War crimes in Lebanon and Israel

There can be no doubt that the combatants in the battle between Hezbollah and Israel engulfing southern Lebanon have lost all moral credibility. Both sides are waging a war without any regard for innocent human life, except insofar as it is regard for the public relations problems it causes.

The conflict across the border between Lebanon and Israel has now displaced up to 1 million people in Lebanon, of which nearly 700 000 are living in temporary accommodations, and another 220 000 are in Syria, Jordan, Cyprus and the Gulf area. Addressing the vital needs of the displaced and other affected populations, including access to safe drinking water, health care, vaccines and life-saving medications, remains the priority. Infrastructure in Lebanon has been severely damaged, hampering the delivery of humanitarian relief. Fuel shortages threaten to paralyse all lifeline systems, and it is estimated that if fuel is not delivered this week, 60% of all hospitals in Lebanon, in addition to other health facilities, will cease to function. (WHO)

Israel is intentionally bombing roads and bridges that are the only routes into the beleaguered area for relief supplies and out of the area for refugees. Civilians are now trapped in a free fire zone. Israeli claims they are making allowances for humanitarian aid are false. Report after report demonstrates they are lying. As for Hezbollah, they continue to fire rockets into areas with civilians. These rockets cannot be controlled or directed to military targets. Like the mirror image assault on the Lebanese population by Israel, this is a war crime.

The immediate issue is not to trade charges as to who committed war crimes first. Both sides are committing these crimes and continue to do so. They are war criminals, regardless whether Hezbollah has the support of the civilian population in the south or Israel has the support of its own citizens. Civilians do not have the right to authorize war crimes. The immediate issue is to stop the unconscionable bloodshed of innocent people to achieve political aims by both sides.

Not that it matters, but we will be asked, so here is our solution to the Israel - Palestine problem. We cut the Gordian Knot with a multinational force that imposes, by force, the international agreement that created the State of Israel and guarantees its existence. The Palestinians give up forever their right to return to their former properties, perhaps with some compensation. Israel withdraws from all occupied territories in Palestine and Lebanon, dismantling its settlements. Jerusalem becomes an international city.

It is to everyone's advantage, including the people of the area, that such a solution be imposed, regardless of the sovereignties of Palestine, Israel and Lebanon. Let's get this over with.

More like this

...you know everything is fubar. I'll save the author for the end: No sooner had Hezbollah taken the two Israeli soldiers hostage [Mad Biologist: Eight soldiers were also killed] than Israel unleashed an air war -- on Lebanon. The Beirut airport was bombed, its fuel storage tanks set ablaze. The…
Israel, a state entity, is committing war crimes in Gaza. They have blockaded and imprisoned an entire civilian population in the Gaza strip, over a million people, and have now launched air strikes against civilian targets with the expected results: the deaths of hundreds, among them women and…
Eric Margolis in the Toronto Sun on the current situtation in the Middle East: All parties involved are to blame for this frightful mess: The Palestinians and Hezbollah for provoking Israel, and Israel for its continuing brutal repression of Palestinians and assassinating their leaders. But most at…
Less than a week ago we posted on an impending public health emergency in the embattled Gaza strip region of Palestine, where a relentless Israeli assault had cut off much of the population from water and power at the height of summer heat. The warning came from our friend, Palestinian doctor and…

It'd have to be a fairly large international force. Not only would it have to deal with the asymmetrical warfare of the Lebanon-based terrorists; it could conceivably have to fight the Israeli forces too. I can well imagine that, if an international force was sitting between the Israelis and an objective, there might be an... accident. And if we were indeed in violation of Israeli sovereignty, we wouldn't necessarily have sufficient moral high ground from which to complain.

As such, I do wonder whether this solution is actualy feasible.

By Corkscrew (not verified) on 12 Aug 2006 #permalink

Hezbollah and Hamas are both committed to the destruction of the State of Israel. From thier point of view, which has been consistent, that is the only solution.

In my amatuer opinion, your solution will only provide a brief respite and will only encourage Hamas and Hezbollah to continue to try and destroy Israel.

It is sad to say, but the only solution I see is for one of the warring parties to become strong enough to destroy the other.

Sorry, Chuck, but the Genocidal "solution" you offer shows a great leack of vision, common humanity or sense of history.

The most obvious example of ths is the PLO. The original goal of the PLO was also the destruction of Israel, but over time, they morphed into much more of a mainstream political movement seeking a peacable two-state solution with Israel.

Time and again, terrorist organizations have been defeated through police action and negotiation, separating the worst elements from their popular support, and allowing the mainstreaming of formerly terrorist views. The IRA and FLQ are good examples of this sort of strategy. While the political issues of a separate Ireland and Quebec continue, they now happen through non-violent democratic means. The FLQ for instance was essentially reduced to a lone nut bombing "Second Cup" coffee shops for daring to have english signs in Quebec. The longer they are dealt with through military means, the longer they last.

If you want to understand what is happening in the Middle East, please go to www.globalresearch.ca.
In an editorial entitled the 'Guns of August', in the Washington Post on Thursday, Richard Holbrooke said, "Two full blown crises, in Lebanon and and Iraq, are merging into a single emergency".
"A chain raction could spread quickly almost anywhere between Cairo and Bombay. The combination of combustible elements poses the greatest threat to global stability since the 1962 Cuban missle crisis, history's only nuclear power confrontation."
Any plan for peace would have to be approved by Dick Chaney, the Neocoms, and the Isreal Lobby. When Chaney is not busy shooting lawyers, he is working on his plan to nuke Syria and Iran at the end of August.
This crisis will produce the possibility of terrorists
exploding a nuclear bomb in an American city, such as New York. My advice to my fellow citizens here in the US, is to get the hell out of the country before the atomic bomb explodes, and possbily kills you. Emigrate to an island in the South Pacific, where you can watch the ocear levels rise as the already irrrversible global warming causes the ice in Greenland and the North and South Poles to melt.
Tactical nuclear weapons will soon be dropped on Iran, with the full approval of Chaney and the Isreal Lobby, causing a possible response by Russia and China.
Can you guarantee me Iran does not already have nuclear weapons, and the missiles to deliver them, all sold in a pakage deal, for several billion dollars, to Iran by Russian and China.

Sorry, it is Cheney, not Chaney. But his real name is Doctor Strangelove.

I'm with corksrew on this: What force? Who? The French? No way..

A beefed up UNIFIL will still be UNIFIL. People always bash the UN peacekeepers (well they are a medley lot it is true!) but they are not a fighting force and have no enemy (except the children who torment them: they are not allowed to threaten or smack children...). A UNIFIL that could 'use force' is a contradiction in terms and seems to imply that there would be three parties fighting a land war. Crazy. No one will send troops. Of course, they may send a few for show, or send some when they are no longer needed.

Only half in jest, I think Israel is on to the right idea with a wall.

Except, the wall should encircle the entire Middle East.

We invite anybody inside the wall that is sick and tired of the whole thing, no matter what the nationality or religion, outside, to live in a place of their own choosing. If that means buying up a lot of real estate in Malibu, the Cote de Azur or central London so be it - it'll still be cheaper than the ongoing conflict.

Likewise, we invite deeply religious people of all stripes inside to defend their religion and its holy sites against all the infidels and apostates already there. We'll pay for airfare and any weaponry and ammunition they want as long as they can carry it inside themselves.

We then close the gates and wait a few months for all the noise to stop.

Then we make good use of the stockpiles of nuclear arms around the world, and carpet-bomb the entire area, taking extra care to really reach down into every place with a temple, church, mosque or any meaningful archeological remains. If we aren't really sure it's all a fine dust, we may have to resume production of nukes until we do.

We also have quite a lot of high-grade and low-grade nuclear waste around the world. Mix it with concrete and cover the entire glassy plain with it, making sure anybody dumb enough to want to live there isn't doing it for very long.

Frankly, I'm so sick and tired of the entire insanity I no longer care who did what or why. The whole festering sore is a living testament to the inability of religion and history to be a guide to anything good or worthwile. The asshats want to kill and/or enslave each other? Fine - just let us find a way to get all the decent people out of the way.

that was corkscrew (sp.)

The Gordian knot. The Palestinians would accept a decent two-state solution (67 borders or so) as they are exhausted. Many claim that they would be ready to give up the right to return. I think that's right; it has become a symbolic demand, a cry for the reparation of old injustice, as well as a negotiation card. Compensation of a kind - and better conditions where they actually are - might sort that out. Might. If the rest fell into place.

Israel should accept that now, as it represents, in the long term, Israel's only chance of survival. But Israel will not, unless the US imposes it.

Israel will not because it's very existence is based on its racist/ethnic/religious identity and its stance as a bellicose, injured victim. Without that core identity, it would no longer be Israel. To survive, it must indeed continue aggressive, not to say hawkish, or even worse, behavior, as that is what the US desires. The US supports Israel for reasons emotional (if one likes, I wonder what the Kristian Kooks think of Israel bombing Christians in Beirut) but more importantly for real-politik strategic reasons. It is the US' (uk, eu..etc.) toe-hold in the ME, funded, supported, and armed to the hilt, care of the US taxpayer, and the EU taxpayer, who bears a lighter burden, as we only pay (until recently) for band-aid and antibiotics and food and rebuilding schools that are demolished three times to keep the Pals alive. (Meanwhile, European countries sell arms to Israel, raking in quite a nice stash.)

The US - and the West as a whole - has invested a huge amount into Israel. Israel has disapointed - it is too concerned with local borders, walls, minor territorial disputes, and, according to the US, still too attached to 'socialist policies', not 'independent enough', not 'free market' enough - practically everything they do is supported or funded in an occult way. Israel has lost the war against the Hezb. in international opinion, and that is very bad news for them.

Israel is a victim, of the US and the West.

Much more could or should be said but the post is too long already.

Six out of seven posts above are in the mode of "it's hopeless". If you take that position, it certainly is. It is hard not to feel that way, however, when - once you are fully informed - you find out that William and Ana are exactly right about who is really waging this war and why. The grinning puppetmasters of the US and UK have every reason for wanting this to continue and will do every thing they can to make it continue, taking full advantage of the "bellicose victim" mind set of their pinnochio. The citizens of US, UK, and Israel are seemingly helpless to stop this enormous juggernaut. We are trapped in its gears, feeding the machine with blood and toil and credit cards. There is one way to stop the machine, and that's to cut it's fuel lines. It runs on our money, and in the US most of that is in the form of future income, already committed to long term payments with high interest. (Home mortgage, car payments, credit card debt). I would venture to guess that the majority of what most americans spend each month is interest payments on same. These go not to support the local economy but to banks and financial institutions, who then supply the fuel to the juggernaut. To cut the fuel line, cut up your credit cards.
If we stop the US/UK juggernaut of war in the middle east, Revere's plan can work. If we don't, William and Ana are right.

By mary in hawaii (not verified) on 12 Aug 2006 #permalink

Chuck (second comment, above) sounds like one of the Israeli "cyber-soldiers" that the Jewish government has recruited to infiltrate the Net.

See the Times of London.

I am a political science type (bird flu is just my favorite way to end the world). I have spent a goodly number of years following hizballah. I note that not to create a false pretense of authority on the matter as I have none. What I can say is that things are generally more complex than they seem. The canards that the Israelis are colonialists / Islamists are terrorists are just that, canards that misrepresent the realities of the region. There are plenty of historical and current injustices to go around and plenty of people who are interested in nothing so much as the perpetuation of their own power. None of it makes any difference to the dead whose numbers increase with time. What I fear honestly is the proliferation of mass destruction weapons among peoples who probably have a great likelyhood of using them.

"The canards that the Israelis are colonialists / Islamists are terrorists are just that, canards that misrepresent the realities of the region. There are plenty of historical and current injustices to go around and plenty of people who are interested in nothing so much as the perpetuation of their own power. None of it makes any difference to the dead whose numbers increase with time."

Thank you, Carl.

To quote Tom Friedman of the NY Times, on the Israeli-Palestinian problem, "To have peace in the Middle East, you need two civil wars first, one within Israel, one among the Palestinians."

Just as one cannot depict Israel or the Palestinians as single entities with unified goals and aspirations, the idea that any multi-national force, of whatever form, can possibly act with unified intent and results is just as laughable.

There is no Middle East crisis. Not in the singular. There are multiple crises involving at different times Palestinians against Israel, Arabs against Jews, Shiites against Sunnis, Lebanese christians against Hizbollah, Hizbollah against Israel, Syria and Hizbollah against the Lebanese, Iran and Syria in competition to support Hizbollah and Hamas, Hamas against Fatah, French post-colonial aspirations against US real power, American christian fundamentalists against both Jews and Arabs, American 'liberals' against Bush and by extension Israel, Iranian Ayatollah brand of Islam against every other Muslim.

I haven't even mentioned oil interests or WMD yet.

The nature of these conflicts is such that if any of them get solved, you can be sure that someone else will use the ready-made battle ground for another fight over something else.

How are you going to stop Hezbollah firing missiles? Ask really nicely?

About a month ago you had some posts about the modern concept of a State and its consequences for world health. That impact is really secondary to the main purpose of the concept, which is to provide a framework for resolving conflict. Let me recap with a very abbreviated history lesson.

The modern idea of a State is essentially European in nature, and is the most recent answer to an ancient question: by what right does this State exist? Once upon a time (e.g., more than about 700 years ago) the answer was easy: it exists because it is strong enough to defend itself from its neighbours. Over the next few centuries another answer was invented: the State exists because of the Divine mandate of its King. The Reformation made that answer unsatisfactory, and a new answer was invented: a State exists as an independant entity respected by other States. That's broadly the modern answer.

Now, in the old days one State could legitimately attack a State whose ruler had lost his Divine mandate by becoming a heretic, and in any event a ruler had conclusively lost his mandate if his State was conquered. In the very old days you didn't even need an excuse like this: you just conequered the other guy's land. In the modern concept States acting between themselves are constrained by their mutual obligations. If a State breaches that consensus then it is subject to reprisals from other States, but it's otherwise left alone. The idea is that a State has so much to lose from a war that it would rather negotiate its grievances than attack. This is why Hitler was initially tolerated when he was making a territorial claim against Czechoslovakia (because he was talking like a Statesman) but was attacked when it was clear that he was invading other countries just to get territory. The fact that he was a genocidal lunatic wasn't of great international concern , because that was an internal matter.

The problem we have nowadays is that there are non-State actors like Hezbollah which are not constrained by their desire to preserve their State. It is broadly accepted that States have a duty to restrain non-State actors that operate in their territory, and if Lebanon was willing or able to restrain Hezbollah then Israel's actions would be described as a war or an invasion. Since everybody recognises that Lebanon can't do much about Hezbollah, Israel's actions have been criticised as "attacks", things that are not in themselves subject to international reprisals.

It presently looks as though Israel will agree to some sort of truce, which is effectively a recognition of Hezbollah as a State-like entity. This means that South Lebanon doesn't really exist any more except as a courtesy title. Lebanon isn't in control of the territory and Israel will be negotiating over it with a third party. If the old system (which you call Westphalian) is to survive it will be because Hezbollah is capable of making peace - that it can restrain attacks from within its territory, and that it will do so because the benefits to the State of peace are greater than the benefits to any militia of war. If Hezbollah can't do that then you basically have a deal like the one Israel has with Gaza: the place is run by bandits who are kept in line through direct threats to their lives.

By Joe in Australia (not verified) on 12 Aug 2006 #permalink

And the Lord spaketh saying, "Let there be a bright glow in the East." Ultimately folks the UN is a paper tiger and the French going in makes me fell ALL BETTER NOW! If I were the Israelis, I would knock the French out of the sky as they tried to land. This has to have an ending and that may mean killing them all. Lebanese, Syrians, French "peacekepers?", and anyone else standing in the way of what is a horrible but now foregone conclusion. Keep it conventional or face a nuke in under five years. The French? Please.

They are the French, they would just withdraw to a neutral country and say how audacious those guys were. Fact is that the French are for the better party wussies in a war. The military is too small to fight more than a couple of weeks and then you have to call up reserves which last saw action when De Gaul had France in NATO. Peace plan and cease-fire? Come on, give me a break! Do you really think Revere that this would stop if they pulled back into their borders, or gave up more land? They were inside their borders in '68 and they were attacked on three sides, same in the Yom Kippur war. It took them a month just to knock them out of the Golan Heights after Syria dug in. The Israelis lost thousands, the Arabs lost about 40,000. Their backs are against the wall and a cornered tiger is the most dangerous when he is.

Revere is right about the casualties though. Its bad and getting worse. But I am right about the military side of it. Hell we are all "right" but its not going to change the outcome of this. The one thing that is right is that we all that we are all gonna go when the big bombs begin to blow. Iranian regular soldiers are only 12 miles from the Litani River INSIDE OF LEBANON with HUGE missiles that are capable of hitting Haifa and Tel Aviv. Seems Kennedy made a statement about nukes only 70 miles to the S. of Florida. Can we expect less from the Israeli's or Iranians?. Money talks and bullshit walks. If I were the Syrians, Lebanese and the Iranians I would militarily speaking load them up with the biggest war shot I could find and if that was nuke waste then so be it. If its a nuke warhead then so be that too. Its all about winning to both sides.

Everyone constantly tries to tie this to land. Its not about the land Revere. It is though about the complete destruction of Israel, Europe, and the US which are full of non believers. Sure there are plenty that dont agree on the Muslim side with that. But the radicals are trying to kill us now arent they? Those radicals will run the show if they get control of the Middle East. Control of the West by oil. What could we do? China would be mobilized in under a week heading in. Russia too.

Does the blowing up of planes have anything to do with land? No. It has to do with taking out the non-believers and currently that means us. The only reason they havent used bio so far is that it would get them too. Dont bet on them not using that VX in Syria either. I warn you all now that in 1972 Savannah River Nuclear reported that they were "missing" or couldnt account for some 560 pounds of plutonium. It was chalked up to leaks in the cooling tubes-560 pounds of cracks in cooling tubes? It would have blown the reactor apart if that were the case. Uh Huh. They also created the availability to school researchers and then conveniently lost that as well. Punch up "missing plutonium in Savannah" in a browser. Not the missing H-bomb stories, the other ones.

Of course those tubes were changed to hide the evidence but its reasonable to assume that material ended up in Israel for a large price tag. The bright flash in 1980 down in S. Africa probably gave them and and the Israeli's confirmed nuclear capabilities. The Israeli money and technology, S. African land to test it. So the Iranians have a big checkbook too and there are 30 missing Russian nukes. They are not stupid, just uneducated but they are catching on now arent they? Does anyone know that the Chechnyans are Muslims? Does anyone know that the biggest nuke repository on this planet is 8 miles inside their borders... Am I painting a grim picture here? They want nukes, they want to convert or kill us (the radicals anyway). Killing us might be easier.

Its all about commitment. The Muslims are committed as are the Israelis. Putting those French forces down there march us one step closer to the big one. It allows Hez to build back up and Iran to continue to build a bomb. The Muslims fire a missile, Israel starts back up the road into Lebanon and will go knocking the crap out of the French on the way. Then they go for Damascus. Thats when the Iranians light whatever bottle rocket they have and off goes Haifa or Tel Aviv in a blinding flash. 3 nukes is all you need to completely destroy Israel for the next 50,000 years. At that time you find out what a fully loaded B707 mini AWACS/Bomber with refueling drogues and 5 squadrons could do heading into Teheran. Using their terrain following radar, they would be below radar intercept capabilities and jamming the whole way in. The Syrians, Iranians and Lebanese couldnt fight them in the sky as that 707 would be directing the fight and the formations would never be broken. Would they get the Iranians? You can count on it. What do you think the Russians would do if a 50 megaton warhead went off next to their soil? China too?

My best scenario is unlike Revere that one side or the other be allowed to kill the other completely off either in bursts or one big war. Its as simple as that. Else one of them WILL nuke the other and start a chain of events that cannot be recalled once they start.

By M. Randolph Kruger (not verified) on 12 Aug 2006 #permalink

Too tired at this hour to write, except to say that Ana, Carl and anon are right.

The big worry is the global spread..
In these days of empires perhaps the whole darn lot should be given back to the Turks including Saudi.
The West could enforce this on the condition that oil remains below $30 per barrel.
In all seriousness though this situation needs a lid put on it before it spreads to central Asia and their compatriots in China, Korea, SE Asia.
Syria and Iran are not as isolated as what folks think.They have allies biding their time.

anon22, carl, Joe, etc.: No one disagrees that the problem is complex. That doesn't mean that some solutions that are not complex couldn't work. Cancer is complex but surgery is crude. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't.

I am suggesting that in this case a solution will have to be imposed by force by the international community. The international community has a stake in this because this conflict is profoundly destabilizing. It also has the real danger of spiraling out of control, as some have noted.

If we had a different administration in the US exsternal imposition of a solution by the itnernational community might be possible. As it is now, it isn't because the Bush administration identifies completely with one side. A negotiated solution will involve compromises on both sides and the three hard issues are borders, Palestinian right of return aned Jerusalem.Bush has no interest in a negotiated solution that involves real compromises on the part of Israel.

To Joe I would say that the days of the "national system" (which is only four hundred years old) are numbered. What will take its place is unclear, but already we are seeing important changes (the EU, non-state actors, etc.) and the threat of infectious disease will add to that ongoing development. Religious states like Israel, Saudi Arabia, etc., are an anachronism. I also doubt there will be a US in fifty or a hundred years. It will have morphed into something else, quite different, although what it is remains open.

None of us can see the future, so we are all guessing about this and each of us reads the entrails differently. For us, this represents another example of the cancer of tribalism (religious strife, ethnic strife, nationalism), while for others it is apparently a matter of ethnic solidarity. Whatever.

Kruger says: "Iranian regular soldiers are only 12 miles from the Litani River INSIDE OF LEBANON with HUGE missiles that are capable of hitting Haifa and Tel Aviv."

Another load of top secret information he chooses to share with a bunch of anonymous people from around the world.

Then he goes on to say "French forces down there march us one step closer to the big one. It allows Hez to build back up and Iran to continue to build a bomb"

What? didn't you just say in so many words they already have such missiles in Lebanon, aimed at Israel? Oh, read on. He says:

" the Iranians have a big checkbook too and there are 30 missing Russian nukes"...intimating then that some of these must be the ones they have trucked into Lebanon and placed near the Litani river. (Would that be in the midst of all this recent conflict, across those blown up bridges and roads and overflights by Israeli drones and aircraft, or are you saying they have been sitting there all along, but Israel hasn't blown them up yet despite blowing up everything and everyone around them?) And if they aready have 30 Russian nukes, why are we so worried about them building some more of their own, especially if as Kruger says: "Thats when the Iranians light whatever bottle rocket they have and off goes Haifa or Tel Aviv in a blinding flash. 3 nukes is all you need to completely destroy Israel for the next 50,000 years."

Let's say that Mr Kruger is actually some kind of military secret special agent from Alabama that is privvy to all this kind of military data that's kept below the radar for the rest of us, and for reasons best known to himself he has decided to let us - a bunch of strangers who could be anyone - in on this stuff. It is still bullshit. Why? Because his scare tactics are nothing new, the nuclear threat has been hanging over us for better than half a century, and the only thing that has kept it in line so far has been the concept of nuclear deterrence, which is not about "lets let them blow the other country out of the water," it is about knowing that we must never let that happen, that we must use statesmenship to solve border disputes not wars.

If you read other news services from Israel and Muslim countries, you will see via editorials and interviews that - contrary to what Kruger says - the "Israelis" are not committed to death and destruction of themselves, their homes their families and children any more than are the "Muslims" in Lebanon or Iraq or anywhere else. Any more than the people of America are all a bunch of neo-con fascist Christian fundamentalists seeking global oblivion so they can rapture up to heaven to play some freaking harps. DON'T LABEL, KRUGER! IT GIVES YOU AWAY!! There are a handful leaders who are insane in many of the countries involved, and they push this armageddon thing, yes. But not the majority of the people, who just want to live and raise their families in peace. The only solution to the Middle East problem is to enforce a fair distribution of land to the Palestinians, make the Israeli's pay for war reparations to Palestine and Lebanon, and enforce the borders and the peace with an plan for international sanctions and assistance, carrots and sticks, to keep everyone in line until peace takes hold, infrastructures are rebuilt and economies flourish again for all three nations. To go the brutal "nuke em all and let god sort em out" route is just plain atavistic and demonstrates a total buy in to the neo con "Pax Americana"/Theocracy.

By mary in hawaii (not verified) on 13 Aug 2006 #permalink

If the Israelis really had no regard for innocent human life, there would be no Lebanese alive.

Pull your head out of your butt.

af: There are Israelis who would like that. I expect it wouldn't make you sad, would it? But that's hardly the point. There are degrees of atrocity. If you don't care enough about civilians to take care, then that's a war crime, as you and they and everyone else knows. Hezbollah is also guilty, even though their scale is smaller.

If there were an alleged rocket launcher in the midst of Tel Aviv do you think they would bomb the shit out of the neighborhood to get at it if there were no other way or another way would be to costly?

af, you are just another of the AIPAC cyberwarriors that DavidB warned us about. Your approach to this problem is crude, chauvinistic, racist and offensive. You give those who have any sympathy for Israel a bad name.

I have taken a step back from this current war in the last couple of weeks or so and did many hours of research, several times not even going to bed. This morning I came to a bitter and frustrating (probably still naive) conclusion. How many of you still play board games? The players move the pieces where they like and all pieces are expendable until someone wins. Of course, the actual players lose nothing because they are not a part of the game, they are above the board looking down, deciding the next move and which piece can be safely sacrificed for the moment. It might make the game more interesting to have a sidebet going on, say for instance, big money, or oil, which is the same thing. Win or lose, the player still gets to go home for dinner, and develop new strategies for the next game. After all, this is not the only game in town.

Even here in this forum I see the pieces being moved. But the other (expendable) pieces in the game are not the players. They are not considered important even to the movers of the pieces. I no longer see this as a battle for territory, or about religion, or about who hates who. This is just a friendly game between competitors who are above the blood and tears. And the game is not even chess, maybe more along the lines of Chinese Checkers. I sincerely hope one of the players does not get frustrated enough to blow up the board. Then nobody will win, and even the players will be in the game of basic survival.

Bitter and frustrated, yes. Probably still naive, yes. But then, it doesn't really matter what I think or feel. I am not one of the players. I am one of the expendable.

Heh Judy,if you think you are naive allow me to increase your self esteem by telling of my "take" on the situation;you are bound to feel better by comparison.
This interminable war is happening,yet again,because Israel's neighbours think it(Israel) is in entirely the wrong place or should not exist at all..Meanwhile Israelis are getting totally pissed off by never knowing whether or not they will get home from school or work in one piece.I worry about morons in cars on the motorway here; there they worry about being blown apart by bombs.And they always will worry until they ALL pack up their little knapsacks and move to some country in Outer-roa.Which of course they will never do voluntarily.So the war continues,and continues and continues until the choke-hold succeeds in "killing"one or other of the opponents.Have a decent sleep Judy.

M in H. Sorry, again you miss the point. Whether Revere, you, or I are right about whats about to happen ensures this will end in a nuclear exchange. later. I suggest you ride down to Alabama and pop off with your rant. They would take you to issue just after they get thru burning your car. Six ALNG regiments are in the field and I trained with them before. I also SAID BEFORE for you to toddle your tail down and apply to receive intel briefings-twice. You choose or chose to ignore it. I have no idea who AF is. He is poorly informed, seems to comment to piss Revere off. I dont do that intentionally. I piss him off with some of my views. Thats okay, he pisses me off with some of his too. But we either agree on some things or not and move on. AF should enlist and then he can email us back about how things are at the front rather than sniping at Revere.

Iranians up on the Litani,? You have not listened or you are just ignoring it. Iranian soldiers in the Litani valley was reported five times on TV.. They man a six shot missile battery (not in the news). The Israeli's havent hit them because they are just a tad out of kill range for Patriot batteries to ensure a shoot down AND they're under Iranian command and control. They fire 1000 pounders and yes they were trucked in from Syria. Those bridges were dropped to stop that and other supplies. That includes the fuel. But it takes the Syrians out of the picture for at least a year or two. Pure combat sense.

Mary its not a ballgame, its a war. People are going to get fucked up at every turn mostly civilians. If I could run water and fuel up to Beirut I would in an instant. But I have also been shot at by someone I just gave food and water to before. The Lebanese have a military themselves. They bolted for the door screaming like little girls when the first bombs fell. The Israelis apparently arent bombing their bivoacs and revetments. The Lebanese army provides no help for their people, just sticks their hands out for a paycheck. Your statement that what I am saying is nothing but old scare tactics is really old and uninformed. Only an idiot would continue with that rant in the light of IAEA findings. It is the foregone conclusion that Iran will either buy, or build their own nukes in short order. Once they do they can close the Straight of Hormuz and there wont be anything we or anyone else can do about it. Middle Eastern countries will be told what they are going to charge for their oil or they will oil starve us into submission. The Chinese would mobilize instantly. Why? Because those same missiles that can hit them can hit Moscow or Beijing. They can shut Riyadh down as well as Tel Aviv and Amman, Turkey, and possibly Rome, Bonn, and Paris. He who has a nuclear gun AND IS WILLING TO USE IT can call the shots. Iran with only three can control the region and the world economy. Ready to pay 8 bucks a gallon? The US upon announcement by Iran that they have a nuke or two, will go in conventionally and take them out. Probably with the logistical help of the Russians and Chinese. Its okay for them to be customers, but not players.

Revere will continue to pipe up about the effects of what is going on now as he should and I bloody well agree with him. You always lose more from refugee situations than you do from the actual war, but this has to END before it gets out of hand. Ceasefire? So far diplomacy aint working. If diplomacy doesnt work then the military option is the only thing left and thats where the Israeliss have used an excuse. Wilson used the Lusitania, Johnson the Gulf of Tonkin, Clinton used Kosovo to divert attention away from Monica, Bush the WTC's to hit Iraq. Its nothing new but it DOES assert the will of the actioning force now doesnt it? It brings them to the table and now they want to talk. You think that your little answer for land deals is going to get the time of day in Israel? Another place to visit and pop off with what you think. I respect your opinion Mary but it doesnt shine in the dark. If the Israelis get pissed off enough you might see that blinding white flash a lot earlier than you think. You apply a very simplistic idea to what is 5000 years complex. The Persians think that they own the land from thousands of years ago. Mary I have to assume that schoolteachers know where to look up reference materials. I know where to look for the real deal information and who to speak to that has it. I dont teach school, but I was an officer and in information gathering. So get off of the secret agent stuff. I have been emailing Revere with it long before I comment on it here out of courtesy because I like a very informed left. I also only do it when its clearly broached by public sources. So try not to preach about which you dont know especially after I have given you the avenue for you to get the information yourself.

By M. Randolph Kruger (not verified) on 13 Aug 2006 #permalink

Revere, what is AIPAC?

By M. Randolph Kruger (not verified) on 13 Aug 2006 #permalink

Hard to read transmitted fonts sometimes. If its an L then I have no idea what it stands for. If its an "i" it means that AF is a member of the American Israeli Political Action Committee. If so then certain members were convicted I think last year? of espionage. This is for charges going back years into the GB 1, Clinton 1 and 2, and GB 1 and 2 terms.

Lots going on, but dontcha just know that the French were all good buddies with the PLO for a price? Seems that they Ayatollah was allowed to rock around in Paris for years too. Whores of Babylon? Yet another LABEL M in H. AIPAC!!!!! Ye gads! They're everywhere! Run for your lives!

By M. Randolph Kruger (not verified) on 13 Aug 2006 #permalink

It is always the innocent that pay for the ego of the leaders. The US is no different. I just wonder what it takes to make people hate so much. Our world is truly in a very sad state. People preach peace, but no one seems willing to listen.

Randy: You hurl a lot of insults when someone disagrees, mainly because you focus on only one solution: violence, death, destruction. It is the only language you speak. However if you reread your post that I called scare tactics, you did strongly intimate that the missiles Iran had in Lebanon were nuclear weapons. In several ways, in several places, you made that sound like the case. That IS scare tactics...especially as now you are backing down from that claim and saying they are "1000 pounders", not nuclear warheads. Second, an ordinary civilian does not "toddle on down and receive intel briefings" like you say I can and should. Not for one second, probably ever, but certainly not in our post 9-11 security state. You must truly believe that I am the idiot you call me if you think I believe I can. You are the one on a rant, a pre-apocalyptic rant that sees no other end. Don't you dare say that I am too stupid to see where this is going, don't you dare condescend to say that "this is not a ballgame." Don't you dare say that I am uninformed. I know exactly and precisely where we are being led and why, all the bullshit reasons behind the policies that have lead us down this road: PNAC and JINSA and the Neo-Con theocracy push for armageddon, Israels desperate need for Iraq's water, and so much more. I sometimes feel like I am one of the few left around that is screaming that there has to be another way. But the more I listen to the lunatics that demand global annihilation as a solution, and the other half that say "oh well, oh darn it is all just so hopeless lets just belly up, smoke a biggie and let them have their way with us cuz we can't do anything about it anyway, the more determined I get to scream at the top of my lungs that you still all have a choice, we still all have a choice!!! I can't make you choose peace, but I choose it. And I tell you what: Only an idiot would choose the path you advocate. Death? That's supposed to be the smart choice?

By mary in hawaii (not verified) on 14 Aug 2006 #permalink

M in H. You seem to think that negotiations with terrorists is the path of peace? Yeah, lets see. In 49 Israel by UN decree was borne. In 49 and 15 minutes their neighbors attacked them. In 51 the equivalent of Hezbollah/Hamas (whats in a name-PLO) killed the King of Jordan-Abdullah 1). His crime. Dealing with Israel. Israel was attacked inside their borders in 61, 64, 68, 73 in adventures by their neighbors. This was while negotiating at the UN. History isnt on your side. The Israelis are intransigent yes, but you dont attack if someone is intransigent inside their borders.

Since 1949 there have been almost 2000 attacks into Israel. The death toll is arguably 50,000 counting army. They are far outweighed by the civilian casualties. Its no longer Israeli Arab war in nature, its Israeli Muslim and that pits them against 2/3rds of this planets religious population, give or take few. That pitting is now moving towards western countries as well. You speak of reparations and giveaways of land like the world should just come in and carve it up...again. It was that carving that started this shit in the first place if you know your regional history there. It was also done by western powers. Then there is the fact that the Persian Empire ruled it for several thousand years to boot. They think they own it.

Now barring that the UN wants to go in and strip them all of their weapons, fuel and war making capability that they all so readily sold to each side, this thing is going to go poof and sooner than later. By the way I dont intimate that Iran has a nuclear capability, it is IAEA stated as fact. They could poison the oil fields now in Saudi Arabia with one lousy missile or take out a city. Your vaunted UN said it not me. All they have to do is take one of those thousand pounders and load up the warhead casing with waste or actual plutonium and air burst it over Riyadh, the oil fields, Baghdad, or Tel Aviv and you have WWIV. Its a nuke without the big bang. The response to that would be fast and furious.

As for your security clearance. DO GO and get it done so we can end this little discussion about your information stream. I never, ever say I know all there is to know about something. I can say though that I know more than your average Joe about this stuff. As for the clearance be prepared: they will find out every little dirty secret in your closet and whether you do dope and/or pay your taxes on time. It is perfectly legal but you have to endure scrutiny if you want to know. But you can get a security clearance. And you are indeed uninformed and get pissed because I share my toys in a limited way... as required by law. You act as though its some personal thing. It isnt. Everything I put out is in the news...somewhere on this planet, before I spill it. You should avail yourself of the system before you try to beat me up.

You admit it yourself that you are one of the few that want to go this route of talking it over and over and then getting attacked again and again. Mary I would say that just about everyone is tired of having to support Israel, or to go and kick the Palestinian/Hezbollah/Hamas collective asses every couple of years. Each and everytime they do we get to take the hit here in the US. I am one of the people that thinks that the Israel first lobby is anything but bad news and its going to get us into trouble long term. For 60 years we have had to constantly hear about Israel and PLO, and Hamas, and Hezbollah and Druse and LABELS as you put it. They gave up the land they took for the better part and in doing so THEY DID COMPLY WITH Resolution 1559. So negotiations and the UN are out. When they took those soldiers, it provided the excuse. I think I would have found one too if there was a billion dollars of hardware inside of state, controlled by another state with the sole use being the attack of the country I live in. Lets just hope that the Iranians dont give them the excuse they need to go after Teheran or Damascus. They wont risk going to Teheran unless they are going to go after the head of the chicken and that doesnt mean conventional. If you cant see that then well I just dont know what to say to you. You arent the only one out there saying there has to be a different way but you and your thought groups just havent come up with something feasible. If you are going to do it then its sure time

Why? An offensive force of 30,000 is about to be replaced by 30,000 "peacekeepers". French and Lebanese. That means the Hez/Hamas will simply be reloading. It is going to allow those guys to rebuild basically under the auspices of the UN and that is going to start a major war if anything happens and by that I mean that Israel might attack the French to get at Hez? Think not? They would do it in a heartbeat. If you cant see it then you are blind. Paranoia, yep and its based upon recent history too.The French didnt want a resolution until it looked like Damascus was going to go down. Oh shit another customer taken out by superior firepower. .

And by the way, I dont advocate the annihilation of anyone unless they are doing something to me. I would kill them, their wives, their dogs and their children if the screw with me or my country. I would smash Damascus flat and that means the big one if necessary and all of the innocents that inevitably couldnt get out of the way. My innocents any different than theirs when they attack? It would be just a stopover on the way to Teheran too. If thats the Armageddon you speak of then yep, count me in. Every time we have gone the route of "give peace a chance" we have been handed our teeth and then some. If we shot down every Iran Air airliner leaving Teheran it wouldnt be long before they would get the picture and stop the attempts on ours. Balance of Terror. REVERE IS RIGHT. SPENDING THIS KIND OF MONEY IS FOOLISH AND 800 MILLION FOR SECURITY WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO FIXING THINGS IN THIS COUNTRY! I dont like taking my damned shoes off either.

By M. Randolph Kruger (not verified) on 15 Aug 2006 #permalink

Randy: Just to remind you, in 1948 the Zionists were the terrorists. Begin and Stern had a price on their heads. Terrorism is often a political term for the other guy's "freedom fighters." Hezbollah calls the IDF state terrorists. We call Hezbollah non-state terrorists. I think they are both right.

Now, as I read your last post, I see once again more samenesses than differences in our views of what is wrong in the world and the need to resolve it. The only real difference is how. I know these issues and conflicts between "neighbors" have been going on for thousands of years, they have all over the world since man started walking upright so he could grab a club. I know we are all sick of the wars and just wish it would end one way or the other. The militarists and armageddonists do see an end, a "final solution": nuclear obliteration of the whole region, perhaps the whole world. Well, that would do it. But that's like, to follow Revere's analogy, curing the cancer by killing the patient. No, I actually don't think there will ever be lasting peace for mankind anywhere, at any time. It just doesn't seem to be in our nature. But we can look for the next best thing, which is keeping the cancer in check, using whatever means of control we can come up with so that the "patient" - planet earth, gaia, humanity et al - can continue to survive even if it means limping along. So again I ask: is Death the best choice? Because a nuclear war in the middle east will not stay in the middle east, I'm pretty darn sure. It will wipe us all off the face of the earth and send the planet back to the microbe stage.

By mary in hawaii (not verified) on 15 Aug 2006 #permalink

M in H. Full circle there Obi-Wan. Revere is right, I am right and again you are right. I want nothing more than to be able to get up and go to work each day and not hear about weapons dropping on peoples heads. But they do. Revere is right and he hates like you and I that this carnage is happening to the civilians on both sides. We all agree like you that the militarists and armageddonists see it coming. If we can see it coming, it might be time to take one or the other completely out ourselves and then disarm the other. French troops in contact with the Israelis is an absolutely grade B idea.

I think its coming like a freight train and there is a major difference between UN troops from Senegal and French troops who havent been there for almost 60 years. This is colonization via the back door. Is death the best choice? Obviously not Mary, but I can say that what they have been doing every 5-15 years is fighting, short peace for the reloads on both sides and then there they go again. I for one am sick of it. If the analogy is microbial state then what happens when two bacteria get into a petri dish? One eats the other one and finishes it off. Vary rarely do they just sit now do they? The UN isnt going to do squat and any attempt to tamp Israel down after 9 resolutions is going to be met with severe resistance this time. No, I think the nukes are going into the breach. The next thing will be that you hear they have it for sure in Iran. Then it slams shut and the trigger is next.

So Revere Begin was a terrorist and the Arabs were attacking both sides then too. It still is a full circle for literally my entire life. Yeah, Mary we might have to cut the cancer out and hope for the best and I aint just talking about Hez/Hamas...ALL of them. Else we deal with something fully larger and not much later. A nuke slinging Iran is not going to be allowed and anyone who thinks so is delusional. Pat them on the head, sell them airplanes and bullets, and old aircraft carriers but dont let them get the bomb.

If you have any sort of pull or pressure to apply then do it now else this time next year its going to be really ugly.

By M. Randolph Kruger (not verified) on 15 Aug 2006 #permalink


"Sorry, Chuck, but the Genocidal "solution" you offer shows a great leack of vision, common humanity or sense of history."


"It is sad to say, but the only solution I see is for one of the warring parties to become strong enough to destroy the other." - Chuck

I didn't offer a solution. But,it may that the outcome is as I have described. And, I did say it was 'sad'. Your characterization of me seems a bit premature based as it is on a single comment.

I'm not aware that the IRA was bent on the annihilation of Great Britain. So, I see a big difference there. I'm afraid you may have fallen into the trap of seeing all terrorist as the same. I don't see that you have offered a solution.

David B. - Another premature characterization.