Israel vs Hamas escalates

[wil]

The US in some cases also has to hold its tongue or risk being even more hypocritical. After all we invented a preemptive defense strategy, so equal reaction, a limited resonse is not in our nature. Ask Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

It is my understanding the surrender on the table before that bombing which was unacceptable was the same treaty we signed after the release of the nukes...except after the anihilation we agreed to compensation and rebuilding...

I love this country like I loved my parents. Appreciate most of what they did, but when the belt was wielded or dad was drunk and obnoxious...I said so. Got me in trouble then, gets me in trouble now.

New bumber sticker for my car...These colors don't run.....the world.

[bananabrain]

So Judaism, Christianity, and Islam don't apply? Are you sure?

i can't speak for christianity and islam - after all, hizbollah believe, erroneously, that they are acting as "good muslims".

Was there no wisdom behind the eye for eye?

of course - but it's a personal injury law and nothing to do with this present situation. on the other hand, jewish law certainly understands a defensive war to save lives, particularly against an enemy that wants to exterminate us.

Best course of action: Withdraw, cease-fire, swallow the pride, apologize, PAY for damages, and learn new ways of struggling with the threats.

THREATS?? what about the 1500 hizbollah rockets that have been fired in the last week? and the kidnapped soldiers? how *exactly* is this going to prevent this happening again? this is so unbelievably naive and off the planet i can't even believe you've written it.

For decades the Republican Irish were bombing UK civilians, and had widespread support among Catholic communities. But whatever faults in the British response, at least we didn't send helicopter gunships and tanks into Belfast to destroy Catholic housing areas.

perhaps that might have been different if the irish concerned were all, say, members of opus dei, wanted to remove the UK entirely and murder all its citizens and had stated said objective clearly, unambiguously and continuously since the foundation of the IRA? and suppose that they were being supplied with weaponry by, i don't know, italy (being catholics, d'ye see). then the simile might be appropriate. besides, the ira never fired 1500 rockets in one week and caused much of the population to have to leave their homes.

Frankly I can only hope the Israeli government quotes are simply an extreme and minority opinion

haim ramon is actually fairly sensible under usual circumstances. what he has said does come across as both crass and self-serving - not to mention stretching the supposed support rather more than is remotely credible.

because I can see no justification for any military response that treat civilian deaths on this scale as simply an acceptable consequence of war.

brian, let me preface this remark by saying that i am greatly saddened by civilian deaths on the lebanese side. but if you think that 400 casualties (and i’m not disputing the figure, though people in the area have a history of lying about stuff like this) is a lot, it is. but if you think the israelis had an aim of causing casualties, you must be absolutely joking. what other army has sent emails, text messages and leaflets to its intended targets, warning them that they were going to attack?? i mean, seriously? if the israelis were intending to kill a lot of civilians, they could have done a LOT worse and you know it. if you think that the israelis seriously intended to kill non-combatants, you absolutely don’t understand them. i agree that there is rarely very much crying over (i apologise for the horrible phrase but can’t think of a more sensitive way of putting it) collateral damage, but this is, when all is said and done, an attempt to incapacitate a terrorist group with thousands of missiles sitting just across the border, who have demonstrated a capacity to shut down the north of israel and make half a million people (approximately 1/8 of the population) flee their homes. no state could be expected to put up with this.

i happen to know one of the people that works in air-force targeting. he sits in a small room on a base analysing satellite photos and intelligence. he’s not sitting there watching al-jazeera or al-manar and going “*******s! let’s take ‘em out!!” and he is NOT, repeat NOT, being told to target civilians or UN personnel!

Is Zionism not the same disease that you are referring to where Israel became a country within a country?

no. zionism is the philosophy that states that the jewish people must have a national home in order to give us sanctuary against the mindless hatred that has murdered us for the last two thousand years. it is the jewish right to national self-determination. the palestinians have the same right and, if they can bring themselves to forgo posturing, violence and empty rhetoric, there is no reason it cannot be realised.

There are some people in Israel who want Iran and Syria to attack them

name one. look, fool, my family are on the front line. my auntie is currently sitting on her veranda outside nahariya watching the katyushas land and refusing to go in the shelter because “if her number’s up, it’s up”. so far, rockets have landed on the arab village next door (and many other arab villages, districts and towns in the galilee, causing numerous casualties unreported by the international media, i might add) while my cousin’s friend’s mother has been killed by a rocket on her balcony. i can also say with certainty that many of my family are being called up to the reserves and, moreover, that they DON’T WANT TO BE IN LEBANON. all they want is to be left alone for long enough to come to an agreement with the palestinians. unfortunately i also have to consider this thoroughly depressing blog by this terribly sensible egyptian chappie:

http://www.sandmonkey.org/2006/07/17...ft-their-left/

read it all the way down to the bottom. this really sheds light on the true nature of the problems in the middle east - you know how the hizbollah keep saying that they’ve been “offering to negotiate from the beginning”? that the kidnapping was really about getting their own prisoners back? nobody seems to be asking them why *they* didn’t try to negotiate with the israelis first rather than attacking, kidnapping and rocketing them. why exactly should the israelis be the ones to make the first move? how can you defend yourself from someone who refuses to play by any rules?

the sad thing is that i know there are many arabs and muslims that sincerely want peace - but they are drowned out by the tribalism. where is the arab and muslim “peace now”? where is the palestinian martin luther king? the palestinian mandela? the palestinian gandhi? where are the muslims protesting about darfur? i’ll tell you - they’re scared for their lives because their societies do not tolerate dissent from the party line.

Hizbolah were born as freedom fighters, protecting peoples lands from invading forces and oppression from across the border years ago...they have grown to what they are after decades of agression...and now they fight back and we are so surprised.

"oppression from across the border"? israel went into lebanon in 1982 - before hizbollah existed - because fatah and the plo under arafat were doing something very similar to what hizbollah are doing now. in other words, they started it - and got more than they bargained for. hizbollah exist because the israelis were too stupid to leave when they were done. they left lebanon finally in 2000 - unilaterally. and what happened? hizbollah took over the south and built up its armoury of 10000 rockets - waiting for the iranians to give them the go-ahead. do you think it is a coincidence that the hizbollah front was opened just as the iranian nuclear issue was about to be addressed. now that has dropped off the radar. look, it is not in the israelis' interest to be in lebanon at all and they know it. what is in their interest is to have a stable and strong government to their north, which is not under iranian - or syrian - control. just as obviously, it is clearly not in the interest of syria or iran for this to be the case and, even more obviously, they are not averse to the lebanese paying the price for the actions of their guerrilla proxies.

i will let the excellent sandmonkey have the last word:

http://www.sandmonkey.org/2006/07/26/poke/

b’shalom

bananabrain

[Dor]

I am really amazed that so many people think Israel should sit back and smile at everything that is done to them.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by lunamoth

Q, I'm not arguing with you. Just putting my own little thoughts on the matter out there. The US was provoked; the response was to do something. Would it have been enough to just go into Afghanistan and continue the hunt for ObL and other leaders of the militants? I don't know. That's not what happened so now we just keep going forward.

I'm not really sure what you mean by the sentence above. All I meant was that the terrorist faction of the middle east wanted to pick a fight with the West, and they did, and even if the US had not gone into Iraq I would not be surprised if eventually we would have been provoked into action there in some other way.

I know. I was continuing my train of thought. What I meant was the US doesn't require the permission of the rest of the world to protect what it considers its own security and that of its allies. Regardless of what picture the media paints, I do not believe this series of actions by the US were done without serious thought and weighing of consequences. Indeed I believe there is a much bigger piece of this issue hidden under the "water" so to speak and what we have seen is only the tip of the iceberg that floats above.

v/r

Q

[Quahom1]

I'm sorry, but you are referring to people as a disease that must be erradicated?! Hitler had a similar philosophy. Who gave you that right? Are you a citizen of Lebanon? Of Israel? Is Zionism not the same disease that you are referring to where Israel became a country within a country? I am not familiar with the religion that considers people a disease... what do you call it?

People are not the disease, but the philoposphy behind the behavior is.

My opinion: Israel should hold a countrywide vote on whether to support the atrocity and war crimes that they are committing, because that way the blood will either be spared or on the hands of everyone who votes for it. Likewise for Lebanon... hold a large vote open to all for whether to support Hezbollah, whether to counter-attack Israel, or to crack down on Hezbollah, or to remain ambivalent.

In light of what has happened to Isael during the past 60 or so years, I doubt Israel considers anything they've done to be war crimes or atrocities. As far as Lebanon is concerned, they are caught in the middle and do not at this time have a strong enough position to do much about people using their land as a battle field.

In the USA, Bush should be recognized as a dictator in foreign affairs, because the American people are NOT voting on his statements. He truly speaks for himself, and the administration barely even speaks for itself let alone the American people. In foreign affairs America is more of a dictatorship than any regime in the Middle East. Bold statement? Simple math. The population, the power ratio, and the foreign event rate is far faster now than the 4 year cycle. In 1776 there were only 2.5 million Americans, but today 300 million and the largest economy, military, and nuclear stockpile in the world. But with still only one person, one person as president, commander-in-chief, who has far, far more power today than anyone ever has in American history. His statements are wreckless. It is too much and it will only get worse. People are not taking responsibility for what is going on... the bulk of Americans don't want responsibility for all of this and the situation is only going to get worse. My opinion: Democratic countries had better become more democratic and more responsible at the individual level if they want to survive and set the example. They better start looking to DIRECT democracy and letting it guide foreign affairs. There should be large votes once per month in America, overriding congress and the president so that the American people are more internationally involved and responsible for their actions. The USA has no business backing Israel in their undemocratic, tyrannical mistake. If the problem is in Lebanon, why is the USA taxpayer money going to Israel? Their attack against a neighbor these past two weeks is NOT righteous by any law, by any religion, by any means. The most active terrorist organization this week is the IDF. I wish it were not the case.

Well, compared to the likes of Teddy and Franklin Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Ulysses Grant and some others in history, President Bush is very un- dictatorial. This war would not be possible without the declaration as issued by Congress, and only then after a majority vote of 2/3rds. Congress declared the war, not the president. And direct majority democracy would be the equivelent of "mob rule", hardly possible in a country with 300 million. As far as his statements being reckless, that is an opinion. Again, your opinion of Israel and the relationship it has with the US is just that, your opinion. That American people do have the power to sway Congress and the president if the majority believe what is being done is wrong, and in fact if that is the case, then the elections coming up in a couple months will show that. As far as Israel attacking their "neighbor", well they see it quite differently, and they also consider their actions as protecting themselves. As far as terrorism goes, the Israelis have been pretty open about their intentions. Hezbolah chose not to listen, or heed the warnings.

I want to see a vote by the American people on whether to pay billions of their dollars to Israel yearly. Iraq has for now far surpassed Turkey and Israel, but I question why either of them is receiving such large taxpayer dollars without the consent of the taxpayer. Why should the USA fund this atrocity? Over 2 soldiers and a few rockets?

Again, that is your opinion.

There are some people in Israel who want Iran and Syria to attack them just as much as there are some in Syria and Iran who are driven to use Israel as an excuse for their own purposes. Why? To draw a bigger fight in the Middle East while their favored president is still in the Whitehouse. You think I'm wrong?

I submit that you are correct. There are always people who are out with malice in mind. Most people in any country are not that way. I submit as well that most "republicans" do not fit the sweeping assumption you are suggesting, that they are all war mongers.

This is not a recent phenomenon that is occuring in the Middle East. This has been brewing for decades, and now it is come to a head.

I bet if Hezbolah stopped shelling Israel, then Israel would stop its incursion into Lebanon. However, I strongly believe that if Israel stopped its shelling first, then Hezbolah would interprete that as a sign of weakness and would continue with the attacks. I think you might also agree with that.

v/r

Q

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by I, Brian

cyberpi, from all accounts, the Israeli's are rallying behind the Israeli government over this, so I don't see any vote there having any effect.

It makes a big difference. That is what faith is. You can’t read the minds of people and neither have the people been given the faith to be the ones making the decisions. I’m not talking about an opinion poll or a rally. Require people to place the votes to make these decisions that determine their actions, for which they are responsible.

Originally Posted by bananabrain

THREATS?? what about the 1500 hizbollah rockets that have been fired in the last week?

I consider it wrong to use the response to an escalation to justify an escalation. It began with an incursion and 2 hostages. The USA had a terrorist attack against the embassy and military barracks decades ago in Lebanon, killing several hundred.... wouldn't that have made a better excuse?

Originally Posted by bananabrain

i can't speak for christianity and islam - after all, hizbollah believe, erroneously, that they are acting as "good muslims".

I am not defending anyone’s actions, nor trying to speak for them. I also see some Israelis believe, erroneously, that they are acting as “good Jews”.

eye-for-eye:

Originally Posted by bananabrain

of course - but it's a personal injury law and nothing to do with this present situation. on the other hand, jewish law certainly understands a defensive war to save lives, particularly against an enemy that wants to exterminate us.

Will Jewish law be held responsible for its crimes? Ask the person you call the enemy to take a vote from every person for whether or not to exterminate you, and then publish the result. Until then you have nothing but conjecture. If you argue this is obvious by their actions, you miss my point. Right now I think Israelis are clearly the ones trying to exterminate their problem. So please, take a vote from every citizen of Israel of whether to exterminate the people that you call enemy, and likewise publish the results before taking action.

Originally Posted by bananabrain

look, fool, my family are on the front line.

I forgive you for calling me fool and wish your family good health just as I wish all people in Lebanon good health.

Originally Posted by bananabrain

it is the jewish right to national self-determination.

Self-determination is everyone’s right. So I say, stop government-determining and start self-determining by holding a vote for these actions. I think self-determination is the right of the people of Hezbollah too.


Ironically some Kurds launch attacks against Turkey from Northern Iraq, and are listed by Western countries as terrorists. Their stated goal is for self-determination of a Kurdish race. Why should Turkey not launch a full scale attack into Northern Iraq the way Israel has into Southern Lebanon?

Originally Posted by bananabrain

the sad thing is that i know there are many arabs and muslims that sincerely want peace - but they are drowned out by the tribalism.

You formerly claimed they were trying to exterminate you. Right now they are suffering from IDF attacks. Will justice now be to inflict over $1 billion damages out of Israel? That would be eye for eye, right? Or should Lebanon inflict a million times more out of Israel to punish the Jewish law, per the Jewish law... in the same way that it is being used to justify these attacks?

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Indeed I believe there is a much bigger piece of this issue hidden under the "water" so to speak and what we have seen is only the tip of the iceberg that floats above.

Shine a light on that darkness, as Jesus (pbuh) would say.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Hezbolah chose not to listen, or heed the warnings.

Both countries and terrorists warn the USA, and the USA does not listen or heed their warnings. Are countries now justified to attack the USA at home as a result? When civilians are killed and civilian infrastructure is destroyed to influence a government or a people, what is it called? Terrorism? It is terrorism in Southern Lebanon… a World Trade Center’s worth of damage has been inflicted against civilian infrastructure and the casualty count will soon be there. I am not defending the actions of any faction or individual of Hezbollah, I am pointing out the actions taken as a result is full scale terrorism.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

President Bush is very un- dictatorial.

Did he ask you to vote on whether to support Israel for their war crimes? Did he ask you to vote whether to give away billions of your dollars and weapons to Israel instead of helping democracy in Lebanon? I am not attacking the character of the person in the White house, nor of congress… I am stating the growing imbalance of power in America and the large divide between people and government. Every 4 years it might be a democracy but in between it has become further and further from it, especially for foreign affairs, including world trade. I do not speak out of ignorance or contempt on this issue.

[I, Brian]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

perhaps that might have been different if the irish concerned were all, say, members of opus dei, wanted to remove the UK entirely and murder all its citizens and had stated said objective clearly, unambiguously and continuously since the foundation of the IRA? and suppose that they were being supplied with weaponry by, i don't know, italy (being catholics, d'ye see). then the simile might be appropriate. besides, the ira never fired 1500 rockets in one week and caused much of the population to have to leave their homes.


haim ramon is actually fairly sensible under usual circumstances. what he has said does come across as both crass and self-serving - not to mention stretching the supposed support rather more than is remotely credible.


brian, let me preface this remark by saying that i am greatly saddened by civilian deaths on the lebanese side. but if you think that 400 casualties (and i’m not disputing the figure, though people in the area have a history of lying about stuff like this) is a lot, it is. but if you think the israelis had an aim of causing casualties, you must be absolutely joking. what other army has sent emails, text messages and leaflets to its intended targets, warning them that they were going to attack?? i mean, seriously? if the israelis were intending to kill a lot of civilians, they could have done a LOT worse and you know it. if you think that the israelis seriously intended to kill non-combatants, you absolutely don’t understand them. i agree that there is rarely very much crying over (i apologise for the horrible phrase but can’t think of a more sensitive way of putting it) collateral damage, but this is, when all is said and done, an attempt to incapacitate a terrorist group with thousands of missiles sitting just across the border, who have demonstrated a capacity to shut down the north of israel and make half a million people (approximately 1/8 of the population) flee their homes. no state could be expected to put up with this.

I'm certainly not suggesting the Israeli's are purposefully targeting civilians - it's already well reported that Hezbollah station themselves and their stashes in civilian areas.

The point I'm making is that the Israeli response comes across as disproportionate and clumsy at best. When you shell settled areas, no matter the precautions, you're going to hit civilians regardless of any "precision" bombing methods used.

And the main complaint is that where else in the world would this otherwise be tolerated and supported, rather than condemned?

Just my personal opinions.

[flowperson]

War is Hell !

Guerilla warfare is real hell !

flow....

[Quahom1]

Shine a light on that darkness, as Jesus (pbuh) would say.

I don't think anyone (that means all mankind), would care to observe the truth below the waterline.

Both countries and terrorists warn the USA, and the USA does not listen or heed their warnings. Are countries now justified to attack the USA at home as a result? When civilians are killed and civilian infrastructure is destroyed to influence a government or a people, what is it called?

The world has seen what happens when others justify attacking the USA because the US "didn't listen". It isn't the wisest thing to force the US' attention by way of attacks (un-provoked).

Terrorism? It is terrorism in Southern Lebanon… a World Trade Center’s worth of damage has been inflicted against civilian infrastructure and the casualty count will soon be there. I am not defending the actions of any faction or individual of Hezbollah, I am pointing out the actions taken as a result is full scale terrorism.

Israel gave ample warning, prior to beginning its campaign. The US had no such luxury. What you are describing is apples and oranges.

Did he ask you to vote on whether to support Israel for their war crimes? Did he ask you to vote whether to give away billions of your dollars and weapons to Israel instead of helping democracy in Lebanon? I am not attacking the character of the person in the White house, nor of congress… I am stating the growing imbalance of power in America and the large divide between people and government. Every 4 years it might be a democracy but in between it has become further and further from it, especially for foreign affairs, including world trade. I do not speak out of ignorance or contempt on this issue.

Ok, you are not contemptuous, nor ignorant. Then you might find this of interest. First of all, you must remember that 70% of America is Christian (despite what the media claims). And Christians all know that "blessed are the nations that bless Israel, and cursed are the nations that curse Israel." It has been in our Christian teachings since we first understood God cognitively. So, your attempt to get the US to look at Israel in any other light is ludicrous.

Second, there is no imbalance of power between the people and the government. In fact the government has had to jump and justify much of what it has done (since 1992), when the Clinton Administration allowed "terrorist attacks" no less than eight times on US soil, and still no response occured. I'd call that "patient", by the USA.

Third, world trade (without tarrifs), has become something of a joke. Mexico should have been the "first" of countries to benefit from such a deal. It hasn't. The US should have seen less jobs outsourced, and the sweat shops in Asia should be on the decline. None of it has happened. Europe should have seen great strides in their trade and work forces. More people should be at work, better wages and reasonable hours per week should be in effect. The "world's" standard of living should be climbing steadily towards that of "the US standard" (if there is such a standard), while the US standard of living should be remaining at status quo. Well the US standard of living is declining, albeit much slower than the rest of the world (which is slipping faster than ever), and that is only because Americans are taking two and three jobs (at any wage), just to try and maintain what they've got. The average annual vacation time per year in the US, is less than 10 days...compare that to the rest of the European and major Asian world populace. The average work week in the US is 50 hours, while the unemployment rate is at 4.3% (but the numbers bely the quality of jobs, or wages), while France and Germany (for example) have 35 hour work weeks, 30 to 45 vacation days a year, and 10-20% unemployment. Now who's fault is that? America's?

America is not the problem here. American foriegn policy is not the problem here (or at least not the gross majority of the problem). You do not seem to care to take a "good hard look" at Middle East countries' policies. In fact you seem to think they are perfect? And if it weren't for the US meddling in Middle East affairs, everything would be fine, and there would be no terrorism?... There would also be no Israel. And that is the ultimate goal of terrorists in the Middle East, and its affiliates...the genocidal removal of those that call themselves the citizens of Israel.

Israel has nothing in the way of rich resourses. No oil, no great water resources, no huge tracts of fertile land, no strategic value of any kind. They simply "exist". In fact, a great number of Israeli citizens are not even religious.

Israel declared themselves a state in 1947/48, and were recognized as such by the United Nations and affiliates. They have been fighting for survival ever since. They are surrounded by blood enemies or "cooly neutral" countries. They were attacked in 67, in 72, in 80-82, and during the nineties, and now they are in a war they didn't ask for, but I doubt they will give into.

They are under attack by those claiming a religion of "peace"...again based on observation, the only peace I can see is the "Peace of the Dead".

It isn't the American citizens who should hold a vote on stopping the war, or withdrawling support to an ally of 58 years... it is the people surrounding Israel who should hold a vote to stop those that "are not of the people of the Peaceful religion", from continuing a war (which THEY started), of which there can be no benefit to anyone, except their own political/idealogical/theological power base.

Let's face it, if Hezbollah gave a damn about the Lebanese citizens who's land they are using, do you really think there would be this "war"? Iran won't let them into its country side, and Syria won't let them in either. Neither will Jordan. Lebanon is the weak link, and is cannon fodder. If I were Lebanese, I would really look at the "Muslim/Arab" allied countries around me, and ask "Where are you? We didn't start this war with Israel...why is our land the battle field for your own interests?"

These are hard questions to answer, without looking into the mirror, and seeing self...

v/r

Q

[bananabrain]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

Require people to place the votes to make these decisions that determine their actions, for which they are responsible.

are you saying have referenda on *everything*? that's not how representative government works - the closest you can get is polling, which can at least be statistically validated.

Originally Posted by cyberpi

I consider it wrong to use the response to an escalation to justify an escalation. It began with an incursion and 2 hostages. The USA had a terrorist attack against the embassy and military barracks decades ago in Lebanon, killing several hundred.... wouldn't that have made a better excuse?

reading between the lines of this, then - *ANY* response by the israelis other than, say, sending in a commando team to kidnap two hizbollah guys, would rate as an "escalation" (and presumably, therefore, "disproportionate"). clearly, in this situation, the israelis are damned if they do and damned if they don't, which they're used to.

I also see some Israelis believe, erroneously, that they are acting as “good Jews”.

with reference to what? to this? why bring religion into it at all? i expect my government to preserve my life, my safety and that of the public. if it does not do this, it is not carrying out its basic responsibility. if the israeli government is protecting israelis by attempting to remove hizbollah's offensive capability, than why would they object to that? and what difference does it make whether they're jewish or not? when you make an argument like that, the line between anti-israel and anti-jewish starts to blur.

Will Jewish law be held responsible for its crimes?

show me a crime it is committing first. as i have already said, israel is not run according to jewish law. neither is this war an action undertaken for religious motives, nor an action commanded by a duly sanctioned religious authority - because there is no such authority in existence and, even if there was, it would not have the authority to make israeli civil law any more than the catholic church has the authority to make, say, spanish civil law. there is no need to adduce a religious dimension to the need to preserve one's citizens from harm and defend them against attack from terrorism.

Ask the person you call the enemy to take a vote from every person for whether or not to exterminate you, and then publish the result. Until then you have nothing but conjecture. If you argue this is obvious by their actions, you miss my point.

oh, come on, this is just arrant nonsense. the hizbollah charter calls for "the liberation of jerusalem". ask yourself how exactly that is supposed to happen in practice and how it relates to being lebanese as opposed to part of something bigger. perhaps you are unaware of the hizbollah-sponsored attack on the jewish community centre in buenos aires some years ago? make no mistake, these guys want to kill jews, not just israelis. and if i were a christian or a sunni, i don't think i'd be too happy about them either.

So please, take a vote from every citizen of Israel of whether to exterminate the people that you call enemy, and likewise publish the results before taking action.

it's abundantly clear to me that if the israelis wanted to exterminate the lebanese, they could have done it in the 20 years they were in lebanon. instead of which they WITHDREW UNILATERALLY - and did they get peace in return? no, they got a manufactured excuse for continuing hostilities. convenient for everyone except the rest of the lebanese - and the israelis, methinks.

I think self-determination is the right of the people of Hezbollah too.

indeed. and they have determined that it is not sufficient for the israelis to leave lebanon and that they are entitled to continue attacking. by doing this, they have determined the consequences. some might even call them unreasonable!

Ironically some Kurds launch attacks against Turkey from Northern Iraq, and are listed by Western countries as terrorists. Their stated goal is for self-determination of a Kurdish race. Why should Turkey not launch a full scale attack into Northern Iraq the way Israel has into Southern Lebanon?

yeah - the kurds don't have their own country, whereas the lebanese do. the kurds are a minority population within eastern turkey, whereas the lebanese aren't within israel. it is illegal to speak kurdish or talk about kurdistan in turkey. it is not illegal in israel to speak arabic - actually it's one of the three official languages, taught in all public schools - and kurds are similarly oppressed in syria, iraq and iran. i really don't see much resemblance even between the PKK and the hizbollah. the PKK may be *******s, but they don't have a 10,000 rocket arsenal supplied by iran. so i don't think much of this comparison.

You formerly claimed they were trying to exterminate you.

some of them - like hizbollah - are. i'm not making generalisations about arabs, muslims, or the lebanese the way you are.

Or should Lebanon inflict a million times more out of Israel to punish the Jewish law, per the Jewish law... in the same way that it is being used to justify these attacks?

there you go again with this. is your problem with israel or with jews? i have not heard a single person - myself included - express the need to stop hizbollah in terms of jewish law. to any sane or reasonable individual, this is blatantly obvious. yet you seem to be saying this is a religious thing. why is that?

a World Trade Center’s worth of damage has been inflicted against civilian infrastructure and the casualty count will soon be there

more assumptions. do you think the israelis couldn't have killed three thousand people if they had wanted to? the fact is that they have done more than could reasonably be expected of them to avoid harming civilians; it is unfortunate that hizbollah's tactic - and it *is* a tactic - of using human shields is working.

Originally Posted by I, Brian

The point I'm making is that the Israeli response comes across as disproportionate and clumsy at best. When you shell settled areas, no matter the precautions, you're going to hit civilians regardless of any "precision" bombing methods used.

i dare say - hence the emails, leaflets and text messages warning people to leave. i simply don't know what exactly they're expected to do, short of sending in ground troops to fight door-to-door - which is exactly what hizbollah want, of course. i mean, what would you suggest? these guys WANT US DEAD and they don't care about casualties on their "own side" except insofar as it gives them media support.

Originally Posted by Quahom1

And Christians all know that "blessed are the nations that bless Israel, and cursed are the nations that curse Israel." It has been in our Christian teachings since we first understood God cognitively.

i don't want to sound ungrateful, Q, except that the "israel" referred to there is not the state of israel, but the "children of israel" - the jewish people. and unfortunately there is the small matter of the whole apocalypse thing where we are expected by most american christians of the evangelical persuasion to either get killed or convert, neither of which i am keen on. modern evangelical eschatology does the reality of the middle east no favours whatsoever; there is no hope for peace in it until millions have died and we are no longer jews. nonetheless, i do believe that america should still be involved, if only because there are a lot of americans who do not believe that a christian agenda should be the determinant of US foreign policy.

b'shalom

bananabrain

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by bananabrain

with reference to what? to this? why bring religion into it at all? i expect my government to preserve my life, my safety and that of the public. if it does not do this, it is not carrying out its basic responsibility. if the israeli government is protecting israelis by attempting to remove hizbollah's offensive capability, than why would they object to that? and what difference does it make whether they're jewish or not? when you make an argument like that, the line between anti-israel and anti-jewish starts to blur.

Originally Posted by bananabrain

there you go again with this. is your problem with israel or with jews? i have not heard a single person - myself included - express the need to stop hizbollah in terms of jewish law. to any sane or reasonable individual, this is blatantly obvious. yet you seem to be saying this is a religious thing. why is that?

Lets just review:

Originally Posted by bananabrain

i can't speak for christianity and islam - after all, hizbollah believe, erroneously, that they are acting as "good muslims".

Originally Posted by bananabrain

of course - but it's a personal injury law and nothing to do with this present situation. on the other hand, jewish law certainly understands a defensive war to save lives, particularly against an enemy that wants to exterminate us.

I rest my case with you.

[cyberpi]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

And Christians all know that "blessed are the nations that bless Israel, and cursed are the nations that curse Israel." It has been in our Christian teachings since we first understood God cognitively. So, your attempt to get the US to look at Israel in any other light is ludicrous.

False on both accounts. A few verses for you:

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Luke 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

John 8:33-34 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayests thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

John 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.


With most of what you state about America I will simply say that my first hand knowledge indicates otherwise, but I will save it for a more worthy thread.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by cyberpi

False on both accounts. A few verses for you:

Matthew 3:9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Luke 3:8 Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

John 8:33-34 They answered him, We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayests thou, Ye shall be made free? Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

John 8:39 They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham.


With most of what you state about America I will simply say that my first hand knowledge indicates otherwise, but I will save it for a more worthy thread.

Oh? Try looking at the whole picture...

1. Genesis 12:3 "And I will bless them that bless thee and curse him that curseth thee; and in thee shall all nations of the earth be blessed." Point: God has promised to bless the man or nation that blesses the Chosen People. History has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the nations that have blessed the Jewish people have had the blessing of God; the nations that have cursed the Jewish people have experienced the curse of God.
   
   
2. St. Paul recorded in Romans 15:27 "For if the Gentiles have shared in their (the Jews) spiritual things, they are indebted to minister to them also in material things."
   
   Christians owe a debt of eternal gratitude to the Jewish people for their contributions that gave birth to the Christian faith. Jesus Christ, a prominent Rabbi from Nazareth said, "Salvation is of the Jews!" (St. John 4:22) consider what the Jewish people have given to Christianity:
   

   a) The Sacred Scripture
   b) The Prophets
   c) The Patriarchs
   d) Mary, Joseph, and Jesus Christ of Nazareth
   e) The Twelve Disciples
   f) The Apostles
   

Of course you are right, it isn't worthy of discussion. Not between you and I, at any event.

v/r

Q

[cyberpi]

Q, Are you claiming responsibility for the biological line that you were born into? Are you responsible for what your biological father and mother did, or the generation prior to them? Did you select your parents and your genes upon entry into this world? Are you responsible for the laws that your ancestors made for you to follow, or the country that you were born into?