| Author | Message | ||
     tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4501 Registered: 12-2001  |
"The French want Israel to stop attacking Hezbollah communication lines within Lebanon. It believes that force should only be used "proportionately" in times of war, which explains why they lost to Germany in 1940 despite having a larger army. The great lesson of the last century has been that anyone wishing to win a war should avoid taking advice from France, and it's comforting in a strange way that France has decided to extend that axiom into the 21st century. " Most revisionist post of the day. The French, who fought bravely and sacrificed enormously in both world wars, almost lost WW I in August, 1914 because they chose to attack when it would have been better to hunker down. And they were overrun in 1940 partly because they chose to hunker down when it would have been better to attack (in September, 1939) and partly because German tactics were state of the art in 1940 and it would be a couple of years before the Allies could close the tactical gap. | ||
| Eric Wertheim Citizen Username: Bub Post Number: 216 Registered: 1-2005 |
Press coverage about factual issues is maddeningly shallow and narrow. For instance, who are the Lebanese prisoners Hezbollah wants to free? I learned, from blogs, that there are three - one of whom snuck into Israel in 1979 and killed a father and his 4 year old daughter. You can watch CNN for 24 straight hours and never see this question asked. More obvious questions are where are the missiles being launched from and is Israel having success hitting them. One talking head, talking out of his •••, said they were being launched from the Shiite neighborhoods of Beirut - I don't think so. | ||
| Dave Supporter Username: Dave  Post Number: 10166 Registered: 4-1997  |
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/article.asp?cu_no=2&item_no=97043&version= 1&template_id=37&parent_id=17 | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 728 Registered: 1-2006 |
Willingly killing a four year old. What does the sister think of that? jd | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 729 Registered: 1-2006 |
Dave: This is a long blog, from bullmooseblog, and I hope you will let it stay on. I think this person does a very good job of defining the issues with clarity. jd Monday, July 17, 2006 Asymmetrical Warfare The Moose suggests that world opinion is vastly overestimated It is said that the current conflict in the Middle East is an example of asymmetrical warfare. It is, but not in the way most consider this type of conflict. Asymmetrical war commonly refers to the situation where one side has vast armaments and the other must rely on guerilla or terrorist tactics. When the Moose invokes the term asymmetrical warfare,he is referring to the current moral dilemma that confronts Israel. Unlike every other nation in the world, Israel is condemned and cautioned when she defends herself. She can't win in the arena of the world diplomatic community. It is stacked against her. That is the real asymmetrical battle. Predictably, vaunted and valued world opinion is denouncing Israel. Already, the United States was forced to use its veto to stop a condemnation in the UN for the Gaza incursion. Nation after nation is lining up to denounce Israel's actions of self-defense in Lebanon. Interestingly,along with the U.S., the countries who may be most supportive of Israel's actions are the Arab states such as Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Egypt who deeply fear the power of Iran. Europe, however, the home of the Holocaust, is mostly eager to get their licks in on Israel. Senator Schumer put it well, "Europeans have forgotten the Nazi Holocaust and expect Israel to let Hamas and Hezbollah attack with impunity. It was in Europe that the Holocaust occurred only 60 years ago, and that's why Israel was created, so there would be a safe haven for the Jewish people," he told WNBC/Channel 4's Gabe Pressman. "They are not evenhanded. I say shame on them. Can you imagine if missiles from Italy or Switzerland rained in on the third biggest city in France?" Of course, the world will talk of restraint and even-handedness, but the only restraint they care about is that Jews should not defend themselves. "World opinion" is almost always wrong when it comes to the conflict. As a matter of fact, when is world opinion right? During the thirties when Hitler was on the march, the world appeased. During the eighties when Reagan confronted the Soviets, the world howled. When Rwandans were slaughtered , the world shrugged their collective shoulders. There is a clear way to prevent any further tragedy and threats to the fragile government in Lebanon. The world should force Iran and Syria to halt their proxies from attacking a sovereign state. Fat chance, that. The only thing that is disproportionate is the cowardice of the international community in confronting Iran. What this conflict is about is an Islamist war on the non-believers. They want the non-Islamic outpost removed. With their Syrian allies, the Iranians have used their proxies to attack Israel and divert attention from their nuclear program. As others have pointed out, this is the equivalent of the Spanish Civil War which is a prelude to a broader war. And the Palestinians matter little - they are only a sideshow. The Iranians are at war with the West in their effort to become the dominant regional power. This is not just Israel's fight. And just as the world appeased Hitler, they will strive to placate the Jew hating mullahs in Iran. But, this time the script will be different. Those pesky Jews have a state and an army to defend it. And in the asymmetrical moral war, the world will condemn every act of self-defense of the Jewish state. So be it. Thank God there is America. At least here, there is little moral ambiguity about the nature of this conflict. The Moose agrees with those who argue that America should be more involved in the region. For too long we have tolerated Iranian mischief in Iraq. And it is time to step up the pressure to stop Tehran's nuclear ambitions. Weakness invites further turmoil. Unfortunately, whatever moral confusion that exists in America is largely found on the left. That is odd. After all, there is only one state in the Middle East - Israel - that provides full democratic rights for Arabs, gay rights, labor rights and women rights. And what of the so-called progressive blogosphere? At best, there is moral ambiguity. While they can easily rant and rail about the misdeeds of the Bushies, even the more thoughtful bloggers can only lament how "complex" the issue is. However, posts and discussion threads are usually toxic wast dumps for anti-Israel garbage. See here, here , here, and here. Encountering this vile venom, M.J. Rosenberg wrote on TPM Cafe, "So it's quite the surprise to see the vile Jew-baiting directing at me for simply saying that Israel has the right to defend itself against Hezbollah while restating my view that Israel must negotiate immediately with the Palestinian to implement UN Res 242... "But what I see here is pure and simple race hatred. Frankly, if I saw any of you walking down the street, I'd hide my kids. You are old fashioned anti-semites, what my father-in-law would have called pogromchiks. I suspect Jews are not the only minority you despise. Haters don't usually confine themselves to one group. "Get yourselves over to Aryan Nation where you belong." The lefties claim that they are resolute terror fighters - they boast that they supported the Afghanistan war. Yet, Israel is removing terrorist havens just as America did in Afghanistan. But where is the full throated support for Israel's actions from the bloggers? Democratic pro-Israel politicians who have become enamored with the blogosphere take note - is there one major left blog that is unabashedly supportive of Israel? The lefty bloggers are not just upset about the Iraq war, they are resistant to any serious effort to combat terrorism - including Israel's right to self-defense. If you want to find the most visible anti- Israel sentiment in the Democratic Party, take a trip around the left wing blogosphere that is so heralded and pandered to these days. Please forgive the Moose - perhaps he is incapable of the deep and subtle thoughts that easily occur to his lefty friends. Maybe, the deep mysteries of the Levant elude him. But, this is how he sees the situation - a democratic, progressive state is fighting aggression initiated by two terrorist organizations which are proxies for fascist Jihadist states that seek to project power and eliminate Israel. The Moose avers that in this asymmetrical moral war there are no neutrals here. -- | ||
| Larry Seltzer Citizen Username: Elvis Post Number: 110 Registered: 4-2006  |
tjohn, Valient as they may have been, they have a history of getting their asses kicked. When is the last time the French won a war where their opponents weren't throwing spears at them? Was it Napolean? | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 1054 Registered: 4-2006 |
Larry- Put Jerry Lewis in charge of their army. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 570 Registered: 3-2005 |
Larry, when is the last time the U.S. won a war? Grenada? And Joel, your bloggers seems to forget how fast we hightailed it out of Lebanon when they started throwing more than flowers at us. I certainly wish the U.S. had taken France's advice to both stay out of Vietnam and not to invade Iraq. Considering that Donald Rumsfeld is at the head of our army, there's much reason to worry about who will be getting the last laugh on us. Jerry Lewis would be less of a clown. Show of hands: How many people know that the government of France is a rightwing government? | ||
| J. Crohn Supporter Username: Jcrohn Post Number: 2572 Registered: 3-2003 |
"Press coverage about factual issues is maddeningly shallow and narrow." Wertheim, you're right. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 12169 Registered: 5-2001 |
The problem for the west, and I include Israel in that definition, is that we try to fight asymetrical warefare with conventional forces. In the end this is doomed to failure. We lost in Vietnam, the USSR got its butt kicked in Afghanistan and we are making little progress in Iraq. Israel can bomb all the infrastructure of Lebanon and essentially turning it back to the middle ages, kill many, even a majority, of the Hezbollah idiots and destroy a large proportion of their rocket supply, but they will survive and rebuild and in a year or two have even more rockets to rain on Israeli cities. | ||
| Larry Seltzer Citizen Username: Elvis Post Number: 111 Registered: 4-2006 |
Kathleen, I could get more controversial than this, but how about Desert Storm? | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 1059 Registered: 4-2006 |
kathleen- France is pro-arab, always has been since the '70s. Especially now as they have the largest muslim population in Europe. They also don't want to stir up the muslim "youths" who burned thousands of cars in France in protest against the government last year. Bob K- The Israelis are a bit more sophisticated than that, and have more experience in fighting terror. They have also been restrained by the US in the past in terms of how they could deal with the Palestinians millitarily. Expect a concerted campaign to make Nasrallah and the leadership of Hezbollah room temperature. Targeted assasinations have been proven to work, and set back terrorists for years. BTW, is it me or does the leader of Hezbollah look like Eric Cartman with a beard and turban? | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1305 Registered: 2-2004 |
Bob I don't disagree. Then in another two years Israel or us can blow their crap up again. It's kind of like weeds. You have to spray every season even knowing you won't get total victory. And knowing that every time you go on a three week vacation they are going to have their way. That is why I limit my vacations to no more than 12 days. And believe me, I have plenty of weed killer on hand. And sometimes I even let a section grow just so when I hit it I can watch it slowly wilt and die. | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 644 Registered: 2-2003 |
Several weeks ago on another thread I suggested that an effective response by the Israeli Government to the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit would be to suspend its bombings of Gaza and to call President Abbas to Jerusalem to announce a joint effort to free Shalit. The concept was to empower Palestinian moderates, expose the extremists as the enemies of peace, and to diminish the influence of Hamas. Winning hearts and minds. The Israeli Government instead chose to continue destroying the Palestinian infrastructure, increasing the pain and loss of life on the Palestinian civilian population. Losing hearts and minds in Gaza and throughout the Middle East. Another result of this policy was a second provocation by Hezbollah -- the kidnapping of two more Israeli soldiers. And the Israeli Government responded exactly how the provocateurs wanted -- by launching military attacks on the Lebanese civilian infrastructure, causing pain, death and suffering to the entire Lebanese population. Losing many more hearts and minds. Israel's security obviously requires a powerful military, which must be used pre-emptively when necessary. But equally important, Israel's security depends on minimizing the influence of those who wish to destroy it, like Hamas and Hezbollah. It's a cliche that truth is the first casualty of war. It's also the case that those who challenge war are often called "traitors" or "cowards." In this discussion the terms "anti-semitic" or "anti-Israeli" are more prominent. In my view, the Israeli Government had the opportunity to use both provocations against the extremists in Gaza and Lebanon. But instead, it chose a course of action that plays into the hands of the extremists. They are very happy with Israel's military attacks and the ongoing "collateral damage." But for those who think the Israeli Government's military response to the two provocations has made Israel safer and enhanced its security, I'd like to ask the following questions: (1) Does Hamas have more or less supporters among the Palestinian population and more or less followers willing to die for their cause as a result of this policy? (2) Does Hezbollah have more or less supporters among the Lebanese population and more or less followers willing to die for their cause as a result of this policy? And by the way, does anyone know how many Hezbollah soldiers have been killed by the Israeli military attacks? | ||
| FlyingSpaghettiMonst Citizen Username: Noodlyappendage Post Number: 206 Registered: 11-2005  |
Not enough. | ||
| Hoops Citizen Username: Hoops Post Number: 1690 Registered: 10-2004  |
FSM - I think that is Pauls point exactly. They cant kill enough Hezbollah terrorists before more are recruited into the fight. The more they destroy the more enemies they create. | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 645 Registered: 2-2003 |
Hoops, That's one point I'm making. But as for my last question, I haven't seen any casualty figures for Hezbollah. I'm not aware of any. If anyone can provide them, please do so. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 733 Registered: 1-2006 |
Payback by proxy. It’s not as if the United States doesn’t have a bill of particulars against Hezbollah. This group has been responsible for more American deaths than any terrorist group after al Qaeda. Let’s not forget the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing that took the lives of 241 Marines. Or the bombing of our Beirut embassy, which killed 63, of whom 17 were Americans. Or the bombing of our embassy in Kuwait. Or the kidnapping, torture, long term captivity and ultimate death of Beirut station chief William F. Buckley. Or the other Americans taken hostage in Lebanon in the 1980s. Or the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847, in which Petty Officer Robert Stethem was beaten, shot, and thrown out of the aircraft onto the tarmac of the Beirut airport. Or Kuwait Air Flight 221, which resulted in two USAID officials being killed. Or the 1990 murder of Colonel William R. Higgins. More recent reports have Hezbollah supplying snipers to insurgents in Iraq to pick off Coalition (principally American) forces. Three of the FBI’s 29 most wanted terrorists are Hezbollah operatives, one of whom, Imad Mugniyah, is a senior leader who participated in most of the abovementioned actions and may have ties to al Qaeda. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 12174 Registered: 5-2001 |
Hard to see a tie with the fiercely Shia Hezbollah with AlQaeda, especially in Irag where the late leader was a staunch Sunni. However, I don't like Hezbollah either. Assasinations work short term. Long term is another question. I still have a mental image of the Israeli gunships chasing the wheelchair bound former head of Hamas down the street as he wheels as fast as he can, but couldn't escape the missles. | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4503 Registered: 12-2001 |
FvsF, If Israeli counter-terrorism efforts are so good, why is it that the Arabs have been fighting back with increasing effectiveness since their low point of 1967? I think that Southerner's comparison of fighting terrorism to keeping a garden weed free was valid up to a point. The important point of distinction is that the weeds in my garden aren't intelligent beings that return each year with improved methods of attacking my garden and resisting my herbicides. The problem in the Middle East is that based on the current path of events, the end of the madness will be in the form of one or more mushroom clouds in five years or ten years or twenty years. Maybe that is what it will take. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 736 Registered: 1-2006 |
The problem is the religious inclinations of those who still believe Spain is temporarily in the hands of Europeans, just like the rest of Europe. Al-Andalus is theirs. First Israel, then Europe, then the World. You and I don't think like that, but millions of oil money fueled Muslims really do. So, they fight on, until eliminated. A long war is upon us. jd | ||
| tjohn Supporter Username: Tjohn Post Number: 4505 Registered: 12-2001 |
JD, I suppose that if you mess with the yellow jacket nest in the corner of your yard, you would immediately claim that they were out to take over your whole yard when they defended their nest. If there was no Israel and no natural resources (therefore, minimal foreign meddling) in Arabia, I daresay we wouldn't be engaged in this conflict with Islamic extremists. | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 12175 Registered: 5-2001 |
Joel, it must be tough to have such horrible prejudices. Moorish Spain was a heck of a lot more tolerant, including towards Jews, than the regime that followed it. Remember the Inquisition? Will you have catsup with the roasted fingers or will you take them plain? | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1307 Registered: 2-2004 |
tjohn, I have the southern version of weeds which do indeed learn from previous seasons on means of attack. You obviously have "blue" weeds! Paul, You make an interesting point, but I'm afraid you have such a utopian view that of course your reasoning makes sense to you. The problem is you believe in the "moderate" myth. Thankfully, your belief system has no access to power these days. But I enjoy reading your bleeding heart posts because they are mostly well thought out. We just have different premises. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 737 Registered: 1-2006 |
One person was killed on Tuesday afternoon in Nahariya following a rocket barrage on the city. According to reports, the rocket hit the man as he left the bomb shelter he had sought refuge in. Another man was reportedly wounded in the northern city. All-in-all 125 rockets fell on northern Israel on Tuesday, Israel Radio reported. 3 people were wounded in Safed by rocket fire on Tuesday. | ||
| joel dranove Citizen Username: Jdranove Post Number: 738 Registered: 1-2006 |
I don't think the Islamist find it tough at all. They haven't relinquished their Seventh Century prejudices, and live in the dark ages, with modern weapons. jd | ||
| J. Crohn Supporter Username: Jcrohn Post Number: 2573 Registered: 3-2003 |
"Hard to see a tie with the fiercely Shia Hezbollah with AlQaeda, especially in Irag where the late leader was a staunch Sunni." It's not hard to see a tie at all. Hizballah has trained al Qaeda members. Shia Iran sent weapons paid for by Sunni Saudi Arabia to secular/Sunni Yasser Arafat. "I suppose that if you mess with the yellow jacket nest in the corner of your yard, you would immediately claim that they were out to take over your whole yard when they defended their nest." Oh, they're only defending their nest? Such a view betrays either inattention or an unbounded attribution of all Islamist imperialism (that's what it is) to western provocation. But Islamist imperialists view anything that stands in their way as a provocation. Your whole yard is their nest: Sheikh Omar bin Bakri, Syrian-born British Islamist and former leader of the Islamist "Al-Muhajirun" organization in Britain, whose activities in Britain were stopped in October 2005, now resides in Beirut. In an interview, Sheikh Omar bin Bakri told the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat that he would not consider returning to Britain until it "repealed its terrorist laws through which it terrorizes peaceful Muslims in Britain" and that "loyal Muslims in Britain will one day turn it, with Allah's help, into 'Islamistan.'" He also repeated statements he had made in 2001 about the "banner of Islam" flying over British landmarks and government buildings.(from MEMRI.org) Understand, the Muslim conquest of the mideast and parts of Europe, and the subsequent Arabization of the entire mideast (once comprising a plethora of what now are referred to as "minorities"), have always been regarded among Islamists as G-d-ordained. But unlike western imperialism, there has never been any widespread critique of Islamic imperialism in the lands conquered by Islam, and so no real rejection of imperialism other than the foreign kind. The was a period of Communist influence and in the 1950s and 60s Islamist imperialsm reemerged, now transmogrified into pan-Arabism, which was essentially an attempt at nationalizing Islamist imperialism. I.e., pan-Arabism became a secular, ethnic proxy for Islamist imperialism. That movement was largely discredited following the 1967 War with Israel, leaving ideological room for the ascent in the popular imagination of the Muslim Brotherhood (Ikhwan), which had formed in the 1920s as a reaction to secularization in Egypt. The Ikhwan was violently suppressed, then exiled, then allowed back into Egypt on condition that it renounce violence. So now their website cautions--officially--that overthrowing governments is "risky" and that the Islamification of all "Muslim lands" should if possible be accomplished through existing political structures. But Muslim lands are, in the more radical imams' estimation, any country in which there is a significant community of Muslims. I once came across a handbook for Muslim parents living in the west. Published by some local Muslim council in Canada, it advised (among many otherwise perfectly reasonable, but sometimes extremely conservative things) that the objective of Muslims living in Canada should be to change society from within, until it became Islamic. Also, young boys should not be discouraged from playing with guns, as long as they were guided to play jihad. Apropos of that, I seem to recall that just a few weeks ago a group of Islamists were caught planning to blow things up in major Canadian cities and cut off the Canadian PM's head. Must be because Canada is a terribly provocative nation that goes around the world stirring up yellow-jackets' nests. Anyway: the Ikhwan ultimately spawned and inspired a variety of other Islamist groups throughout the mideast and Asia, including parts of the former USSR and the Balkans. Among them is al Qaeda; Ayman al Zawahiri was a member of the Ikhwan in Egypt in his youth. These groups are a reaction to a combination of modernity, secularism, the dissipation of the Islamic empire, and contact with the west. They have also fought on behalf of Muslim communities against subjugation, as in Afghanistan against the Russians and Kosovo against the Serbs. Funnily enough, they can't seem to recall that the US stood with them in those conflicts. Israel provides a flashpoint, for sure--it is especially humiliating to have the dhimmis that even other dhimmis subjugated and slaughtered by the millions ensconced in "Muslim lands." But I think it's rather unrealistic to think the west would not have had to contend with Islamism's rise but for Israel. Oil, maybe. But even that analysis seems rather simplistic to me, given that imperialism and economic globalisation would have brought the west into contact with the failed Islamic empire in any case. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 572 Registered: 3-2005 |
Larry, Why did Cheney take us back into Iraq? Why did George Bush (pappy) lose his re-election bid? What was their "victory"? It certainly wasn't a durable peace. Or did you think the wise policy was, in fact, military containment of Saddam, not his removal? I hope you don't think the point of Desert Storms was the "liberation" of Kuwait. And let's call Desert Storm by its real name: Gulf War II. Looks like Gulf War III isn't going to resolve the instablity in the region either. Think we'll even bother to take sides for Gulf War IV? Something tells me another Bush soon will be telling the public it was "victory" and leaving. Strange how mighty military empires get undone -- not by being defeated by superior military forces -- but by being bled from millions of tiny cuts from the people they thought it would be a cakewalk to defeat. Joel, Do me a favor and explain to Smarty Jones in his thread about "global war on terror" how American's high gas consumption funds Islamicist terrorists. I don't think he'll believe me if I explain it. As for the US response to Hezbollah, one incident you cited resulted in Ronald Reagan cutting and running out of Lebanon, another instance you cited resulted in RONALD REAGAN GIVING IRAN ADVANCE MISSLE TECHNOLOGY in exchange for hostages -- and wouldn't it be a cruel irony if Iran used that technology in the missles now being launched at Israel? Tell me again why it is you trust these people to protect lives in Israel? Paul, I saw Rami Khoury quoted as saying that no Hezbollah fighters had been killed in Lebanon (which indicated to him that they had evacuated their known hideouts immediately after the kidnappings), but other than that, I've not seen any discussion of it either. | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 1069 Registered: 4-2006 |
tjohn- I have to find the author's name and book title for you ( I read a number on the Middle East) but a counter-terrorism expert addressed your very post. First Palestinian terrorism was largely negligible until the Palestinians under Arafat signed the Oslo Agreement with Israel in 1993. What you would want to call the "occupied territories" were largely peaceable and sustained significant economic growth ( compared to when they were under the rule of Jordan) under Israeli "occupation". Terrorism before this was not from the territories, but rather from Arafat's Fatah organization and mostly abroad. When Arafat and his crowd of cronies moved back from Tunis, according to an agreement with Israel to seek peace and establish a Palestinian state, is when Palestinian terrorism errupted in the 1st and 2nd intifadas. Anyway, the expert I am referring to saw Palestinian terrorism as not becoming more effective as you state but much less so. The targeted killing of the Palestinian bomb maker "the engineer" destroyed Palestinian terror capacity for some time. He viewed a policy of targeted assassinations of Palestinian killers as most effective in his analysis of data as decreasing terrorism as a result. Israel's operation Defensive Shield, set back Palestinian terrorism in the West Bank for several years. The bottom line is that the US has not let Israel defeat Palestinian terrorism by total and widespread action because of it's own national interests, including getting Saudi oil. To say they have been more effective is missing the point. They have engaged in more desperate measures because they have not been effective enough in destroying Israel. | ||
| kathleen Citizen Username: Symbolic Post Number: 573 Registered: 3-2005 |
FVF, You mean rightwingers pander to Arabs and have ever since the 70s oil crisis? You don't say! | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 1071 Registered: 4-2006 |
kathleen- Put your burkha on and post more of that pro-Palestinian drivel from suspect sources.  I said before I am an independent, and don't side with the lefties or the righties. I got issues with the Bushies on the Saudis, but not the war on terror in general or Iran. | ||
| J. Crohn Supporter Username: Jcrohn Post Number: 2574 Registered: 3-2003 |
"You mean rightwingers pander to Arabs and have ever since the 70s oil crisis?" Actually, kathleen, everybody panders to the Arabs, but it isn't to forestall another oil crisis based on political punishment. The Arabs learned their lesson in the '70s: restricting supply or jacking up the price of oil beyond what western economies can sustain reduces demand, which comes back to bite the Arab (in particular, the Saudi) a s s right quick. Then as oil revenues fall, domestic discontent rises. The upshot is, they're just as dependent on our purchasing their oil as we are dependent on buying it. (Not that I disagree with you at all about the importance of the US reducing consumption.) So once that was established, it became clear to parts of the Arab world that they would be much better off currying favor with the west and its oil and gas development companies, which Arabs could profit from as well. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 1146 Registered: 2-2006  |
I neve post here but can somebody explain to me why a country is willing to start attacking when two soldiers are abducted but not when it's just regular citizens? This is a war with Syria and Iran by proxy ... no more no less. Unfortunately Hezbollah doesn't seem to realize that they are just being used by their "friends". Neither Iran nor Syriah could give a crap about them. So now that close to 300 (mostly civilian) people died on both sides to free two professional soldiers it all makes sense?? I don't understand the world anymore. Neiter Arabs nor Israeli have the right to act with such hostility. Frankly the whole world should come down like a ton of bricks on this endless hostility and sanction the crap out of the whole middle east including Israel. Then start worrying about Africa which will become the new Middle East. With Aids and war wipping out the African Population this should be accomplished soon. My poor children and grandchildren will have to live with this hell we created over oil and religion. | ||
| Southerner Citizen Username: Southerner Post Number: 1316 Registered: 2-2004 |
Maybe you'll win the lottery. | ||
| Bajou Citizen Username: Bajou Post Number: 1157 Registered: 2-2006 |
What else from you.... | ||
| Paul Surovell Supporter Username: Paulsurovell Post Number: 646 Registered: 2-2003 |
Southerner, Here's a simplified outline of why I regard your knee-jerk approval of the use of massive military force to be "utopian" -- (1) Al Qaeda attacks the US on 9-11. Response: Invade and occupy Iraq which has no ties to Al Qaeda. In the process 2,500-plus Americans are killed, 20,000-plus are maimed, 150,000-plus serious medical problems. Spend $400 billion-plus of American taxpayer funds. Tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed. Pro-Iranian radical Shiites brought to power. Impact on Al Qaeda -- Big plus. Iraq becomes recruiting and training ground for terrorists, especially use of IEDs. (2) Hamas kidnaps one Israeli soldier. Response: Destroy Palestinian civilian infrastructure, arrest Hamas officials. In the process so far, at least one Israeli soldier killed by IED, dozens of Palestinian civilians killed. Impact on Hamas -- unknown, except for arrests. (3) Hezbollah kidnaps three Israeli soldiers. Response: Destroy Lebanese civilian infrastructure. In the process (thus far) 25 Israelis killed, nearly 300 Lebanese civilians killed. Impact on Hezbollah -- unknown, except leader's apartment building demolished. Financial and economic cost to Israel not yet estimated. | ||
| sbenois Supporter Username: Sbenois Post Number: 15367 Registered: 10-2001  |
1) I believe that the immediate response to 9/11 was the US attacking Afghanistan. 3) Does the crossing of the border into Israel and the KILLING of Israeli soldiers not warrant a mention in your post? Or the lobbing of hundred of rockets into Israeli villages or cities? | ||
| Bob K Supporter Username: Bobk Post Number: 12176 Registered: 5-2001 |
In the news this morning are indications that Israel is going to send some troops into Iraq to look for arms caches and tunnels (shades of Vietnam). What I have read is that it is unlikely that they are going to stay and set up housekeeping. The Israeli eighteen year occupation of Southern Lebanon is still fresh in their minds. During that period they lost 1,000 soliders killed, which is a lot for a small country. Using statistics posted earlier in connection with the toll of suicide bombers, this would be similar to the US losing 30,000 dead. Again, sort of like Vietnam for us and Afghanistan for the Soviets. Obviously, they weren't succesful in wiping out Hezbollah. The almost unsolvable problem is that over the next few years the rockets supplied by Iran to Hezbollah will have longer range. How much of a buffer is Israel going to insist on? | ||
| Nancy - LibraryLady Supporter Username: Librarylady Post Number: 3697 Registered: 5-2001  |
Show your support for Israel at the South Orange-Maplewood Rally for Peace Thursday, July 20 beginning at 7 p.m. in Grove Park (South Orange Avenue at Grove) in South Orange. Speakers scheduled to appear include: Gov. Jon Corzine and local clergy | ||
| Factvsfiction Citizen Username: Factvsfiction Post Number: 1078 Registered: 4-2006 |
and tulip will be leading the rally.  |
