Is it worth starting a war over 2 soldiers being kidnapped?

[kentuck]

Is there any sense of proportion? If someone, a terrorist, blows up a building and kills a dozen people, would a nuclear bomb be a proportional response. Without a proportional response, indiscriminate killing is the act of a bully. Someone that knows they have the best weapons and they can kill the other side much easier. We should question why this war is going on in Lebanon and Haifa right now? Is there no such word as "diplomacy" in their vocabulary? How many days should a problem, such as a kidnapping, be negotiated before we start a world war?? Israel and the US, with the veto at the Security Council, look like war mongerers.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Nope.

It ain't really about 2 soldiers.

[kentuck]

3. What's it about?

We all know they hate Israel and would like to see them driven into the sea? So what else happened?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. I don't know.

But bombing the shit out of Lebanese civilians isn't going to bring those 2 soldiers back.

[cantstandbush]

90. It's about the pretense of self-defense to inflict as much pain and suffer

as possible on your enemies while also grabbing and controlling important waterways and farm land.

[iamjoy]

7. Bingo

not about the two soldiers.
It's about being surrounded by neighbors who think you have no right to exist.
It's about being so concerned that you appear strong and unwavering that you lose all sense of proportion.

Israel has been at war with its neighbors for almost sixty years. Soldeirs get captured in war. It's sad and tragic, but then, what about war isn't?

[uppityperson]

2. 2 kidnapped soldiers is the excuse, not the cause.

long time coming, long time to solve, needs lots of diplomatic stuff to help solve. Condi doesn't have the skills, USA doesn't have the standing anymore, too much war mongering.

[catnhatnh]

12. Try Googling....

...."The War Of Jenkin's Ear" a small,little known engagement of 4 years between two major powers....

[gatorboy]

4. Considering that Isreal had to pretty much take on every Arab nation

during the 1948 Arab-Isreal War (with little to no help from Britian), their policy has always been to hit hard. It's probably what's kept them alive this long.

[New Government]

6. While I agree they don't mess around

Israel has never learned what the phrase, "proportional response" means.

[gatorboy]

10. And considering the area they live in,

they probably won't.

[serryjw]

9. How many Lebanese are

in Israeli prisons?

[New Government]

I don't know

And who cares? Having someone take prisoners is not cause for massive bombardment and mass killing of innocent civilians. With your avatar of the Dali Lama, surely you agree?

[serryjw]

32. Sorry, Actually I was responding to the OP

WHY would Israel start a war for 2 soldiers? They probably have many more Lebanese in their prisons. This entire things is nuts...This could easily escalate in a full blown regional war..What would the US do?

[gatorboy]

26. I don't see your point. You think they should let them go?

This isn't an Iraqi situation. Iraq wasn't a threat to us anymore than iceland is. But Isreal sits smack dab in the middle of an area where every country that surrounds them want them wiped off the earth. And tried to do so not too long ago.
Don't like how immigrants are treated here? That's the very same treatment Jews, who tried to immigrate, back after the Holocaust, were given. Britiain forced them away and the Arab nations tried to expel what Jews were left in Palestine. You can't possible compare how they live with us. They live in a world where everyone wants them dead. When you have to live like that, going overbaord is the only way to survive.

[KeepItReal]

35. Wanting Israel wiped out and being able to do it ain't the same thing

Israel's military is *more* than capable of defending their country. Remember they *do* have nukes, by the way.

Plus the USA would back them 100% militarily if another nation tried to invade them again. That ain't the situation now.

[gatorboy]

41. But the Arab nations sure did give it a try, didn't they?

You're thinking about how the military is now. In 1948, How many nukes did they have?

In 1948, with a combination of The Saudi's, Jordan, Iraq, Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon...the Arab combatants assumed they had a good shot. The type of force Isreal used is what kept them alive.

They're not going to change and why should they? It's that type of force that's kept them alive this long. And you have to keep in mind that Isreal is used to taking bruises on their own. They did it for so long that even *if* the U.S. offers to back them up, Isreal is not going to wait around for the calvary. Nor should they.

[KeepItReal]

48. Who from that list is itchin to be nuked? Jordan? Syria? Egypt?

I understand the history, but this is 2006 and no *country* wants a piece of Israel. Now terrorists? Hell yeah...they always have and I guess always will pick fights with Israel. Remember peace is bad for business...whether you're in the arms business or the hate-mongering business.

[serryjw]

40. Yes, it is surviving

BUT it's not living. The entire ME wants them dead?...well, maybe because the TWO most powerful/well armed nations want them dead...as long as we can have their oil. Do you not think that Iran & Iraq know we equipped BOTH to KILL each other, so we didn't have to? I am sick of this war....when are they going to learn to live in peace?



http://zope.gush-shalom.org/home/en

WHY does it take woman to work for peace?
http://www.batshalom.org/

[gatorboy]

44. Look it's not that easy and I wish it was.

But this has been going on long before the U.S. poked it's dirty little nose into the region for profit.
The question is, if Israel backed down on the Middle East, do you think the ME would comply?
When The U.N. originally offered to split Palestine between the Jews and Arabs after Britain offered to stop occupation, the Jewish people complied. The Arabs did not. It was the Arabs that wanted them out as well as the Jewish immigrants that were trickling in from the Holocaust (Which is similar to the immigration situation we have now). It's a combination of all these travesties, that the Jewish people had to endure, that's kept them on edge.

[serryjw]

54. So the next generation

will be posting on DU in 20 years talking about the war in the ME. I have no idea what the answer is...but nobody can live like this. You have no idea if your kids are going to come home from school or an open air market.

[Clark2008]

107. That's wrong

It was the Jewish people who didn't comply.

How do I know? My former mother-in-law.

Her first husband was killed and she was kicked off the land THEY owned and forced to walk, on foot with three small children, to Jordan.

Sorry - you've been reading too much corporate media on that subject.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[riderinthestorm]

73. Lots of people care.

Israel is here to stay. Get used to it. Regardless of whether you agree with it's policies of disproportionate reponse, your theory that Israel isn't a "viable" country worthy of existence is pretty extreme.

Enjoy your stay at DU. However long it lasts....

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[riderinthestorm]

77. No threats. The mods know their job

You stated that nobody cares if Israel lives or dies as a country. That statement is a strawman.

People in the US DO care if Israel survives as a country. Whether the US should be supporting Israel at our current levels is another question.

[Minnesota Libra]

8. For anyone who thinks two soldiers are not worth a war I wonder...........

....how they'd feel if it was a brother, sister, child, husband, wife, lover of theirs.:shrug:

Of course one of my loved ones would be worth starting a war to get them back.:eyes:

[blonndee]

11. What if it was your brother, sister, child, husband, wife,

or lover who was killed in that war? Is it really okay to "damn the consequences to everyone else" just because it's someone YOU love?

[Minnesota Libra]

14. I thought it was just.................

....the neocons/fundies who limited the value of human beings outside the womb.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

20. I thought it was just....

...the neocons/fundies who though war was just fun and games.

[Minnesota Libra]

58. War is not fun, it's pure hell as is............

....being left with the enemy to rot and be tortured to death.:banghead:

[blonndee]

21. Apparently so do you--after all, you

would be willing to support a war, which would necessarily kill more innocent life, because you apparently think that the life of someone YOU value is more important than anyone else's. Have I got that right?

[Minnesota Libra]

55. I think EVERYONE'S LIFE is VERY VALUABLE, that was..............

....my whole point.:banghead:

[blonndee]

57. Then why would you think that a war

would be the solution to your loved one being captured/kidnapped?

[Minnesota Libra]

60. Because..............

......my loved ones, your loved ones, and everyone else's loved ones are worth getting back, or so I was always told, but apparently I was lied to.

[blonndee]

61. "Worth getting back" isn't the question, though, is it?

The question is, whether it's worth a war, which would lead to the loss of many more lives, which you claim are just as valuable.

[Minnesota Libra]

65. Well, Thank goodness .............

....our military has a whole lot more sense than some of the citizens they fight in the name of because the military will move heaven and earth to get one of their own back.

End of discussion.

[blonndee]

67. We never really had a discussion

because you kept misdirecting the issue at hand. I don't see what your latest comment about the military has anything to do with YOUR position that you'd be willing to support a war if one of your loved ones was captured, regardless of the consequences to others.

Perhaps that's because you're unable to morally defend said position?

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Moochy]

16. Nations are not individuals

Surely you can see the difference? Or will you appeal to me to consider that one of my siblings or mother or father was captured protecting the border? Am I a nation or am I the elected leader of a nation, so I can better answer your question.

[blonndee]

23. Um, I was responding to a poster who said that it WOULD

be worth a war if one of her loved ones was captured/kidnapped. So I was appealing to her to see how OTHERS' loved ones would suffer as a result.

Are you by chance responding to the wrong post?

[Moochy]

37. oops, my apologies

Upon careful review, let it be known that I am a dork. :blush:

[blonndee]

39. No worries!

I've had more of those "dork" moments than I care to remember, myself. :)

[kentuck]

13. That would be irrational, although understandable...

and should not be permitted.

[Minnesota Libra]

18. I guess a human life..........

....isn't very valuable these days is it?

[kentuck]

24. War is insanity.

And anti-life forces in the extreme.

[Selatius]

15. Self-delete, wrong place n/t

[kentuck]

17. You not only get to sink all the warships...

but you can drop a bomb on civilians also, if you want. Because you have the power and God is on your side.

[Selatius]

25. Whoops, I guess I edited my message too late.

Read down further to see my repost.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[whistle]

19. Moot point, the war is already underway, question now is how to stop it

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[blonndee]

49. Did you join just to start shit about Israel?

Because that's all you seem to say, over and over again.

You're not very good at this.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[whistle]

92. Your comments in this post seem to be a pretty good indicator

...of why you are on DU.

[blonndee]

93. Care to elaborate?

[whistle]

96. Sure, after you elaborate on how my comment....

..."the war is already underway, question now is how to stop it" suggests that I am somehow only raising "shit" about Israel.

[blonndee]

97. Whistle, that comment was to a poster who has now been banned.

Whose 8 or 9 comments were to the effect of "screw Israel. Who cares about that crazy, unviable country." HE had responded to you, and I responded to him, calling him out, essentially, because he was spreading his vitriol all over DU.

[whistle]

98. Oh, well I never saw those comments, I guess they were removed

...last night before I had a chance to see them this morning. That left only your comment blondee, which got me up on my hind legs. So sorry, but it is an excellent example of how emotions and hot temper can lead to flame wars if communication and diplomacy are thrown to the wind. Maybe that is what has been going on in the middle east for far too long. The cool head which should have prevailed from a mature peace loving country like the United States just does not exist, at least not at the official level of this administration. This situation must be stopped soon or it is very likely going to accelerate into something totally out of control. So what we now have is a mess and also a very dangerous situation not only for Israel and the rest of the middle east, but for the entire world.

[blonndee]

99. Good point about how

emotions can lead to flamefests. However, I was not and am not part of any flame wars on this topic, although even trying to discuss the situation rationally at all can lead to people becoming defensive and angry, as I'm sure you can see within just about any thread on the topic.

[Selatius]

22. No, sir, Israel's response is not proportionate to the original action

If you randomly sank one of my warships, does that give me license to sink your entire fleet and blockade your whole country in retaliation? Or does it only give me license to sink one of your warships provided you weren't merely making the opening move of an act of war?

[kentuck]

28. All in how you wish t define it, right?

I think Gandhi was correct: "An eye for an eye and soon the whole world is walking around blind..."

[Selatius]

30. Everybody loves the Old Testament

I guess Jesus was just wasting his time then with his New Testament!

:sarcasm:

[rockymountaindem]

47. Except taking two soldiers prisoner is not an accident

That is a premeditated act and an attack on Israel by any standard.

[Selatius]

50. I never said my example was accidental n/t

[rockymountaindem]

52. I assumed "random" meant "accidental"

If you ment otherwise, I'm sorry I misinterpreted you.

[Deja Q]

27. Of course not. The region, ran by toddlers, has been warring for centuries

Why is there hubbub about it now?

Possibly because the doofus who runs Iran has already said he wants to blow Israel off the face of the map?

And Israel, despite having nukes, hasn't used them on Iran... though they're not a perfect country either.

Let Israel go in with troops.

They'd be fools to use nukes. Though who'd stop them?

[kentuck]

29. People say stupid shit all the time...

We have people that say they would like to turn the desert into glass. That doesn't mean they will actually do it. It doesn't mean they want but one must be ready to defend for such circumstances.

[Dukkha]

31. only two people were also killed in 1914

Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife, which started The Great War. Of course the buildup to it was many years before but the assassination was what triggered Austria-Hungary's declaration of war on Serbia.

[kentuck]

33. Have the soldiers been killed?

I hadn't heard that. Only that they had been kidnapped and were threatened with being sent to Iran. Remember that truth is the first casualty of war?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

42. There was a soldier killed in the capture.

But the Lebanese offered to exchange them for prisoners. Which also means it's not really about the prisoners.

The business about moving the prisoners to Iran is nonsense.

Look for more anti-Iranian propaganda in a lead up to a strike against Iranian nuke facilities.

[Selatius]

34. Yeah, and that war killed something like 10,000,000 people on all sides

Which led to the second one, which killed more like 50,000,000 across Europe before Hitler was finally dead.

[kentuck]

36. There's a lesson there somewhere...

:shrug:

[roamer65]

38. Gandhi

"An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."

This is a gross over-reaction and violation of international law. Israel is needs to back off, now. Establishment of a UN buffer zone along Lebanon's southern border is the only solution.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Straight Story]

56. Would you kidnap 2 soldiers if you knew someone could kick your ass?

How dumb could someone be?

It's evolution in action. Pick on someone with more powerful weapons then you, and then get your ass kicked.

Science is the ruling issue here. Israel has more power, more weapons, and the guts to use them - and then someone pisses them off. Morality is defined by the winner, and in this case the winner is the one who can eliminate you.

Right or wrong does not seem to be a defining factor. We lost 3000+ lives on 9/11. How many did other countries lose because we attacked them?

If you believe there is no god, no moral absolutes, then nature takes over - and those with the most power make the rules. Israel is right, America is right, until someone with more firepower makes us wrong.

Sad - but that is the way of things...

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Straight Story]

64. Wow - a one liner with no substance

And who defines morality anyway? And how do they back it up?

[blonndee]

66. That's about the extent

of what this "interesting" poster has to say. One-line cut and runs.

[The Straight Story]

68. sad indeed

Might makes right - morally right or wrong is defined by the winner in power (not right to me, but that is how it has always been).

I defined my own morality long ago - after going through fundie-ism, buddhism, atheism, lutheranism, and finally my own ideal of things (from a christian perspective).

IF we take an evolution perspective on things then the most fit will survive - but we are not animals, and should break out of that view.

We have evolved beyond such things as might makes right - but it still exists in our lives. When you attack someone who has more weapons than you, well you can expect to be decimated. And right or wrong, morally speaking, does not help you one bit.

[blonndee]

69. Interesting take on things

I agree that "might makes right" makes some degree of sense from a purely evolutionary perspective; however, I wonder if that only works for a while, a little bit like capitalism. In terms of firepower and its associated economic and political power, it would seem as though eventually the "mighty" get so powerful that they end up destroying themselves. Maybe THAT's part of the whole evolution of empires and other mighty forces.

[The Straight Story]

80. Here is my view:

Anarchy decays into a governmental society.

People see that anarchy does not protect them. So they form tribes/govt/etc to protect each other (those in the clan).

Along comes someone not in the group attacking them. Someone who does not have their best interest in mind. So they retaliate and kill/wage war with the 'agressor'.

Israel does not see that it has many friends in the region. they have the power to protect themselves and stop those that want them gone. Survival of the fittest.

I guess the question, to me, comes down to - how do we achieve peace? Is it through watering down our ideals and appeasing others, or is it from removing those that don't see things our way and attack us?

One way for peace is education - a way that does not always seem to work. Mainly because someone else comes into power who, despite education, sees things differently than others do and use their power to make their way right.

Christians had an uphill battle, and many died in the early days. But they kept to their message and it changed the world. The majority hate war and death, and sooner or later they will listen.

So we are left wondering - which brings greater change - war, or peace?

[pyro858]

62. Any sane people in the ME?

Both sides sure love misery, don't they?

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ladjf]

63. It is clear that Israel had their attack plans in place waiting for

a suitable provocation.

[LeahD]

71. You damn betcha'! And, civilians be damned. n/t

[jerry611]

74. That's a question I nor anyone else can answer

You are asking what is the weight of 2 human lives?

That is a question that I don't believe can be answered....

[threadkillaz]

78. Israel kidnapped the Palestinian Governemnt last month.

Israel Kidnaps as Hostages Palestinian MPs, Cabinet Ministers
Abbas: Israel Committing Crimes against Humanity, Collective Punishment

http://www.palestine-pmc.com/details.asp?cat=1&id=1166

But you would never know would you.

[Balbus]

79. Today's Jews ain't your daddy's Jews of years ago.

Today's Jews will no longer stand around and be told where to live, pushed into camps, forced into slavery, thrown into ovens to be burned alive. If you throw a stone at Israel, Israel will throw a knife at you. If you shoot a gun at Israel, Israel will shoot rockets at you. After 5000 years of repression in some form or other they will not put up with it any longer.

[Jara sang]

81. Give me a break. Nearly every peoples on the planet have been opressed

at some time or another.

[enigmacat]

87. So, who elected you spokesman for the entire Jewish populace?

[pitohui]

82. what if one of them was your son? EOm

,

[Zomby Woof]

84. Horrible appeal to emotion

If one of them was my son, much as I would be enraged and fearing for his safety, I could not see justifying the mass murder of innocent civilians in exchange for his return presence. Israel's reactionaries are in full swing with their atrocities as of late. They are no better or worse than Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Qaeda, or the Republican party. They all traffic in, and profit from, bloodshed, war, and the arms trade - in the name of their respective Invisible Sky God.

Hezbollah and Israel deserve each other and their mutual deathgrip. The rest of us, including most of Beirut - do not.

[enigmacat]

88. As much as I love my my son

I would not blow up children and babies to get him back.
Your statement is especially ironic given that most of the children who have been killed in recent years have been on the Palestinian side.

[blonndee]

89. Too bad more people don't think like you.

Thankfully, most DUers realize that everyone's life is valuable, not just the lives of people THEY love. I'm still surprised at those who would indeed "blow up children and babies," though. I never thought I would find such selfish people here. I guess if they don't KNOW the people getting killed, they don't really count. :shrug:

[Spider Jerusalem]

83. Wars have started over far less.

Do you know what started the Crimean War? A disagreement between France and Russia over whether the Roman Catholics or the Russian Orthodox would have custody of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem.

And once the first shots have been fired and the bombs are falling, it's a bit pointless to argue whether the cause was provocation enough or not.

[Hippo_Tron]

85. It's a clear cut problem with no solution known to man

If you negotiate with terrorists you encourage more terrorism. If you blow the shit out of Lebanon, you encourage more terrorism.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

91. At leat Israel isn't calling it's aggression "spreading democracy".

Although it does, justify it's killing of civilians, as "self-defense".

[warrens]

94. Kidnapped or taken prisoner

Seems there was some kind of battle going on when they were taken prisoner. Israel has a lot to answer for (not that their opponents are sweet guys or anything), including assassination of opponents, supporting illegal occupation by "settlers" (I call them claim jumpers), economic savaging of the Palestinians (which goes back long before Hamas took over), and just SO MUCH MORE.

I used to sympathize strongly with Israel, and still do insofar as its liberal majority wants no part of all this shit. But like us, they're stuck with an incredibly evil government.

[Recursion]

95. What's the virtue in a "proportional" response?

If you keep your responses proportional, doesn't that just make war a more attractive alternative to your enemy, and end up killing more people?

Don't you think the US Civil War would have dragged on longer if Sherman had kept his attacks "proportional" to the Confederate threat? Then how many tens of thousands more would have died?

Iraq and Afghanistan have become slaughterhouses, IMO, because we were so obsessed with "proportionality" (and it's the same damn mistake that the same damn neocons made in Vietnam) -- use as little force as possible, on the theory I suppose that war is just another form of persuasion rather than the end of civilization (which it is). War is the dissolution of all social bonds, and if we must fight we should show no restraint other than the basic dictates of humanity outlined in the Geneva Conventions and the Laws of War. If we have any hesitation about showing so little restraint, we should not go to war. If the US attacks someone, we should leave absolutely no doubt about the outcome: death, devastation, the fury of Hell unleashed on earth. And that is exactly why we should not go to war except in the most extreme circumstances, when all negotiations have failed and after we have been attacked first.

Israel seems to understand half of that now -- the only problem is, they refuse to view their enemies as enemies, and instead view them as criminals (we make that mistake too, and frankly International Law as it stands aids us in making those mistakes, since it's been assumed since WWII that in any conflict at least one side must be criminal). They need to negotiate for the release of the soldiers, because negotiation in war is what you do. However, they also need to make clear that their negotiation is not necessarily coupled with their attacks; if Hamas and Hezbollah want Israeli actions against them to stop, they need to negotiate for that too. And, they'll need to find some kind of believable assurance they can give Israel that if they agree to a truce, they will stick to it.

Neither side is very trustworthy at the moment. Israel, Hezbollah, and Hamas have all 3 violated truces and ceasefires before. If one can say there is any positive aspect to an escalation of violence (which one can't, really, except in a sadly relative sense), it is that all three forces will have trouble concealing the costs of violence from their people now. That fact, I hope and pray, will be the beginning of peace.

[kentuck]

101. So, war should be total annihilation of your enemies?

And if everyone believed that and everyone got their hands on nuclear weapons, we would be much safer because of the promise of mutually assured destruction. Although you make a good argument, it is a totally irrational one. We mus tlearn from history if we are to progress. We could start with Germany after WWI. They were annihilated and look what happened...

[Zynx]

100. Eight soldiers being killed as well? Yeah.

Also, Hezbollah has been bombarding Israel for years and Israel has actually shown a great deal of restraint. This finally pushed it over the edge. I would have done exactly the same thing. Hezbollah declared war on Israel with that action.

[kentuck]

102. Did Israel "kidnap" government officials of another country...?

just a few weeks ago? That's fairly antagonistic, would you agree?

[NashVegas]

103. No Idea, But It's a Great Premise

With these kidnappings, Israel's enemies have committed acts of military agression. This give Israel the greenlight for military actions.

[Lilith Velkor]

106. No kidding, it's way better than imaginary WMD

...as premises go.

[leesa]

104. No, but they gotta do it while they still have a US military to go to war

for them. If the US is going down the tubes, this may be Israel's last chance to take over the Middle East. Remember, they have no oil or water.

[The Stranger]

105. Based on their history of prisoner swaps, this is not about two people.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/01/29/prisoner.exchange/

Israel, Hezbollah swap prisoners

(CNN) --Israel and the Lebanese militant group Hezbollah conducted a historic prisoner swap Thursday after years of tense, secret negotiations brokered by Germany.

Two planes left Cologne, Germany, after the exchange -- one touching down in Beirut, Lebanon, to an enthusiastic greeting and the other landing in Tel Aviv, Israel, amid great national sorrow and anger.

Israel Defense Forces said more than two dozen Lebanese and Arab prisoners -- including two senior Hezbollah officials, Mustafa Dirani and Sheikh Abdel Karim Obeid -- flew to Beirut after the exchange occurred at an air base in Cologne. Stephan Smyrek, a German who worked with Hezbollah, also was freed.

Hezbollah, which Israel and the United States regards as a terrorist organization, released Elhanan Tannenbaum -- an Israeli businessman and army reserve colonel -- and the bodies of three IDF soldiers.

. . . .

Israel said that "with this arrangement, a mechanism has been put in place whose aim is to bring substantial information on the fate of captured navigator Ron Arad and his return home."

Israel has been holding Hezbolloh officials Obeid and Dirani -- whom Israeli commandos kidnapped in Lebanon -- as bargaining chips for the release of Arad. His plane went down over Lebanon in 1986.