the middle east is going even more apeshit

[hamilton]

Now I see that the Israelis have hit a UN post.

Link

Nice marksmanship.

[meggo]

we're on the same page meggo.

hurray!

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Nice marksmanship.

Possibly :

Israel troops "ignored" UN plea

UN peacekeepers in south Lebanon contacted Israel 10 times before an Israeli bomb killed four UN personnel, sources familiar with a UN report say.

The post was hit by a precision-guided missile after six hours of shelling nearby, diplomats familiar with the initial probe into the deaths say.

The news comes during crisis talks in Rome seeking to end the fighting between Hezbollah and Israel.

The UN secretary general has called for a ceasefire, as fighting continues.

[ollie]

As bad as this situation is I find it even more depressing that Iraq has now been relegated to a 3-minute update, at most every hour ("in other news"), on CNN. Last night's blurb mentioned that about 100 Iraqis are killed each day between suicide bombers, death squads and military action. It's an incredibly desparate situation with no end in sight.

And I was talking to my local pizza guy last night and he was visibly shaken as he told me that his family had to relocate to northern Lebanon. He wants the various factions to fight it out on neutral ground. That would be great if it could happen.

Edited July 26, 2006 by Guest

[guigsy]

this is just what the u.s. needs to take the heat of iraq.. im sure there are more reasons than 1 for the u.s. to not want a ceasefire between the 2 groups, but my cynical mind cant help but think that's right up there.

[Deeps]

Interesting article about the repercussions of fence sitting by the UN and Chretien's inadvertant legitimizing of Hezbollah.

Lately we have been hearing curious warnings from some self-described international affairs experts, politicians, and lobbyists about the "dangers of supporting Israel" and the "abandonment of the multilateral approach."

If these critics would look at the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict in general, and the Lebanese tragedy in particular, they will discover that almost 30 years of a United Nations peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon has done nothing to curtail terror activity against Israel from its northern border.

Western Ideals Need to be Re-Emphasized

[AD]

He wants the various factions to fight it out on neutral ground. That would be great if it could happen.

Great for Israel, not so great for Hezbollah.

AD

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Some forget that Hezbollah is the same organization that destroyed a Jewish community centre in Argentina in 1994, terrorized Lebanon for two decades, and bombed the U.S. marine barracks in 1983.

Re. the latter - my favourite word around all this: "blowback". Bob Woodward, iirc, had a good book about the CIA's involvement (and fuck ups) in Lebanon around that time, but damned if I can find it (timouse, I might have lent it to you).

Found a good PBS page on Hezbollah, though - Lebanon: Party of God (June 2003)

I would never suggest that the West, such as it is, give away the shop in dealing with groups like Hezbollah, but there must be more intelligent and insightful ways of dealing with them than have been followed up to this point (and all the infighting among intelligence organisations in the US alone is no small problem, not to speak of the hopeless hamstringing within and around the UN).

[ollie]

He wants the various factions to fight it out on neutral ground. That would be great if it could happen.

Great for Israel' date=' not so great for Hezbollah.

AD

[/quote']

Well, of course. I meant great for the civilians. Pipe dream I know.

[StoneMtn]

Here's a link to an excellent article on the current Middle East conflict. It's written by a Canadian litigation lawyer, at a top-notch firm. He really sets out the issues well, and discusses them reasonably. I suggest you read the following:

Measured response or war crime? Harper widely attacked for his support of Israel, but he took the right stand, says Neil Finkelstein

[Hux]

I have leanings on this, and often find myself sympathizing with both sides, but the one factor that I think speaks loudly is that whenever you compare actual casualties, it's always the Palestinians/Iraqis/Lebanese who are killed at about 3 times the rate of Israelis/Americans/whoever.

I caught a snippet of Sen. John McCain on Leno last night, and he mentioned that Israel had sustained more casualties in the current conflict "when taken as a proportion of their total population", and I thought, wtf? lives in a smaller country are worth more? total bs, what a dick.

[ollie]

Here's a link to an excellent article on the current Middle East conflict. It's written by a Canadian litigation lawyer, at a top-notch firm. He really sets out the issues well, and discusses them reasonably. I suggest you read the following:

Measured response or war crime? Harper widely attacked for his support of Israel, but he took the right stand, says Neil Finkelstein

Arbour defended a simpler view: Israel was damaging infrastructure and killing civilians, so intentional or not, it was a potential war criminal. Her stance ignores Hezbollah's deliberate blending of its soldiers and Lebanese civilians. Given this reality, it is regrettable that a jurist of Arbour's stature would label Israel's attacks on Hezbollah as potential war crimes.

I think it's regrettable that Israel is also ignoring the reality that Hezbollah soldiers are blending with Lebanese civilians. That Hezbollah does this is still not justification for attacking civilian targets.

[StoneMtn]

What alternative do you see Ollie?

Should Israel just ignore the missiles landing in their country?

[ollie]

What alternative do you see Ollie?

Should Israel just ignore the missiles landing in their country?

I think there must be a number of alternatives. It frustrates me that Israel thinks that the current course of action is the only way to achieve its objectives. Violence rarely solves anything longterm. Yes it will keep Hezbollah at bay for the time being but it comes at the price of scarring Lebanon and the Lebanese for generations to come.

But as far as combat does go... wouldn't a greater ground offensive and hand-to-hand combat limit civilian deaths versus bombing the country's infrastructure out of existence?

[bradm]

It frustrates me that Israel thinks that the current course of action is the only way to achieve its objectives.

It may be that Israel thinks that the current course of action is the best way to achieve its objectives (which include minimizing its troop casualties).

Aloha,

Brad

[ollie]

It frustrates me that Israel thinks this is the best way to achieve its objectives.

[afro poppa]

It frustrates me that Israel thinks this is the best way to achieve its objectives.

I guess when someone threatens your well being by wanting to "obliterate the Jewish state" (said the leader or one of the leaders of the Arab nations, whose name escapes me now) the only option is to defend yourself...unfortunately.

[ollie]

While many world leaders might think wishfully about obliterating the Jewish state, Israel is in fact obliterating Lebanon at the moment.

There are bout 700 dead Lebanese civilians right now. How high does that number have to climb before you become uncomfortable with Israel's reaction? 1000? 10,000? No number too high?

People are being killed and I am sick of both side's "Well, he started it" attitude. We do not accept this kind of behaviour out of school children yet here it is playing out on the international stage.

I don't have the solution but I would like to see some forward-thinking leadership from somebody at the international level. Let's try something new other than blow shit up.

Do you really think Israel will be any safer if and when this situation is resolved?

[Hal Johnson]

Here's a link to an excellent article on the current Middle East conflict. It's written by a Canadian litigation lawyer, at a top-notch firm. He really sets out the issues well, and discusses them reasonably. I suggest you read the following:

Measured response or war crime? Harper widely attacked for his support of Israel, but he took the right stand, says Neil Finkelstein

Thats the most one sided thing Ive read on this in a while. Why not find something NOT written by a person of Jewish decent, and NOT on a political agenda, who defends Isreal's "measured" response?

Should Israel just ignore the missiles landing in their country?

Like the Lebanese have? WTF?

This latest conflict was started by soldiers being kidnapped, and from all accounts that Ive read and heard about, it was to get back Lebanese prisoners, mostly mentioned as women and children. I have trouble believing that they were all women and children, per se, but the point is still evident that Isreal has completely over-reacted.

Its funny too, cuz now all the guys on the talk radio that have defended this for so long are starting to say, "oh, well, Isreal had every right to go in there, but they didnt think this through. It might prove to not solve anything." No f'ing guff....

Edited August 8, 2006 by Guest

[StoneMtn]

What relevance is it that the author of the article is of Jewish descent? (Or so you are presuming, which may not be the case, given that I know a Christian family named "Finkelstein").

I am also entirely unclear what you mean by "not on a political agenda". The matter is political. There's no way around that. If you are suggesting that this person is a member of Harper's party, then you know more than I do about the author.

[Hal Johnson]

one factor that I think speaks loudly is that whenever you compare actual casualties, it's always the Palestinians/Iraqis/Lebanese who are killed at about 3 times the rate of Israelis/Americans/whoever.

Interestingly enough, the "Terrorists" known as Hezbollah managed to take out something like twelve soldiers out of 15 when they first responded, yet the Isreali "Army" managed to only kill about 3 Hezbollah out of 73 people when they attacked.

Oh, and the news just reported that Mourners at a funeral were just bombed.

I dont know how Israeli's arent pissed off right now. Im pissed at my Government for attatching my name to it.

[Hal Johnson]

Im saying he's biased - but now you made me think - mayhaps a knee jerk reaction on my part, in which case, Im sorry - maybe I should have just said I didnt like the article, it seemed very biased...

[ollie]

I don't have the solution but I would like to see some forward-thinking leadership from somebody at the international level.

In particular, a loud voice or two from one of the arab nations. It's going to take a a few brave men from that side to stand up to Syria and Iran.

[Hal Johnson]

Couldn't agree with you more.

[afro poppa]

While many world leaders might think wishfully about obliterating the Jewish state, Israel is in fact obliterating Lebanon at the moment.

What Israel is trying to do is force the Lebanese Government to act against Hezbollah. I don't know if I agree with their measures of doing so, although I do agree that the Lebanese Government should act against Hezbollah...When someone says they want to "Obliterate the Jewish State" I take that very personally...

I just wish they didn't have to kill each other.