks in northern Israel. On the day before the ceasefire the number was at its all-time highest: 250. What this means is that despite their efforts to defend themselves, Israel made no progress. Now that Israel is NOT a presence in southern Lebanon, Hezbollah is even less inhibited and Israel basically needs to hope Hezbollah doesn't attack again. After all, the UN forces that will be in southern Lebanon will certainly not be as effective as the IDF was when they were around. So, as I said, because they have made no progress in disarming Hezbollah, Israel just needs to hope they aren't attacked again.

[Bettina]

Ok, budullewraagh. I want to play your game and have some questions.

 

You said you would let your soldiers and civilians get captured and consider it a loss.

 

How many rockets will you allow to strike Israel each week?

 

How many soldiers/civilians are you willing to lose each year?

 

Bee

[budullewraagh]

Unlimited if the other option is to suffer even greater losses. Well, I'd have to make a limit if popular support in my nation were to fall significantly. But actually, while not attacking I'd figure out better solutions. I think the obvious no-brainer would be to do everything in my power to avoid civilian casualties if I were to have no choice but attack. Also, excessive destruction of infrastructure would be something else to avoid, unless I were to have enough money to repair said infrastructure. Once again, Israel terribly mishandled the situation they had: they called everyone in southern Lebanon a terrorist and totally ravaged the country while not slowing down Hezbollah attacks. Then they didn't even offer to provide reparations, allowing Hezbollah to do so and win over the hearts of the Lebanese people. What would I have done? I would have waited and formulated a better mode of attack than declaring everything a legitimate target.

[mooeypoo]

This is beyond rediculus. Unlimited??

 

This is like talking to a brick door. All you want is Israel to be Baaaad. No matter why, if it's realistic, if it's good suggestion. You don't give a damn. No matter what Israel does, other than letting its civilians be murdered, it is a bad nation.

 

But actually, while not attacking I'd figure out better solutions.

Israel DID THAT, damnit, check what you're suggesting! After the attacks started, Israel waited for almost ten hours before going in. After the airforce went in, Israel waited more before sending in ground troops, and while the fighting, Israel wanted TALKS.

 

If you say "i'd try to figure out a better solution" you're being condecending. Israel TRIED TO THINK of those. It found none. If you think there's a better one, GIVE IT! Don't say "I'd try". Yes, I would try too. What would happen if you'd FAIL in finding a better solution????

 

You'd just keep unlimited amount of people being hurt, just so YOU can have the condecending appeal.

 

You keep ignoring us when we ask for solution. If I ask you to give me one, saying "try to think of something better" is NOT A SOLUTION! It's a condecending remark.

 

 

I can't keep this argument going, you're like a thick brick wall ignoring our questions when feel like it, and being extremely condecending.

 

If Canada attacked your house with missiles, mister New York man, you would be crying to have someone in your side helping crush the terrorists who kill your family and destroy your homes. What would you have done then if your government would've decided that it's better to have UNLIMITED DEATHS than to defend you?

 

Don't even answer me, I'm not interrested. Until you put your feet back on our earth, talk logically, and suggest things that are realistic instead of just looking for every possible way to blame israel for all your troubles, the world troubles, and lebanon troubles, I'm just plain not interrested.

 

Some people here were against Israel's actions, but had good points to suggest. You're just repeating idiotic unrealistic condecending points.

 

Unlimited lives.

 

God help us all.

 

~moo

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Let's not let this descend into personal insults. Please calm down a bit and take a pause before making your posts.

[mooeypoo]

I didn't personally offend anyone, I said that he was condecending, which he is.

 

That is not a personal insult, it is an insight on the way this thread is going.

 

 

~moo

[Bettina]

Unlimited if the other option is to suffer even greater losses. Well, I'd have to make a limit if popular support in my nation were to fall significantly. But actually, while not attacking I'd figure out better solutions. I think the obvious no-brainer would be to do everything in my power to avoid civilian casualties if I were to have no choice but attack. Also, excessive destruction of infrastructure would be something else to avoid, unless I were to have enough money to repair said infrastructure. Once again, Israel terribly mishandled the situation they had: they called everyone in southern Lebanon a terrorist and totally ravaged the country while not slowing down Hezbollah attacks. Then they didn't even offer to provide reparations, allowing Hezbollah to do so and win over the hearts of the Lebanese people. What would I have done? I would have waited and formulated a better mode of attack than declaring everything a legitimate target.

 

Thanks for answering my question. It gives me an insight into your thinking and although I respect your right to differ, I'm glad your not in charge of a nation that is supposed to protect me or any other citizen.

 

Bee

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I didn't personally offend anyone' date=' I said that he was condecending, which he is.

 

That is not a personal insult, it is an insight on the way this thread is going.

 

 

~moo[/quote']

I know, but we're getting rather close to meltdown at this rate.

[Pangloss]

I agree with the Captain. I know it's hard to see sometimes when you're in the midst of a heated debate, but I think valid points have been made by both sides and the discussion has been fruitful. This is one of the most interesting long-term (14-page!) discussions that I think we've had on this board in the time I've been here (several years now). I think you have to step back and look at the positive and realize that there's only so much you can accomplish in a discussion.

[5614]

Oh, it's only 6 pages for me!

Who said they had to make a trade?

Before Israel attacked, and even in the inital stages of their attack both Hamas and Hezbollah made offers for the return of the kidnapped soldiers. The inital offer asked for about 400 prisoners to be released for 2 of the kidnapped soldiers. I think that offers after that were during Israel's attack, and I think the number only went up from 400 to even more.

 

budullewraagh: you have a viewpoint and are perfectly allowed to have. You seem to understand the situation ok, but I think there's one important view point you are missing. That is the Israeli public. There has been (with the previously mentioned kidnapping and constant bombardment of northern Israeli towns) a growing feeling within Israel that something needs to be done about the 'terrorist problem'.

 

I said previously about how the war has been "brewing up" (or was that another thread?). Just remember the Israeli public all supported the war. And the government even more than the public were aware how overdue the war was.

 

Israel is no better off than they were before

I see why you say that, but Wrong. The international community is well aware of the issue now. If Hezbollah attack again the international community will see it as the second time Israel has been attacked and will be forced to accept that Israel must defend itself. Also there's the pressure on Lebanon to keep groups like Hezbollah under control, and the pressure on Hezbollah not to start another war. Basically it got the world aware of the issue which has been brewing for the last few years, and which until now most of the world was happily ignoring.

 

UN peacekeepers will arrive in 10 days but if Hezbollah wants to attack, they will.

I totaly agree. This is a big problem.

 

UN forces certainly are not nearly as effective as the IDF was and the IDF failed miserably at diminishing Hezbollah's attacks

UN forces will not be anywhere near as effective as the IDF, if the UN does anything useful at all it would be suprising. But I think saying that that the IDF "failed miserably" is unfair.

[ParanoiA]

Well, I think the IDF did fail miserably at diminishing Hezbollah's attacks. They didn't seem to stop them at all, so that would be a failure. And they never seemed to be able to steamroll over Hezbollah - it was always a long ferocious fight, sometimes followed by a retreat dressed up as a business decision. They just didn't shine like we've come to expect from a first class modern military.

 

And it seems most of the world expects this kind of military to be able to limit the death blow to the warriors, while still being swift, efficient killers themselves - and I do too. People just aren't going to accept killing civilians in any conflict anymore. It doesn't matter which side has the legitimate complaint. This is a good thing.

 

I wish Israel would have gone in on the ground and made more of an effort to avoid civilian casualties. Perhaps persistant real-time video footage from various areas of fighting, so people can see Hezbollah in action. I have no doubt, we would see that ugly side of humanity, which would serve Israel's interest.

 

It really doesn't matter if Israel has a right to defend themselves in this manner or not. That's not going to stop the recruitment momentum in Lebanon started now by killing all of these innocent people. I believe if you're going to play war, you have to truly fight the war on all fronts, which includes global PR. This is the front that feeds the future of terrorism - the validation of their rhetoric.

[budullewraagh]

The way I see it when someone joins any form of military or militia, he or she signs up to die. What I don't understand is why when a soldier gets shot in the head it's a "sad thing" but when a soldier gets taken prisoner it suddenly becomes a whole lot worse. Had the people who abducted the prisoner just shot him in the head people would hardly care. I consider kidnappings and deaths to be both bad occurrences but not particularly different in the magnitude of "badness." If I were a leader I certainly wouldn't automatically start a war just because 1, 2 or 10 soldiers were abducted. I also wouldn't necessarily start a war even if 1, 2 or 10 civilians were abducted and/or killed.

 

Let's flip the scenario around a bit. Imagine that Israel had little to no defense whatsoever and Hezbollah was slowly picking off civilians one by one. Sure, this would be a really bad thing. Absolutely terrible. However, would I, as Israel's PM, want to attack Hezbollah with my 10 tanks and 200-man army? No, of course not- this would make Hezbollah increase the rate of abductions and killings. If I were to try to figure out a better way, sure, my inaction wouldn't solve the problem but at least it wouldn't make the problem worse.

 

And yeah, I think that the Israeli population had reason to be angry and understandably wanted someone to pay for their transgressions. Unfortunately those who paid were the wrong people: the Lebanese. The Israeli population during the war became as ridiculously extremist as the population of Lebanon is becoming now; they all supported the war despite its horrible failures in harming Hezbollah and its massive success in messing up Lebanon for the civilians. The thing that we have to remember is that mob rule is not a good idea. The fact that the Israeli population wanted the war doesn't mean the war was in their best interest. We'll see the negative results show up for years.

 

Hezbollah never cared about what the international community or Israel thought of it. All they care about is Syria and Lebanon. What can the west do? Impose economic sanctions? Nobody trades with Hezbollah in the first place! Support Israeli attacks in Lebanon? Hezbollah wants to pick fights with Israel, hence the rocket attacks and abduction of soldiers! Make the Lebanese government take action to regain control of its nation? Too late! Hezbollah already has the hearts of the Lebanese people because nobody else is providing anywhere near the amount of humanitarian aid that Hezbollah is providing. Sure, the world knows about it but what can we do?

 

UN forces will not be anywhere near as effective as the IDF, if the UN does anything useful at all it would be suprising. But I think saying that that the IDF "failed miserably" is unfair.

Please tell me where they succeeded. Last I checked, a bunch of Hezbollah's long-range missile launchers were destroyed but Hezbollah attacks on Northern Israel did not decrease in frequency throughout the war. Also, Israel left a gigantic vacuum that resulted in Hezbollah winning over the hearts of the people of Lebanon. Oh, and Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah is still alive. Also, the Syrian population apparently is now calling for action to remove Israeli occupying forces from their lands. So, where's the success?