Israel to Declare War on Lebanon

I have alreay seeded This Here.

Syria and Russia would dearly love to test there new missle system the SA-18. Hezbollah will have moved the two (Confirmed) hostages to Damascus and as is thier stradegy they will lure Israeli forces over the border where they can be dealt with.

As soon as news of the capture was announced, celebratory gunfire erupted across Beirut's southern suburbs -- a Hezbollah stronghold. Some residents were also seen distributing sweets to passing motorists. AFP

Dennis, I think you are misreading I Spy's comment. I don't see anything in there that would in anyway support the destruction of Israel.

Dennis just stop
I SPY was not saying he hopes Syria and Russia use their new missile systems, he said that Syria and Russia would love to test them. That is hardly reason to believe I SPY feels the same.
This is turning into the same thing as Keld. Instead of just accusing Newsviners of wanting the destruction of Israel why can't the focus be on what is happening over there?

I stand corrected

Syria and Russia would dearly love to test there new missle system the SA-18.

The S-18 is not really that new, 1980s technology that has hardly been updated in the last 20 years. The latest model (Igla S) came out in '02 and is not that much superior to the original. It is decided superior to the Strela family though.

Does the government of Lebanon have the ability, in practical terms, to control Hezbollah? I don't think they have the necessary strength. And yet here's Israel's response to the kidnapping of two soldiers:

A baby was sliced into three and body parts hung from olive trees as the full force of Israeli military might hit rural southern Lebanon Thursday.

In the deadliest Israeli strikes in a decade, at least 39 people were killed.

As the south came under a relentless air assault that destroyed vital bridges linking one area to another, ordinary life came to a standstill as terror-stricken residents hid indoors and businesses remained closed.

...

On a charred mattress rest the remains of a burned baby girl, her arm to one side. Her upper body is at one end of the bed and her lower body at the other.

Police said the 10-month-old and six other family members were killed when an Israeli missile hit their home in the usually quiet village of Baflay, near the coastal city of Tyre.

source

More of the same collective, disproportionate punishment it used in the occupied Palestinian areas, and the same disregard of civilian lives.

I hope Syria and others do join in the war. I'm sick of this kind of response from Israel.

Um, these were air assaults. Who do you think sliced up the infant and hung the parts from a tree? The insinuation is that the Israeli's must have done this, but I would like to know how they managed to do this while flying a plane on a bombing run.

Perhaps if the people that are becoming victims here will realize that they are victims of Hezbollah, they will bring about a change. Israel was invaded and attacked. It was an act of war.

I hope Syria and others do join in the war. I'm sick of this kind of response from Israel.

You don't like someone's actions and you call for them to be punished with an escalation of violence.

Isn't that the same complaint you're levelling against Israel?

What a hypocrite you are.

I hope Syria and others do join in the war. I'm sick of this kind of response from Israel.

Sounds like you are all in favor of a good war! Not sure why that is. I would think that if you were truly anti-war, you would instead be hoping for the release of the Israeli soldiers that were kidnapped. Why are you inciting additional violence?

No Daweb everybody is just sick of the double standards. We did support Israel for years. But after the collapse of the Oslo accords and the recent events we no longer care who wins just as long as somebody does and it ends this stupid occupation by Israel.

So you think the solution is that the Arab world should wipe Israel (an Ally of the US) off the map? or at least give it a good go? What is the double standard that you are so sick of? Do you really think Israel should allow other nations to invade and kidnap their citizens at will?

@daweb, I'm assuming the violent blast from a missile accomplished that, not a person with a knife or anything.

I am in favor of a good war in the middle east. Let's get the issue settled one way or another rather than having decades more of the low-level violence we have now. Plus, it will hopefully pull al-Qaeda and other groups out of Iraq and focus them on Israel if there's a general war. I'm not anti-war, I'm just against the US being involved in wars. Let everyone else blow themselves up all they want.

daweb, unfortunately I have something in common with Hamas. I don't believe Israel is a legitimate state. The proto-Israeli terrorism of the British mandate period led the UK to leave the area earlier than planned, and their only claim to legitimacy would have been if they'd complied with the UN proposal of the time, which they didn't - a proposal that called for a full Palestinian arab state.

People are fed up with this tit for tat crap, its been going on for years and its about time it was sorted out once and for all.

I personally, like I SPY I suspect would like a peaceful solution, the fact is however, there is going to be no peaceful solution, so I do fully understand his desire to see this thing played out and ended. Its not a pretty thought, but I think in the end, it was inevitable that this was going to happen.

I have to wonder if peace is possible in the middle east, regardless of who lives there.

Let everyone else blow themselves up all they want.

So your problem with Israel's responding to the attack on its army and civilians from Lebanon is .... what?

Syria and Iran two countries having signed a military cooperation agreement last month that Syria's defense minister described as establishing ``a joint front against Israel."

You must realise Israel exists because it guards the Eliat-Ashkalon pipeline. So Israel has a future while the world needs this pipe. After that in say 40yrs Israel will get no support internationally. So if Israel wishes to continue they will need to come up with better solutions before then.

Dennis, Israel is a government. Governments are held to the standard of the Geneva conventions. Terrorist groups are criminals and don't follow it, I know. That doesn't mean governments (including our own) can ignore their obligations.

Which terrorist group are we talking about? Hezbollah? The same Hezbollah which is now represented in the Lebanese Government? The Hezbollah that Lebanon is supposed to be disarming under UN Resolution 1559?

This is an attack launched from one sovereign state against another. It's entirely different from the occupied territories. Lebanon is responsible for attacks launched from its soil. You can't just brush it off as the maverick actions of a radical group that no government bears a responsibility for. It can't just wash its hands of it.

Lebanon must bring Hezbollah to book or face the consequences.

If my dog escapes from my garden and damages the neighbour's propery I can't just say, well leave me out of it, take it up direct with the dog, it doesn't listen to me anyway!

Right. Which is exactly why every time an armed drug smuggler from Mexico gets into a firefight with US border officials we respond by bombing Mexican airports. I see your point perfectly now.

If Israel is declaring war on Lebanon, fine. They can fight Hezbollah there all they want in military actions. They still need to try to minimize the deaths of innocent civilians though, under the Geneva conventions.

I have no doubt that are doing that, they always do.

Which is exactly why every time an armed drug smuggler from Mexico gets into a firefight with US border officials we respond by bombing Mexican airports.

The Mexican government I guess are after the same criminals as the US are. If they refused to act I'm sure the US would start to get decidedly cross with them.

Also, you're comparing violence linked to cross-border crime with an outright attack on a nation's army and civilian population.

Dennis:
You don't even need to cite UNR 1559 - it's primarily a restatement of the Lebanese gov't's duties as a part of the Taif agreement.

I am fairly certain you would see a response if a branch of the Mexican government came across the border and killed and kidnapped US soldiers. That would be a comparison to what has happened in Israel, not

an armed drug smuggler from Mexico gets into a firefight with US border officials

And if a part of the Mexican army were helping the drug smugglers I mentioned? It happens.

http://www.dailybulletin.com/news/ci_4016983:

Concerns also were expressed about Mexican military incursions into the U.S. during the past several years. The incursions -- more than 200 since 1996 -- were first reported by the Daily Bulletin in January.

http://www.vdare.com/francis/border_problems.htm:

Last year, according to documented reports of the U.S. Border Patrol, Mexican troops and police officers crossed into United States territory at least 23 times.... In October, 2000, 10 Mexican soldiers were reported to have fired on a U.S. air unit....In March, 2000, two Mexican military vehicles allegedly on an anti-drug mission crossed the U.S. border and actually fired shots at Border Patrol agents.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/3/7/134033.shtml:

Shockingly, the agent revealed, "Our government is aware of these incidents, but refuses to take any steps to stop these flagrant violations."

Yes, if they kidnapped or killed a US border agent that would draw a bigger response than 'merely' firing at our helicopters and agents. But it probably wouldn't involve missile fire or taking out airports. The response by Israel seems too extreme, certain to encourage more violence, and certain to do nothing to get their soldiers back, and may potentially draw Israel into direct conflict with Syria. Not a smart move at all.

Wow, links! That does not mean you are correct.

When has a branch of the Mexican government entered the USA, Killed and kidnapped US servicemen and the Mexican government did not cooperate with the USA and make an effort to bring them to justice.

You have presented examples of 'alleged' incursions and provocative actions. Far different from what has happened in Israel.

Brian:
Does Mexico maintain, as official state policy, pursuit of a reclamation of the Southwest US from the "Gringo invaders"? Is there an ongoing undeclared low-level conflict? Have Mexican officials called for "pushing American imperialists into the seas, both of them!"?

The situations are different and your moral equivalency is getting old, quickly.

I SPY that's a completely ridiculous comment.

I agree with Brian, here. I SPY - your comment is utter nonsense.

I'm speechless ...

LOL at what? The inanity own comment?

I heartily agree.

oops.

LOL at what? The inanity of your own comment?

I heartily agree.

My parenthetical remarks are badly written. What I meant was that: ... The blood of any innocents killed by Israeli missiles/bombs/mortars rests solely on Hezbollah, at least at this point. (G-d forbid any stupid actions by Israeli commanders, just a quick rescue mission, in and out, with, hopefully, no casualties on either side.)

Why does kidnapping 2 soldiers allow Israel to take any actions they want no matter how horrible? Can any other country act however they want if another nation commits an act of aggression? Can the US do whatever they want if another country, or even better group of people in another country, commits acts against us?

Can Hezbollah and Hamas attack Israeli cities, kidnap Israeli soldiers, and place their own people in jeopardy without consequences? How would you suggest Israel dealt with the situation?

Cleareyes-
1. Because it doesn't end with the kidnapping. There's also the bombing and therats.
2. The events yesterday didn't sum up with kidnapping; the Hezbolla started attacking Israeli cities without any provoking from the Israeli side *whatsoever*.
3. Besides the fact that so far 8 Israeli soldiers died in the last 24 hours in Lebanon, and one woman killed from the Hezbollah bombings in Nahariah, what kind of country could allow itself neglect it's kidnapped, probably badly wounded soldiers? What kind of people can allow anything like that?

Can *you* even IMAGINE what's it like to be captured the Hezbollah? Whether you like it or not buddy, if you happen to be christian or American, you're also their enemy. Trust me, you would wish and pray your country comes after you in case you weree kidnapped.

I hope that sheds some light as to why and how.

if you happen to be christian ... you're also their enemy.

What do you mean by that? There are lots of Christians in Lebanon, and they oppose the actions of Hezbollah, because they knew Israel would react as they did.

I got that opinion from here

Maybe it's different in different areas of Lebanon, I don't know.

Amazingly enough Israel didn't manage to annihilate Hezbollah when they occupied southern Lebanon for years. I don't really see that happening any time soon.

Yes, this definitely seems like the start of another middle east war.

Thanks for translating it to the Christian passage. Just because we're of two different faiths (Hebrew and Christianity) doesn't mean it isn't from the same mold.

We're all here for a purpose and that's to serve God (and in my case, God and Christ).

Stay safe, Yaakov! God be with you.

So how long do you go eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth? Tell me something, if I came over and punched your girlfriend in the eye, would you restrain yourself and just punch me in the eye? No, I hope that you would beat the living crap out of me, then drag me into police and press charges. What should Israel do?

nikitab, please stay away from my girlfriend, thank you.

It's sad that some witty inappropriate remark gets more votes (4, 4, 6) than things directly relevant to the subject.

Israel: 3 soldiers kidnapped.

Palestine and Lebanon: 50? 80? civilians killed and civilian infrastructure destroyed. Israel is making no attempt to spare innocent civilians.

I hope there's a huge war and all the jihadis move out of Iraq and target Israel instead. Then we could get out, declare victory in Iraq, and the whole region could blow itself up for all I care.

Amazing to see the war monger coming out of liberals when the target is Israel. Not sure I can understand that tho. Israel is our (USA's) Ally. You do realize this, don't you?

You criticise Israel for military overreaction and call for it to be punished by even greater military overreaction.

How many civilians and innocents will die on all sides if that happens?

This is the most appalling blatant hypocrisy.

daweb, I'm not a liberal. I'm not sure where you got that idea. And warmongering usually applies to urging your own country to go to war. Dear god I hope the US never has even the slightest role in this conflict.

Having Israel as our ally hurts us overseas infinitely more than it ever helps. Plus I'm tired of us giving them so much foreign aid. Why the heck do we prop them up with $2 billion/year aid payments? What does that get us except the hatred of Muslims?

Brian, sorry, I see you are a libertarian. You are also not the only person on this thread calling for war and the destruction of Israel tho...

I'm not calling for the US to do anything about it. I just see that the war that may be starting now is inevitable, if it doesn't start now it will sometime. And I'd like the US to not have any entangling alliances with Israel when it does. If militant Arab groups there want to have a full scale war, fine. I understand the frustration they feel that land that was once theirs is now Israel.

The Arabs occupying the areas now known as the Palestinian/Occupied Territories were given a chance at full statehood by the '47 Partition Plan, but they took the Arab League's pronouncements of imminent victory over the "Zionist invaders" literally and ended up hosing themselves in the process. It's, in large part, their own stupid fault for rejecting the partition plan.

You mean the plan that gave 55% of the land to the Jews, who were 1/3 of the population? I wonder why they didn't like that plan....

Here was the original British hope:

"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."

Instead it ended up with Arabs fleeing their homes in what would become Israel, and Jews fleeing what had been their homes in surrounding Arab nations. The original hope of the British was commendable, but the end result we have today in and around Israel is a disaster that accomplished none of those goals except for establishing a Jewish state. It seems that the international community took the feelings of the current inhabitants of the land too little into account, if they thought about them at all.

The groups that would become Israel were no strangers to terrorism themselves in the years before the end of the British Mandate.

So it comes to this, Brian: do the historic Jews have any claim on the land that now constitutes Israel? Is there a place for a Jewish state? If not, why? What particular events, in your opinion, erased Jewish rights to the area now encompassed? The dispersion by the Romans after 73 A.D.? The destruction of the second Temple? Why do the Arabs, who settled the land post-Roman Empire, have a greater claim on it than the Jews that owned it prior?

Additionally, a good 25% of the land comprising Israel and the O.T.'s was legally purchased from its Ottoman owners prior to '47 by enterprising Zionists. Do the Arabs all of a sudden have claim to that legally-obtained land? Why, in your opinion, is that so?

Please define how the sale of my land by a conqueror who took it by force eviscerates my right to it!

Israel does have a right to have a state, but only by negotiating with the people who owned the land at the time and not by the force of a superior power.

Maybe America should also give the land back to the Indian Ethnic Group that ruled it 3000 years ago. Or since Caucasians all came from around Turkey, Iran and Russia, all Caucasians deserve a state to be set up in Russia?

Since we're all originally from Africa, its time to take back the continent!

I am not contradicting myself; my view is that correcting historical wrongs can be done only with respect for the present alignment of things.

This was the fundamental injustice of 1948.

I do believe that there was a need for a Jewish state, and that is a very complex issue that is a whole other discussion, but my belief is not worth more than my opinion.

The opinon of the people who live in the land called Israel in modern times is more valuable than mine.

the people who owned the land at the time

That would be Britain, in terms of state sovereignty. Shall we ask them if it is OK for Israel to not be destroyed?

Maybe America should also give the land back to the Indian Ethnic Group that ruled it 3000 years ago.

Well it's now 58 years which is too short obviously. Does Israel have to wait the full remaining 2,942 years before all other claims lapse on the basis of your criterion? What shorter period might be OK?

I know, I'll dial up ol' Octavius and see if he wants the land back. No? Sennacherib, perhaps? Surely the Medes want a crack at it - I'll text Xerxes right away and see if he's interested.

If only you knew you just corroborated my point...if only!

Dennis:
Tag away.

Oluseye:
Are you making the ridiculous claim that "Palestinian" Arabs' claim to the country of Israel predates the post-Mosaic Israelite conquests? Clarify, please, 'cause it sounds an awful lot like you are, and I'd hate to think that someone dropped a pallet of stupid in your water supply and you done drunk the whole durn thing.

Obviously not, take a deep breath and read again, and then apply some logic. You'll get my point!

Palestinian right to the land does not predate ancient Israel, even though there is indication that Arabs have been in the area now known as Palestine/Israel since the 3rd Millenium BC.

The obvious point I make, one that would be clear to you with a little bit of dilligent application, is that we also have to respect the situation of things in modern times which 1948 was. As Jerry Springer said and I once wrote about, "if we go back long enough, everyone has to leave the land they're on! If we want peace and stability now, we have to respect the legitimate claims to land based on the current position of things.

I hope you can appreciate that.

You're crazy. Seriously. This idea that "the Arabs only understand blood" certainly didn't work in 1948, 1967, 1973, the first intifida, the second intifida, and so on and so forth. What, do you think the Israeli army was being kind during those wars? That it intentionally restrained itself? Israel and Egypt and Jordan made peace through negotiations, not blood.

Your name gives you away for what you are... a person who takes pleasure in the death and destruction of others. Your "psuedonihilism" may suit you just fine in your bizarre little head, but in the real world people need to find a way to live together.

The IDF wasn't being kind, but it was being restrained. Had they opted for total war during either of the Intifadas, Ramalah and Gaza City would have been reduced to rubble long ago.

Israel and Egypt and Jordan made peace through negotiations, not blood.

I think starting a war, losing it, and then going to the negotiation table before your armies are completely obliterated is about as close as you can get to making peace through blood.

Kwan Se Um Bosal.

Yes, me too. Thanks.

Begun these clone wars have.

I had to fit a Yoda line in somewhere. ;)

Oh yes, just like Hezbollah completely disappeared after Israel occupied Lebanon. Right.

Brian, you're missing a critical point in all of this: the US is giving Israel it's implicit and explicit support in these actions, whereas in the past they have withheld such. We've long acted as a check on Israel moving to total war, particularly in south Lebanon and the Golan Heights and we have consistently chided them to avoid "collective punishment" in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. From the Bush Administration's statements thus far, I foresee no chidings or such directed at Israel. Even the EU has been taking, if not a pro-Israel, at least anti-Hamas stance following Shalit's kidnapping.

I seriously don't think Syria knows what it's gotten itself into this time - next time the IAF buzzes the Optometrist of Death's royal palace, it won't just be sonic booms breaking windows.

Syria? Do you mean Lebanon?

The US has said it holds Syria and Iran responsible. Israel has said it holds Lebanon responsible.

Although:

Yisrael Beiteinu chairman Avigdor Lieberman said that the response must cause not only Hezbollah and Hamas but also their backers in Syria and Iran to regret having attacked Israel.

source

Wow that'll certainly be exciting if Israel is fighting Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and Hamas in Palestine, while the US is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan.

No, I mean Syria. Both the Hizb'allah and Hamas leaderships are based out of Damascus and receive cover from Baby Assad. Hizb'allah gets the majority of its funding and supplies from its Shia brethren in Iran but it gets logistical cover from Syria. Speculation is that Imad Mugniyah, senior Hizb'allah military planner, is behind this particular op and has most likely been coordinating directly with Hamas since prior to the snatch n' grab of Shalit.

Mugniyah is the scumbag responsible for US Embassy bombing in Beirut in '83 and the Marine barracks bombing that killed 241 Americans and 58 French, as well as the Khobar Towers bombings in Saudi Arabia and countless other terroristic acts. The sooner he and his like are sent to the great hereafter to roast in eternal flames, the better off the entire world will be.

So do you think Lebanon could have stopped Hezbollah's raid?

I think:

(1) They should have been acting to disarm Hezbollah for the last 2 years
(2) If too weak to do so they should have beem asking for help (Israel for one would oblige)
(3) Should be putting pressure on Hezbollah now to release the prisoners

First off, it's Hizb'allah ("Party of Allah"), NOT "Hezbollah". Secondly, several of the Lebanese cabinet ministers and gov't officials are members of Hizb'allah and have at least a marginal ability to speak some sense into the terrorist organization's leadership.

Dennis is right: Hizb'allah is a can that the Lebanese gov't has been kicking down the road for a long, long time. During the Syrian occupation, the psychos in Hizb'allah were given free reign in S. Lebanon, as opening a second front on Israel was explicitly in Syria's interests. Prior to and post-occupation, however, the Lebanese have known they have a Hizb'allah Problem and have refused to address it.

Thanks for the spelling correction - I will try to get it right in future!

That spelling pulls up only 5 articles on news.google.com.

Hezbollah pulls up 5,240.

Spelling foreign words often gives weird results like that.

I understand your confusion; however, when talking about Islamist terrorist groups with a decidedly "Kill the infidels!" set of core values, I prefer to take them at their word and be specific when talking about them, even unto the point of calling them by their proper name. They call themselves the "Party (or "Army", as it's sometimes translated) of Allah", thus will I do the same.

That little "o" in the Romanization ("HezbOllah") tends to obscure the fact that these are religiously-motivated nutcases bent on a little pan-civilzation conflict.

First off, it's Hizb'allah ("Party of Allah"), NOT "Hezbollah".

Hezbollah, Hezb-Allah, Hizballah, Hizb Allah, or حزب الله‬, it is the same organization.

@Roan:
Once again, I have no disagreement with your key point. Rather, my overarching point is that the Romanization of the organization's name obscures its fundamentally religious roots. It is an Islamic fundamentalist organization, committed to Islamic supremacy through any means, including widespread destruction and death. It may be a semantic nit, but the explicit invocation of Allah's name is lost in the other transations.

I'm interested in calling a spade a spade, and Hizb'allah is a Semtex-vest-wearin', soldier-snatchin', rocket-firin', "'Islam' means 'Submission', not 'Peace'", terroristic spade.

I understand.

To correct the injustice of denying Jews a right of self determination.

The Wikipedia piece on Israel offers some perspective on the roots of Zionism and the desire for a restoration of the Jewish state.

What it comes down to, though, is that the Israelis/Jews have a historical claim on the land.

To correct the injustice of denying Jews a right of self determination

of course, as we all know, Jews deserve self determination and Palestinians, (the country was then called Palestine) did not at the same time deserve self determination, and actually deserved to have sovereignty taken from them.

The country has never been called "Palestine". The area encompassing much of Transjordan was known colloquially as "Palestine", but it has never been a country. It went from Ottoman to British to Egyptian/Jordanian/Israeli-held territory.

Think I'm wrong? Please provide pointers to the official flag of Palestine. Or perhaps a properly-constituted cabinet and/or parliament expressing self-determination. A King of Palestine, perhaps? No? Surely, a Sovereign or a Crown Prince has existed, correct?

The Arabs living in the O.T.'s got greedy like the dog with a bone in its mouth in Aesop's fable. The dog saw his reflection in a stream and, dissatisfied with his own bone alone, thought he could snatch the bone from the other "dog". He opened his mouth and out dropped the bone, lost into the depths of the stream.

of course, as we all know, Jews deserve self determination and Palestinians, (the country was then called Palestine) did not at the same time deserve self determination, and actually deserved to have sovereignty taken from them.

Who said that? Oh, wait, it was you.

So, essentially, because the jews had that land a long time ago, we thought it'd be a good idea to take it from those who were living there, and give it them...and expect nothing to go wrong?

Would that not be akin to another country coming to the US with the intention of taking all displaced native americans, and making a new country for them on the land we were living on?

I think we should try that. Could only be an improvement!

;-)

That notion is already covered by the whole "reservation" system. We get casinos and cheap cigarettes out of the deal, the remaining Native Americans get hosed by their tribal leaders and voted off the reservation if they speak up.

Hooray for miniature city-states!

Gah.

So you recommend radiotherapy? That's Iran's answer.

The problem is the middle East is ISRAEL!

For sure, we all know how well all the differnet sects in the Middle East get along with each other.

I recommend that Israel return to the 1967 borders and start behaving like a responsible nation. All of the Arab states have said this would result in recognition of Israel and general peace and cooperation. Israel said "no!" It wants to steal more land.

All of the Arab states have said this would result in recognition of Israel and general peace and cooperation

Has anyone asked Hamas whether they would agree with that? They will just drop the ideological commitment to the destruction of Israel on which they are based if asked nicely?

For sure, we all know how well all the different sects in the Middle East get along with each other.

I did not say that the players in the conflict are all angels. But there is a big difference between a cold and malignant cancer. If Israel were simply to scale their actions down to be a benign tumor, the Arabs have said they can live with that. Why does Israel insist on being malignant? That is the big question.
Personally,I believe they are diseased from the holocaust in the same way an alcoholic son lives with his fathers disease. I want them to find help to get better, not to see them destroyed.
Religion, nationalism, ethnicity and tribalism do not mix. We have seen this mix fail over and over again throughout history. There is no difference between militant Islam and militant Israel in this regard. They are the same species and we as a nation should not be supporting either of them. Neither serves our interests.

deological commitment to the destruction of Israel

A nice sounding phrase which doesn't really match the well-known fact that Arab recognition of Israel will be the death of Hamas.

Has anyone asked Hamas whether they would agree with that? They will just drop the ideological commitment to the destruction of Israel on which they are based if asked nicely

Has anyone asked Israel whether they would agree with that? They will just drop the ideological commitment to the destruction of Hamas on which they are based if asked?

Your question with the two actors inverted makes as much sense to me as your original question. That is a sure sign that the question is a chicken or the egg question.
Of course Hamas will not just drop their resistance. it is an absurd notion. Israel has to give them a reason to make them think it is not worth it anymore. Killing toddlers and stealing land is not conducive to causing a resistance group to give up its resistance.
How does resistance excuse theft anyway? If I can summarize what you are hinting at, if any Palestinian still resents having their homes stolen and wants to punish Israel as a result, then Israel should steal more land? Is this an accurate portrayal of your views?

But there is a big difference between a cold and malignant cancer.

Mr. Secretary, you would be well served to remember that Arabs are killing more Arabs than the Israelis are. Who is the real cancer here?

Mr. Secretary, you would be well served to remember that Arabs are killing more Arabs than the Israelis are. Who is the real cancer here?

So your view is that if an Arab kills another Arab somewhere, then Israel gets a free hall pass to kill Palestinians whenever they feel like it without anyone having the right to mention it or be angry about it ? Is that accurate?
In other, what does that have to do with my post.
If Syria and Iran are to be considered cancers as well for meddling in their neighbors politics, then fine... but we have already cut off aid to those cancers. Now we need to do the same to Israel.

Religion, nationalism, ethnicity and tribalism do not mix. We have seen this mix fail over and over again throughout history. There is no difference between militant Islam and militant Israel in this regard.

Whatever your views about Israel's birth, the fact remains that Israel has been attacked time and again by surrounding nations or by Palestinian militants. It has only survived because of support from the US and a tough policy on defence. When attacked Israel does not mess about.

It's a matter of survival and expediency. "Militant Islam and militant Israel" has nothing whatever to do with it.

It has only survived because of support from the US

It's a matter of survival and expediency.

True for first point. I admire your honesty. There are not many Zionsits who would admit that Israel is really a US puppet regime.

Your second point is nonsense. Israel would survive much better if they made peace, but they are pathologically unable to be peaceful. One cannot steal, blow up civilian airports, kill toddlers and claim to be peace lovers in the same day. Because of the US policy of standing behind Israel no matter what ridiculous things it does, Israel has turned being an annoying toadie to the schoolyard bully into an art form.
Everyone knows what happens to the toadie when the bully graduates, though. Everyone except Israel, apparantly. Like I said, I'm trying to get Israel to accept it pathology and learn to live in a world where it neighbors are Arabs and Palestinians, which isn't going to be changing.

So your view is that if an Arab kills another Arab somewhere, then Israel gets a free hall pass to kill Palestinians whenever they feel like it without anyone having the right to mention it or be angry about it ? Is that accurate?

No, I did not even imply that.

In other, what does that have to do with my post.

In your posts you have claimed that the problem in the Middle East is Israel , and that sectarian violence is like a cold when compared to Israel as the cancer.

I am merely exposing the errors in those statements.

And Israel is NOT based on the ideological destruction of Hamas, but Hamas IS based on the ideological destruction of Israel.

Big Difference.

Mr. Secretary, would you please show us when it was that Israel stole, blew up civilian airports, killed toddlers or, in other words, targeted civillians in the recent years prior to this most recent crisis?

And could you please show me when in this recent crisis, Israel has purposely targeted civillian population for destruction?

There's no shortage of violently anti-Israel people these days, are there?

It reminds me of that adage, "Always be open minded, but not so open minded that your brains fall out"

Let's talk about nonsense for a moment - the vitriole of "Israel is a cancer" and "Israel is pathologically unable to be peaceful" are disgusting, and I would argue that comments like these only polarize people into more extreme positions. I would aslo say that they make you look like a bit of a nonce.

Israel is part of the problem. In my opinion, less so than it's arab neighbours. I'm sure you differ, but coming out swinging about Israel being nothing but a puppet government and a cancer in the middle east is just plain vile.

And, to add to that, the ugliest thing about it is that if one actually looks at things in anything resembling a rigorous manner, these sorts of statements end up hurting the non-Israeli civillians. I think that if Israel was able to attain stability and security, Israel would actually help those around them to grow their economies thereby benefitting the civillian population (let alone that there would be no violence). Some people on NV agree with me.

True for first point. I admire your honesty. There are not many Zionsits who would admit that Israel is really a US puppet regime.

That's not what he said, and you know it.

There is a difference between receiving support and being a "puppet regime." For example, Egypt recieved $1.84 billion in U.S. foreign aid in 2005, and Jordan recieved $0.48 billion. Are they U.S. puppet regimes as well? Source

I recommend that Israel ... start behaving like a responsible nation.

That would certainly make them unique in the Middle East wouldn't it?

It would. It's the least the West should expect since we hold Israel up as the "only democracy in the Middle East".

I dunno Rhine, it pretty much looks like war already to me.

That does not address the issue raised.

When he published this article yesterday, the Israel government had not declared war. As far as I know, it has not done so yet (3 PM EDT). So, a title that reads "Israel to declare war on Lebanon" is simply sensationalistic.

Ah well, this ad revenue thing is going to be the bane of Newsvine. People are more likely to write sensational stuff. More votes, more comments.

Why should citizen journalism be different from any other kind of journalism? ;-)

When he published this article yesterday, the Israel government had not declared war. As far as I know, it has not done so yet (3 PM EDT). So, a title that reads "Israel to declare war on Lebanon" is simply sensationalistic.

With this type of thinking — and, admittedly, applying it to a completely different situation — I'm not sure why so many people are upset about "the war in Iraq." What war? Congress never declared war. There must be no war. Perhaps there is just some vast left-wing conspiracy to make everyone believe that there is a war. My point is that reality sometimes differs from semantics.

Yaakov in 17.4

I did not write this article for ad revenue. I vote it because

Seems like "votes" are playing too much on your mind?

Yaakov, just so that you don't waste too much of your time on Rhine the way I did, you might want to see our previous exchanges.

nikitab in 17.7

In your partisan quest to come and attack me, you fail to see the point I raised. A point good enough that someone was actually inspired to write an article about it.

It's pretty sad when you see how much of an open mind a 17 year old kid can have and compare it to the narrow-minded insult-and-attack oriented mindset of some of the older folks here on Newsvine.

Also, to those reading it, I would suggest you follow the very beginning of the exchanges linked to by nikitab. Right to where he first indulged in self-advertising and was called on it (even the author thought so). However, instead of apologizing, he goes off on his merry-go-round tactics, resorting to his victim-mentality inspired whining about how people do that because they don't agree with him, and finally culminating in his favorite method of debate - insults.

Uh, what's your opinion on Jewish rap? That guy was pretty good, but it sounded more like dancehall than rap.

I like it, I got Matisyahu on my iPod. Too bad he refuses to shake women's hands or something like that, which I found somewhat odd.

Hmm... produced by Bill Laswell. He's a really interesting guy: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Laswell

Matisyahu is pretty poppy if you ask me: sounds like Dave Matthews got a reggae synth and went nuts. But, I like it: good production values make it hard to not like.

His live cd is pretty badass...I can't say I've liked the studio stuff as much though...too much production.