Ceasefire Needed NOW

The war in Lebanon expands to include the wine region, home of the delightful Chateau Kefraya, Ksara, Clos St Thomas, and other labels.

As either Willie or Joe said, "Them atrocity-committin' huns…"

In better days, Michael Young lifted a glass with Michael Karam, the Screaming Lord Byron of Lebanese Wine.

Update: Thanks to Kevrob for finding the Willie & Joe cartoon.

Comments

[R C Dean]

Tim, I can't tell you how disappointed I am to see you join the ranks of those equating the Israelis with the Nazis.

Unless your reference to "huns" is directed at the Hez, in which case it is historically and morally, if not ethnically, accurate.

[highnumber]

"Them atrocity-committin' huns..."

...refers to ANYONE interfering in the production of good wine.

[Mr T]

Hey dumbass! Cease-fires are nothing but tactical pauses which are used as tools to gain time in order to recoup losses, re-arm forces, and rebuild terrorist infrastructure.

NO cease-fire until Hezbollah is obliterated!

Israel must continue its war in Lebanon until it obliterates Hezbollah's presence there. And the leaders of every civilized country should be urging Israel to do just that.

Israel is Western civilization's frontline in the war against Islamic totalitarianism, a religious ideology that seeks to subjugate the whole world to Islam.

It is in the self-interest of every free or semi-free country in the world that Israel defeat Hezbollah, an Islamic terror group sponsored by the Islamic republic of Iran.

The Islamic totalitarians will not be defeated until we in the West support Israel and gain the courage and the moral certitude to fight them without restraint, bitch.

[Mr T]

Hey dumbass! Cease-fires are nothing but tactical pauses which are used as tools to gain time in order to recoup losses, re-arm forces, and rebuild terrorist infrastructure.

NO cease-fire until Hezbollah is obliterated!

Israel must continue its war in Lebanon until it obliterates Hezbollah's presence there. And the leaders of every civilized country should be urging Israel to do just that.

Israel is Western civilization's frontline in the war against Islamic totalitarianism, a religious ideology that seeks to subjugate the whole world to Islam.

It is in the self-interest of every free or semi-free country in the world that Israel defeat Hezbollah, an Islamic terror group sponsored by the Islamic republic of Iran.

The Islamic totalitarians will not be defeated until we in the West support Israel and gain the courage and the moral certitude to fight them without restraint, bitch.

[kevrob]

The cartoon in question.

Kevin

[kevrob]

Try this archive of dead link since the one I used doesn't work.

Kevin R

[just another lurker]

Thanks, Kevrob. One of my favorites.

R C Dean, I'm really surprised you didn't know the reference here.

[TrickyVic]

"NO cease-fire until Hezbollah is obliterated!"

That worked real well for the Israelis the first time. If you understood the nature of these types of organizations, you would know that they can not be defeated until their cause has been defeated. It's all about the cause! For every bomb you drop, more will take their place. That will get you status quo at best, as it did for the Israelis till they decided to withdraw in 2000.

[edna]

musar wastes yarden. the '70 is one of the greatest red wines ever made if you can get past the volatility and brett.

of course, hizbollah would love to decapitate anyone making or drinking alcohol.

[Mr T]

...they can not be defeated until their cause has been defeated. It's all about the cause!

True TrickyVic and the cause is Iran and ultimately Islam itself.

[Mr T]

...they can not be defeated until their cause has been defeated. It's all about the cause!

True TrickyVic and the cause is Iran and ultimately Islam itself.

[Mr T]

...they can not be defeated until their cause has been defeated. It's all about the cause!

True TrickyVic and the cause is Iran and ultimately Islam itself.

[Mr T]

Sorry about all the posts. Blame Web-Sense.

[highnumber]

the cause is...ultimately Islam itself

First call for genocide!

or would you just like to restrict the people's religious choice?
It's easier to kill 'em all.

[Pig Mannix]

Looks like you got your wish.

[MUTT]

kill them All!!! ah, yes- the voice of reason in a troubled time.
Im plagued by demented mideval boobs right here in the USA- lets round up all these crapture republithugs with the big ears & sky blue polyester suits& thier hideous Beverly leHaye sex doll love interests, give them some firearms, & parachute them into Hezbolla ville.
They only problem might be- being birds of a feather- they might start mating. Whilst I usually prefer love over war, this isnt a good idea......

[Mr T]

Fools! Islam means submit. The essence of Islam is jihad and sharia. Jihad means aggressive warfare to force their true, enlightened, and liberated views on all of us from without. Sharia is Muslim law to maintain these true, enlightened, and liberated views in all of us from within. Both are manditory practices and institutions for all Muslims. Thus fascism is a normal, inherent, and inevitable part of Islam.

There are two kinds of Muslims:
1. Muslims who are Muslims. (These are called "extremists".)
2. Muslims who are not Muslims. (These are called "moderate".)

Those in category #1 are few; those in category #2 are many. There is hope for the latter.

[Mr T]

Fools! Islam means submit. The essence of Islam is jihad and sharia. Jihad means aggressive warfare to force their true, enlightened, and liberated views on all of us from without. Sharia is Muslim law to maintain these true, enlightened, and liberated views in all of us from within. Both are manditory practices and institutions for all Muslims. Thus fascism is a normal, inherent, and inevitable part of Islam.

There are two kinds of Muslims:
1. Muslims who are Muslims. (These are called "extremists".)
2. Muslims who are not Muslims. (These are called "moderate".)

Those in category #1 are few; those in category #2 are many. There is hope for the latter.

[MainstreamMan]

Pro-Israel

"NO cease-fire until Hezbollah is obliterated!"

Pro-Hezb.

"No cease-fire until Isreal is obliterated!"

Results.
No Cease fire...ever.

Often cast as
"If the Arabs put down their guns today/the IDF withdrew from the occupied territories today... then the war would be over tomorrow."

Bunch-o-idiots in charge of the guns/bombs.
There is no military solution.

So how'd the US get rid of the armed terrorist organization in its midst in the early 20th century? The KKK had a larger percentage representation in the 1920's US than Hezb. does now. I don't recall the large scale bombing of Atlanta as part of the solution.

[Mr T]

Fuck you Mainstreammedia, the Joooooooos are NOT advocating the elimination of all Muslims IT IS THE OTHER WAY AROUND!

[MainstreamMan]

Mr. T

Jihad has been classified either as al-jih?d al-akbar (the greater jihad), the struggle against one's soul (nafs), or al-jih?d al-asghar (the lesser jihad), the external, physical effort, often implying fighting.

Muslim scholars explained there are five kinds of jihad fi sabilillah (struggle in the cause of God) [1]:

* Jihad of the heart/soul (jihad bin nafs/qalb) is an inner struggle of good against evil in the mind, through concepts such as tawhid.

* Jihad by the tongue (jihad bil lisan) is a struggle of good against evil waged by writing and speech, such as in the form of dawah (proselytizing), Khutbas (sermons), and political or military propaganda.

* Jihad by the pen and knowledge (jihad bil qalam/ilm) is a struggle for good against evil through scholarly study of Islam, ijtihad (legal reasoning), and through sciences (such as military and medical sciences).

* Jihad by the hand (jihad bil yad) refers to a struggle of good against evil waged by actions or with one's wealth, such as going on the Hajj pilgrimage (seen as the best jihad for women), taking care of elderly parents, providing funding for jihad, political activity for furthering the cause of Islam, stopping evil by force, or espionage.

* Jihad of peace refers to the struggle to make peace in the world, everywhere and anywhere, in order to improve the image of Islam and thus spread Islam. Only peaceful methods are allowed in this strategic interpretation of jihad.

* Jihad by the sword (jihad bis saif) refers to qital fi sabilillah (armed fighting in the way of God, or holy war). Many interpret jihad bis saif to apply only to self-defense.

[MainstreamMan]

In Arabic, Islam derives from the triconsonantal root S?n-L?m-M?m, with a basic meaning of "to surrender". Islam is an abstract nominal derived from this root, and literally means "submission to 'The God' (Arabic:Allah)". The legislative meaning is to submit to God by singling Him out in all acts of worship, to yield obediently to Him and to free and disassociate oneself from Polytheism and its people.

I don't see anything in this that says anything about forcing others to submit.

[MainstreamMan]

Mr. T

Who said anything about "the Jooooos?"

I was talking about idjuts who hold opinions like yours....

[Mr T]

Traditional Islamic theology has held for centuries that on points of disagreement the later Medinan suras take precedence over the early Meccan ones -- and in what most Muslim authorities consider to be the last sura of all, Surat At-Tawba (sura 9), we find the "Ayat as-Seif" (Verse of the Sword, verse 5) and the call to wage war against Jews and Christians until they submit as inferiors under Islamic rule (verse 29).

[Mr T]

Qur'an 4:89 says: "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): but take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks..." The verse is clear: those who "turn renegades" and "reject Faith" are to be killed by the believers.

[Mr T]

Qur'an 4:89 says: "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): but take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (from what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks..." The verse is clear: those who "turn renegades" and "reject Faith" are to be killed by the believers.

[highnumber]

Jihad means aggressive warfare to force their true, enlightened, and liberated views on all of us from without.
...
the call to wage war against Jews and Christians until they submit as inferiors under Islamic rule

You're ignorant and you are taking tiny pieces of information to make it suit the picture that you have in your head.
Explain to me the tolerance that Islam (yes, it does mean submission TO GOD) displayed for Jews while at the same time Torquemada was having his way with them in Spain?
Historically, the Christians were the ones that both Jews and Muslims had every right to fear.
Jewish and Christian minorities were treated much better in Muslim societies than in Christian societies.

I used up my tolerance for bigots for the whole year already, so I may start getting mean.

[Thomas Paine's Goiter]

I don't recall the large scale bombing of Atlanta as part of the solution.

Have you ever been there? It should have been leveled. Again.

[highnumber]

Mr T,

Have you ever studied the Qur'an with a scholar who could explain to you the nuances of the language, the context of the statements?

Even the devil can quote scripture.

[Ken]

From todays Washington Post:
"Israeli aircraft fired missiles at a radio tower in downtown Beirut on Thursday and dropped leaflets warning residents of the Lebanese capital that more extensive bombing, whose "painful and severe results will not be limited" to Hezbollah fighters, is on the way."

For the longest time on Hit and Run Israel's apologists have claimed the IDF would never hurt civilians if not for those dastardly Hez fighters using them as shields and that the IDF does not want collective punishment (I can't think of a more un-libertarian idea). So now whaddaya say?

If one looks back at the various discussions about this conflict you will see two distinct groupings of opinions
1. Israel has done no wrong, it is ALL the fault of its enemies
2. Israel has done SOME wrong (I can't remember any posts that actually said Hiz was in the right in this conflict)

It seems the first group must be considered fanatics or severly duped people, people who cannot make normal observations about the imperfect natures of all men and governments.

And oh, yeah, Mr. T, Christianity doesn't have any genocidal, sexist, pro-violent verses in its holy books, huh?

[Mark Eichenlaub]

Looks like the ceasefire has been agreed upon.

[Patriot]

We should follow the example of the Israelis. They have the real resolve to deal with the Islamofascist fanatics, and take the fight to them.

[The Real Bill]

Fuck all this religion bullshit. There are only friends, enemies, and neutrals. Love your friends, destroy your enemies, and leave the neutrals be.

That is all.

[matthew hogan]

"I don't recall the large scale bombing of Atlanta as part of the solution."

That was in the *18*60s.

[MainstreamMan]

"Traditional Islamic theology"

Is this like traditional Christian theology which all sects agree on totally? Because, you know, there is only one way to be Christian (it is appropriate to lump them into a single category whether Baptist or Mormon). And only one way to be Islamic. Any deviation from the true path makes you a heretic. So are you talking about Shia, Sunni, Wahabi or what? Are you talking about Arab, Indonesian, Nation of Islam, or what?

Gimme a break.
Be a brave bigot and just say you hate categorically for no good reason. Don't try and justify it to me.

[Don Coyote]

Ken: "(I can't think of a more un-libertarian idea)

What libertarian idea would be the party line in the situation you cited?

[The Real Bill]

If being a bigot means hating those that wish to do me harm or wish to force me to live according to their wishes, I'm a bigot; that is, I'm bigoted towards most of humanity.

[Don Coyote]

A bigot is one that is partial to his own ways and intolerant of others.

Intolerance is the inability to tolerate mere differences of opinion, among other things.

Seems that flows freely here on this thread.

tolerate is to recognize and respect or to allow without prohibiting or opposing.

Maybe bigotry is not that unhealthy or unwarranted in some circumstances (except for maybe monks/nuns).

[Ken]

Coyote
I'm uneasy with a party line for anything, much less me defining it, but I think anyone who analyzed thinkers who identified as libertarian would see at least a strong emphasis on individual rights and responsibilities, and a strong disapproval of collective treatment of individuals. An old adage goes "A and B feel bad for C and force D to pay to take care of him." This is cited as something libertarians are against. Israel's idea of collective punishment was "B attacked C, so I will punish A, D and E in the hopes that in the future they will restrain B." If you want to do some mental gymnastics that would provide a libertarian defense of this type of thinking I'd love to watch, if only to delight in the flips, whirls and tumbles that would necessarily ensue (but I would not put it past those who root-root-root for Israel).

[Don Coyote]

Ken, Thanks for not adding numbers to that equation. I never understood mixing the alphabet with numbers.

Okay, I give. Does Israel need to stick its boot up A, B, C or D's ass?

[APL]

Patroit and B.A. Barraccus:

If you ever flipped open your Old Testament, or Torah, you would discover that Judaism was a religion devoted to the voilant slaugther of all of the non-Jewish inhabitantst of present day Israel, including their livestock. Excepting the young virgin women, who were to be taken into slavery.

That says all we need to know about Judaism, right?

[bigbigslacker]

Mr T, to some extent I agree with much of what you've "said". But, then again, I agree, at least to some extent, with some counterarguments. One is the notion that you are either a Muslim, and believe/embrace all the fire and brimstone as do the extremists, or that you are a Muslim in name only - a poser.

The same could be said of Christians who routinely ignore mush of the old testament. I've never met a Chrisian who adheres to Levitus 11:12. (Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination to you). Or 20:13 advising that a man who lieth with another man shall surely be put to death.

OK, maybe I do agree that its either one way or the other, but I don't find that in itself a compelling reason to find Islam (or Christianity)an automatic enemy. The issue of which group is more apt to act on the lunacy of some of their religious verses is the only concern in this regard.

(this is probably the first entirely serious post I've written in months...)

[The Real Bill]

Islam isn't really the problem; primitive culture is the real problem. Ironically, Mohammed was supposedly trying to make Arab culture less primitive with Islam.

[joe]

Israel can't win this war, but it can lose it. "Until Hezbollah is destoryed?" Are you kidding me?

When a state goes to war against a terror group, there's a point spread - if the state doesn't win in a blowout, it loses. The hawks who supported escalating this war put the national security of Israel in serious danger, and now the UN has to go in and save their bacon.

[kevrob]

...save their bacon... - joe

Now, that's neither kosher nor hilal.

Kevin

[Rick Barton]

joe:

The hawks who supported escalating this war put the national security of Israel in serious danger...

Yep, and the Israeli civilians have suffered the result- Not in the numbers that Lebanese civilians have, but that doesn't matter much to those Israeli civilians and their families who have been killed or injured.

[Rick Barton]

"save their bacon"

Now, that's neither kosher nor hilal.

It was turkey bacon and a rabbi said the mumbo-jumbo over it, so it's cool.

[Tim Cavanaugh]

So, like, nobody wants to talk about wine, huh?

[FatDrunkAndStupid]

I think wine is the key to understanding this whole conflict. Hizbullah doesn't care about wine. The don't care about life. They don't care about babes or having fun or reading or writing or any of the other things we as Westerners veiw as important to a healthy, happy life. Their only concern is the destruction of Israel, and if their people have to live in rubble for the next 100 year to achieve that end, so be it. That's the problem for all you who advocate "cease fire" or "negotiation". There just isn't anything to negotiate. This is the classic example of Ayn Rand's famous quip about poison and food. The baseline requirement for any negotiation from Israel's standpoint would be "stop trying to kill us and leave us alone". But that's the one thing Hizbullah will never agree to. A rational people, the type that care about things like wine or cheese or long walks on the beach, might be persuaded to give up their dream of driving every last Jew into the sea if the cause seemed impossible and would damn their society to decades or centuries of living hell. But Hizbullah doesn't care about wine. So killing every last one of them (or at least enough to degrade their tactical ability to carry out their goals) is Isreal's only option. The short term consequence of this reality for the good people of Lebanon is sadly more misery. Lebanon needs another civil war- one in which one side actually wins (and we can only pray it would be the right one) before they can find peace.

[joe]

FDS, would you be so kind as to point out who is advocating negotiating with Hezbollah?

I haven't noticed anyone.

'That's the problem for all you who advocate "cease fire"' You mean like Olmert? Haven't seen the news today, have you?

I predict that the No Cease Fire! crowed will not express even the slightest awareness that the people on whose behalf they claim to speak have just abaondoned that position.

[Happy Jack]

So, like, nobody wants to talk about wine, huh?

No. That's too French.

who is advocating negotiating with Hezbollah?

Uh, the US, France, et al. You can't very well negotiate a cease fire between combatants if one of the players are missing from the conversation.

[MainstreamMan]

A Letter from 18 Writers including three Nobel Prize recipients

The latest chapter of the conflict between Israel and Palestine began when Israeli forces abducted two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from Gaza. An incident scarcely reported anywhere, except in the Turkish press. The following day the Palestinians took an Israeli soldier prisoner--and proposed a negotiated exchange against prisoners taken by the Israelis--there are approximately 10,000 in Israeli jails.

That this "kidnapping" was considered an outrage, whereas the illegal military occupation of the West Bank and the systematic appropriation of its natural resources--most particularly that of water--by the Israeli Defense (!) Forces is considered a regrettable but realistic fact of life, is typical of the double standards repeatedly employed by the West in face of what has befallen the Palestinians, on the land allotted to them by international agreements, during the last seventy years.

Today outrage follows outrage; makeshift missiles cross sophisticated ones. The latter usually find their target situated where the disinherited and crowded poor live, waiting for what was once called Justice. Both categories of missile rip bodies apart horribly--who but field commanders can forget this for a moment?

Each provocation and counter-provocation is contested and preached over. But the subsequent arguments, accusations and vows, all serve as a distraction in order to divert world attention from a long-term military, economic and geographic practice whose political aim is nothing less than the liquidation of the Palestinian nation.

This has to be said loud and clear, for the practice, only half declared and often covert, is advancing fast these days, and, in our opinion, it must be unceasingly and eternally recognized for what it is and resisted.

PS: As Juliano Mer Khamis, director of the documentary film Arna's Children, asked: "Who is going to paint the 'Guernica' of Lebanon?"

John Berger
Noam Chomsky
Harold Pinter
Jos? Saramago
Eduardo Galeano
Arundhati Roy
Naomi Klein
Howard Zinn
Charles Glass
Richard Falk
Gore Vidal
Russell Banks
Thomas Keneally
Chris Abani
Carolyn Forch?
Mart?n Espada
Jessica Hagedorn
Toni Morrison

Just stirring the pot.

[James Ard]

Status quo Joe couldn't be more wrong. The Israeli's aren't abiding by any cease fire today, nor tomorrow. They may abide by one Monday, but only if they finish carving out their buffer-zone by then. I don't see how a buffer-zone harms their security. Please explain.

[The Real Bill]

A Letter from 18 Writers including three Nobel Prize recipients

At this point, I'm not impressed.

John Berger
Noam Chomsky
Harold Pinter
Jos?aramago
Eduardo Galeano
Arundhati Roy
Naomi Klein
Howard Zinn
Charles Glass
Richard Falk
Gore Vidal
Russell Banks
Thomas Keneally
Chris Abani
Carolyn Forch?art?Espada
Jessica Hagedorn
Toni Morrison

Okay, now I'm just laughing.

[joe]

Happy Jack,

That's not true, actually. Most cease fires work that way, but this appears to be an imposed cease fire. It was worked out at the UN. Imposed on Hezbollah, anyway. Israel took the deal, thus demonstrating, by your reasoning, their lack of concern about Israeli security and/or their lack of understand of the reality of fighting terrorism. Either way, I think Israel's support for a cease fire is grounded in anti-semitism, don't you?

[joe]

James Ard,

Ah, how convenient. A cease fire beginning on Friday, Saturday, or Sunday would have been a shameful capitulation, but one staring on Monday is a demonstration of their strength and a clear victory. Gotcha.

To answer your question, accepting the cease fire, ending their operation prior to some fastasmal elimination of Hezbollah, and endorsing a UN buffer zone ISN'T a threat to their security - it's a wise change of course. Expanding the war and getting themselves into the situation of having to occupy part of Lebanon - THAT is the threat to their security. It is very wise of Olmert to ignore the Keyboard Kommandos and support the UN/French deal.

Olmert's decision to ignore the "not one step back" argument demonstrates a degree of wisdom that Iraq doves like myself only wish our government could display.

[Eric II]

I don't see how a buffer-zone harms their security. Please explain.

If Hizbollah starts launching missiles from behind the buffer zone that are capable of hitting Israeli towns, Israel can now only depend on its air power to attack the missile sites. At least unless they expect the international peacekeeping force or the Lebanese Army to go to war with Hizbollah once the missiles are launched, both of which are unlikely propositions.

I think Israel's just hoping right now that, after the latest bloddbath, Hizbollah will think twice before taking another pot-shot, due to the anger that such an attack could generate within their support base, and within the Lebanese populace at-large. To the extent that Israel values the buffer zone, it could have more to do with keeping an Iranian-Syrian proxy off of its internationally-recognized borders than with diminishing the missile threat.

[joe]

BTW, James Ard, the buffer zone you speak of will be established by the UN forces on the UN's timeline, based on the UN's maps. Olmert may not be the greatest strategic thinker in the world, but he's not dumb enough to spend more his country's people, treasure, and prestige to occupy territory that is to be peacefully occupied in a few days, and that Israeli forces won't be holding in any case.

[joe]

Eric II,

If the Lebanese government accepts the cease-fire deal and a few thousand troops from other countries are positioned in Southern Lebanon, the Lebanese government will be compelled to join in with any UN-endorse security action against Hezbollah, should one become necessary because of further Hezbollah terror rocket attacks.

They've been forced to/able to avoid taking on Hezbollah's force to date because of their lack of military power. The proposed cease fire conditions would be require Lebanon to re-assert its sovereignty over the south, and give them the force required to do so.

Also, you write "Syrian-Iranian proxy," but I think your point is stronger than you realize - there are actual Iranian Revolutionary Guards there, if the Israelis are to be believed. I doubt they's put out a statement to that effect without proof.

[James Ard]

Joe, I wouldn't be too sure the Israeli's won't be holding the buffer by Monday. They have tripled their invasion force and they're air-dropping troops at the river and working backwards. Apparently Olmert is willing to risk a few lives to control Southern Lebenon at least until the UN moves in.

[joe]

James,

Was "holding southern Lebanon" Israel's goal going in? I seem to recal something about degrading Hezbollah's capacity to attack Israel. They've been unleashing huge amounts of whoop-ass for a month, and the rockets keep coming. We've been occupying Iraq for years, without any apparent erosion in the capacity of the terrorists and insurgents to, er, terrorize and insurge.

But you may well be right about Israel driving father over the next two days. It doesn't really matter I/R/T my point - they have been unable to accomplish their mission, and have turned to their friends in the UN, especially the French, to save their bacon, rather than taking their stateside cheerleaders' advice to fight on.

It is interesting to watch the "I meant to do that" denial of this reality develop in real time. Israel has always wanted a cease fire. They never intended to fight on indefinitely. Leaving Hezbollah intact as a military force, and depending on a UN force to protect their security was the plan all along.

[James Ard]

I have to agree that in today's world there is no way Israel could obliterate Hezbollah. And they probably know it. I must have been dreaming to think they'd handle Iran for us.

[Eric II]

the Lebanese government will be compelled to join in with any UN-endorse security action against Hezbollah, should one become necessary because of further Hezbollah terror rocket attacksM

I wouldn't be so sure of that, given that joining in could risk triggering another civil war in the country. The presence of foreign peacekeepers didn't help much the last time one broke out.

Also, even if the U.N. was to somehow endorse a security action against Hizbollah (something I wouldn't bank on just yet), it wouldn't be the job of the peacekeepers to carry it out. After all, their job's to keep a war from breaking out by acting as a buffer/intermediary, not to take sides once it's begun.

[Bob]

It's interesting that leftists like Chomsky and Pintar can articulate relatively reasoned critiques of Israel, but anti-Israel right winders always seem to drift into anti-Semitic conspiracy territory. Why is that? Are leftists just smarter?

[Jacob]

Having a demilitarized zone up to the Litani river as per the UN resolution would be just fine for Israel. It would mean no more kidnappings, no direct threat to border communities, no direct surveilance of Israel by Hizbollah observers, no short range (cheap) missile threat. It would mean a remarkable improvement over the old situation.

Trouble is - who will impose that, who will drive out Hizbollah (as per the UN resolution), who will prevent them from returning ? I have little faith that the UN or Lebanese army will deliver, will be capable to implement what they promise.
IDF is trying to clean up that area of Hizbollah, hoping that it would be easier for the UN force to keep Hizb out, than to drive them out.
Anyway, the UN resolution is just so many words. It all dependts on the implementation, and judging from UN's record - there is little room for optimism.

[Joe]

"The latest chapter of the conflict between Israel and Palestine began when Israeli forces abducted two civilians, a doctor and his brother, from Gaza. An incident scarcely reported anywhere, except in the Turkish press."

Why assume it's true if it was reported only in the Turkish press? Were they abducted or arrested?

[anon]

Why assume it's true if it was reported only in the Turkish press? Were they abducted or arrested?

From Today's LA Times:

Who initiated this sequence of errors? As with all crises in the region, this question is almost impossible to answer. The specific trigger is often said to be the June incursion into Israel by Palestinians from Gaza, which resulted in the seizure of Cpl. Gilad Shalit of the Israel Defense Forces and the death of two other IDF soldiers. But the Palestinians have explained that their commandos were carrying out a reprisal raid after the IDF seized two Palestinian brothers, Osama and Mustafa Muamar, who, they claimed, are innocent of anything save being sons of a known Hamas activist, Ali Muamar.

[Bob]

"Who initiated this sequence of errors? As with all crises in the region, this question is almost impossible to answer."

Nothing is impossible to answer if you have an axe to grind and your standards of evidence are not very rigorous. Making things simple is the hallmark of a good ideologue on the right or the left. In this case, the left's axe is an overwhelming sympathy with the Palestinians as the underdog. The right's axe is an overwhelming hatred of Israel that often seems indistinguishable from anti-Semitism, probably because the right draws on its traditional anti-Semitic sources and tries to make them apply just to Israel.

[Ken]

Bob, what planet are you on? Have you seen a lot of anti-Israeli sentiment in the major left wing or right wing papers, journals, or tv stations? Anyone can go look at NRO, Weekly Standard, etc. and just try to find an anti-Israeli article (NRO actually ran an Israeli flag on their site many days). They pretty much just ran the IDF party line. What else do you want from them? I'd say it is YOUR comments that clearly reflect an ideologue. Only those on the fringe of the left exhibited even the mildest criticism of Israel (look at the Post's editorials, New Republic, etc).
Jacob-The UN may have a bad track record with Israel, but as far as I know they haven't killed any of their troops (which Israel has done to the UN).

[Ken]

I'd also like to suggest that it hardly matters if the IDF's seizures of Palestinian are called "arrests" hy the IDF. Israel holds many people right now without trial, they regularly come into Palestinian territory, abduct who they want, and leave. Call it arrest or kidnapping, they have taken WAY more folks than Hamas or Hiz has done in return. I'm not saying they did not have some legit reason for these things, perhaps they did, perhaps not (though most independent organizations that have commented have condemned the abductions). But unlike the pro-Israel fanatics on the post I won't simply assume the IDF line on its own actions must be true.

[joe]

Eric II,

The UN could authorize a force with a more robust mandate than peacekeepers. Peacekeeping missions are the most common, but the allied forces in Korea were a UN mission, too.

Ken,

Your description of the neocon right and their fondness for Israel is quite correct, but they are not the only right. Pat Buchanon is an example of a different kind of right winger, with a different orientation towards Israel.

"Only those on the fringe of the left exhibited even the mildest criticism of Israel (look at the Post's editorials, New Republic, etc)." That's not exactly true - there have been moderate and liberal voices criticizing Israel's tactics.

I've noticed that the two Israeli soldiers taken by Hezbollah are often said to have been "kidnapped." A military unit attacks another military unit, kills one, captures two, and the press is using the language of the Lindburgh baby.

[Bob]

Ken,

By left, I'm referring to the left represented by Chomsky and Pinter, which is decidedly anti-Israel. The right that Pat Buchanan represents is also decidedly anti-Israel. The fringe right--from Raimondo to David Duke--bases much of its anti-Israel stance on anti-Semitic conspiracy "theories." I don't think the fringe left does.

[FatDrunkAndStupid]

Joe,
Hizbullah is not a military unit. They are an armed terrorist gang. So "kidnapping" is the correct term. I think a lot of the blind support for Israel stems from the sheer irrationality of the Arab position. It's been 58 years now. 58 god damn years and these idiots still won't, in the words of our esteemed President, "cut this shit out". The death, the destruction, the generations of Arabs who have lived in agject poverty all because these assholes can't accept reality. Hizbullah's stunt last week destroyed a chunk of Lebanon. It will take years to rebuild what was destroyed. And for what? It's hard to have sympathy for people that function on a level so low we can barely recognize it as human.

[kwais]

I always thought Pat Buchannan was very eloquent. Though I disagree with him on almost everything. I disagree with what he says, but he says it well. He did the best anti-war piece I ever read.

I also thought Raimondo was a left winger. But then, I never read more than the headlines of most his stuff really.

Buchannan has also been described as a left winger who likes guns.

[kwais]

a left winger who likes guns and white people

[MainstreamMan]

"The death, the destruction, the generations of Arabs who have lived in agject poverty all because these assholes can't accept reality."

Wonder which way this causal arrow really points.

Israel has lived in a constant state of war for 58 years because they can't accept reality. The reality that when you oppress people using violence and collective punishment, a certain minority of them take it seriously and fight back.

If you think there is only one side in this conflict with an irrational position, you are either drunk or stupid or both...

Oh wait....

[FatDrunkAndStupid]

Isreal doesn't want to be in a state of war. They only want peace and to be left alone. This contrasts to the Hizbullah position which calls only for war and the destruction of the state of Israel. So long as they cling to that irrational position, they will die and their own people, and other Arabs unfortuante enough to share the the same state with these lunatics, will suffer. If Israel could wave a magic wand and impose peace any other way they would. If Hizbullah had a magic wand they'd use it to kill every Jew in the middle east. That, when you get down to it, is the bottom line, and demonstrates the absurdity of the sort of moral equivelency that folks like you are trying to push. And I'd like to add that I'm not a Zionist. I could care less whether Isreal exists or not. I'm only a realist. And as a human being I'm sickened by mayhem and destruction on both sides that are caused by groups like Hizbullah and Hamas.

[MainstreamMan]

"If Israel could wave a magic wand and impose peace any other way they would. If Hizbullah had a magic wand they'd use it to kill every Jew in the middle east."

Gimme a break.
And you call yourself a realist? Please point to examples from reality that demonstrate Israel's inclinations in this direction. (We'll ignore, for now, events like the Hebron massacre, which was a private Israeli citizen).

When, for example, has Israel not paired peace talks with expansion of settlements in the very territory that is in dispute? How do they justify collective punishment of the Palestinians? They say that since the disputed territories are not occupied territories (those tanks and soldiers aren't an occupying force, they are a defense force), that Geneva does not apply (Gaza, remember is a refugee camp)...This is a twisted logic that creates many security problems for them, yet they continue to use the same failed tactics over and over again. They withdraw from Gaza, continue building an illegal wall around the West Bank, arrest and detain Palestinians from Gaza without trial, bomb x because of y's actions, etc...but only Hamas is unwilling to find a peaceful solution? Look at the body count sometime. Who has killed more non-combatants? Who justifies the death of non-combatants with statements that claim that the punishment of non-combatants is intended to weaken support for the violent actions of the enemy (oh yeah, both sides....[smacks head])

Sorry, but there are no good guys in this fight.
Failure to recognize that reality makes it difficult to see a way out. Solutions have to involve both sides changing their behaviors.

[Jennifer]

It's been 58 years now. 58 god damn years and these idiots still won't, in the words of our esteemed President, "cut this shit out".

So if your country is taken from you by a bigger and stronger military force, just how long are you allowed to be upset about it before you're expected to meekly submit to the new status quo and "cut this shit out"?

[Joe]

Jennifer

Ask the Indians. You know, the ones on the reservations...

[laser]

"You know, it's funny.

For years I've been trying to get people to pay attention to the deaths and destruction and injustices being perpetrated on my beloved Lebanon.

And nobody cared.

When Yasser Arafat's Palestinian Liberation Organization tried to take over the country and make it his terrorist playground, nobody cared.

When people were dying by the thousands in the civil war, nobody cared.

When Syria had its boot on the neck of its tiny neighbor for 25 years, nobody cared.

When Iran dispatched Hezbollah terrorists into the country to undermine home rule by Lebanese, nobody cared.

When Muslims chased millions of Christians from the country, tipping the balance of power, nobody cared.

But now, all eyes are on Lebanon.

Do you know why?

Because Israel has tried to clean up this hornet's nest. Yet, all we hear about is how many Lebanese are dying.

Can I let you in on a little secret?

Guess what the total death toll is among Lebanese during the extent of this war - including Hezbollah terrorists, many of whom are not really Lebanese?

You better sit down.

The total death toll is just over 500.

Now, far be it for me to minimize death tolls. One innocent death is a tragedy. But this is the total - all terrorists, civilians, Lebanese army, everything.

The whole world is going nuts over this "slaughter."

What is needed is some perspective here. May I offer it?

Last month alone, U.S. troops in Afghanistan announced killing 600 "suspected" Taliban. That's one month alone. We've been occupying this foreign country since 2002. It began in response to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. U.S. forces went halfway around the world to attack a sovereign nation, to overthrow the government and kill as many people as it deemed necessary over the last five years to prevent more terrorist attacks in the future. Few would suggest that Afghanistan represents any imminent threat to the U.S. today. By the way, according to U.S. military spokesmen, a total of 1,700 Afghanis have been killed since the start of the year. That includes some civilians, some aid workers and more than 70 foreign troops.

But, last time I checked, there weren't demonstrations in the streets of the U.S. or elsewhere around the world over this war.

Instead, everybody is going ape over Lebanon.

By the way, the government of Afghanistan, installed by the U.S., is happy about the war. President Hamid Karzai wants to see the terrorists rooted out of his country. He recognizes it represents the best chance for his nation to be free.

Meanwhile, back in Lebanon, a government that has tolerated terrorist bases on its soil for years and years is suddenly indignant about Israel's retaliation against incessant attacks from those strongholds.

Does any of this make sense?

Do you think those screaming about the bloodshed in Lebanon really give a hoot about Lebanon? If so, where have they been for the last 30 years?

Why is Lebanon the top story in every newscast? Why is Lebanon on the front page of every newspaper? Don't you get the impression that the violence there is probably worse than anywhere else on the planet from this focus?

Clearly it is not.

And the only difference is who's doing the butt kicking in Lebanon.

As for me, an American of Lebanese and Syrian heritage, I don't want to see a "cease-fire." I want to see Lebanon freed of the terrorist blight, once and for all. I want to see Lebanon freed from domination by Iran and Syria. I want to see Lebanon be Lebanon. I don't want to see Lebanon suffer for another 30 years. It's time to clean up the mess and allow this poor, little country to heal.

And that means getting rid of the disease of Hezbollah - now."

[Ken]

Well said MainstreamMan and Jennifer, well said.
Ah, Laser's wisdom pops back up. I imagine he is posting the views of an American of Lebanese/Syrian heritage who is stating this (hence the ""). But this poor fellow he is quoting is not representative of the Lebanese masses. Judging from their democratically elected officials as well as scientifically conducted polls the average Lebanese person hates and fears Israel more than Syria, Iran or Hiz. Maybe it's those 900 dead brothers, neighbors, etc. at the hands of the IDF. Remember, Hiz originated to repulse one of the previous Israeli invasions. Seems the Lebanese really don't like the IDF. Really. But again this is just more of the craziness from those who refuse to let a critical thought creep into their minds about Israels actions. Hundreds of dead civilians at IDF hands? It MUST have been Hiz hiding among the civilians and forcing them to act as human shields. Certainly the IDF was as careful as they could be. Bombed Red Cross convoys? It MUST have been the IDF's enemies hiding in the convoys. Dead UN workers at the hands of the IDF? It MUST have been terrorists hiding among the UN workers. Targeted infrastructure and non-Hiz areas? It MUST be to prevent the shuttling of the captive soldiers out of the country/to keep Iran from resupplying/to induce the Lebanese to act...Now we get the best: the IDF is killing Lebanese people for the sake of Lebanon. Darned those Lebanese who don't see that!

[joe]

Fat, Drunk, and Stupid, "Hizbullah is not a military unit. They are an armed terrorist gang."

I'm really not interested in your feelings and who you like better, but the reality of the forces they can commit to the battlefield.

And a military unit can't be an armed terrorist gang? Tell it to the SS.

"Isreal doesn't want to be in a state of war. They only want peace and to be left alone." Do you remember the kid in school who would start fights, get a couple good punches in, and then say he didn't want to fight anymore? There's one on every playground.

[joe]

BTW, FDS, I do consider myself a Zionist. The reason I'm quicker to critize Israel when it commits atrocities than the other nasties in the region is because I consider Israel to be "us." The claim to be our democratic ally, and to be entitled to special treatment because of that.

When they engage in terrorism (and yes, killing hundreds of civilians to punish them for not making their government do what you want, that is terrorism), then they are not only committing an abhorrent crime (no shortage of those in the world), but breaking a deal.

[Don Coyote]

There are reports that Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah has pulled his agreement for a ceasefire. Rumored that Iran told him to wait. Lebanon will not send troops south with an armed Hezbollah. Condi, in a call to Lebanon, said we cannot be responsible for the consequences.

[well, actually]

Not to mention Israel receives billions of dollars in US military aid anually. Sure the IDf isn't nearly as bad as Hezbollah, but that doesn't excuse the IDF entirely. Americans should hold the IDF to the same high humanitarian standards we should also hold our own military to.

I am still not convinced that Western Civilization faces a military threat so dire that we must abaondon the Geneva Conventions, rule of law, privacy, open discourse, or human decency.

[sv]

German Forces will engage in Beyrouth to secure
Lebanon's borders. Leopard_II tanks will dancing
around the Litani river. You can hear already the
classical Vienna Walzers as the current general
secretary of Nato with a sharp eye to Lt. General Jones[U.S. Army Chief of Staff], Hoop de Scheffer, recently said. Preparations in Germany are on the
way to receive the green lights from the Supreme
Court in Karlsruhe and the majority support in the
parliament( Reichstag at Berlin ) as a winning coalition.
It follows a liberal note to the German Liberal Party:
Es scheint bei der F.D.P bald Liberalismus Einzug zu halten.
A) mindestens 4 Milliarden Iran-Investitionen stehen auf
dem Spiel. Diese gehen ohne einen
Litani-Einsatz der Bundeswehr
verloren. B) Ein F.D.P.-Eintritt
in die Regierung beginnt durch einen starken Wiederauftritt in der Aussenpolitik. Cheney will eine westliche Wirtschaftsweise
im Mittleren Osten einf?hren. Ohne
die deutschen Liberalen wird er
dort definitif scheitern. Wir
sollten dort unsereren deutschen
Vertrauensvorteil bei Schiiten voll auspielen. Niemand wird bestreiten, dass wir bei den
Arabern besser als die U.S. Corporations im Rennen liegen.

[R C Dean]

Israel has lived in a constant state of war for 58 years because they can't accept reality.

What reality is it the Israelis are supposed to accept? The reality of a new Holocaust, as Hez and Hamas and their sponsors drive the Jews into the sea? The reality of suicide bombers? The reality of Katyushas hammering their cities?

The reality that when you oppress people using violence and collective punishment, a certain minority of them take it seriously and fight back.

If that were true, then every Arab dictatorship would be trying to fend off its own Hezbollah. Yet they are not. How can that be?

Obviously, though, this is an attempt to justify aggression against Israel by reference to the occupied territories. There are only two problems with that theory, though. First, the aggression preceded any occupation by Israel (unless you regard Israel itself as occupied territory, in which case we are back to new Holocaust). Second, Israel wasn't occupying any Lebanese territory when Hez was building up for, and then launched, the current war.

Personally, I prefer theories that at least line up with the facts on the ground occasionally. In my opinion, any explanation for why various Arab and Persian groups and nations are attacking Israel that leaves out hatred for the Jews is missing both the forest and the trees.

[MainstreamMan]

"Personally, I prefer theories that at least line up with the facts on the ground occasionally. In my opinion, any explanation for why various Arab and Persian groups and nations are attacking Israel that leaves out hatred for the Jews is missing both the forest and the trees."

The facts on the ground?

Hatred for the Jews is a real part of this picture. I agree.

But your summary of the facts on the ground seems a bit, uhmmm, simple minded (based on a history of reading your posts, not just this one).

Your view seems more an orchard than a forest, with all the trees lined up in neat rows.

Facts on the ground are far more of a mess.

And please use the holocaust to justify all IDF actions...9/11 to justify all US actions... Civil War to justify all KKK actions....yadda yadda, yawn.

[MainstreamMan]

"If that were true, then every Arab dictatorship would be trying to fend off its own Hezbollah. Yet they are not. How can that be?"

Facts on the ground. Remember. It is important for arguments to align with the facts on the ground.

Google Egypt and terrorism to start, then Saudi Arabia and terrorism, Turkey and terrorism, Pakistan and terrorism...

[Nike Lunar kickers-schoenen]

In your life, there will at least one time that you forget yourself for someone, asking for no result, no company, no ownership nor love. Just ask for meeting you in my most beautiful years. ?