What Should Israel Do?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

EDITED TO CHANGE "Unilaterally Cease Fire And Let Hizbollah Keep Their Rockets For Another Day" To
"Unilaterally Cease Fire And Let Hizbollah Keep Their Rockets "


It does seem like a distinction without a difference but I want my poll to be accurate.


EDITED AGAIN To Add "Wait For A Diplomatic Solution"

[Lowell]

1. Lebanon cannot fight the Hezbollah

without their infrastructure. Israel is wrong in their focus of attack. As Lebanon teeters on the brink of destruction they have no way to protect themselves from either Israel or the Hezbollah thugs.

[MannyGoldstein]

9. They Need To Walk The Walk

If Lebanon wants to be a sovereign nation then they need to police their country. Otherwise the Israelis have a reasonable right to do it themselves.

[Freddie Stubbs]

33. Lebanon didn't seem to be to inclined to do so when it had an

infrastructure.

[burythehatchet]

2. Choices worded just like a Bill O'Reilly poll

Fox would be proud.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

3. I Just Made A Poll

And I think you insinuation is unwarranted, insulting, and a violation of Democratic Underground rules.

Other than that I see nothing wrong with it.

KISSES

[Junkdrawer]

7. I second that...this poll is a pants load n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. How So

I can still add options.

[Junkdrawer]

10. How about "Attempt to use diplomacy, then surgical strikes to address...

the missile issue." Of course, that option is pretty dead now.

[Junkdrawer]

15. Nice spin on my suggestion. Of course you could have worded it:

"Try a useless diplomatic approach", but that might have been too obvious.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

17. I'm Serious-Give Me The Correct Wording

I really think the "keep the rockets" is what is bothering some people. If I remove "the rockets" the options become meaningless.


No nation would tolerate the presence of rockets on their border, in the hands of a group that is responsible to no one , anymore than you or I would tolerate our neighbor having eight thousand to ten thousand rocks he can throw at our home any time he chooses.

[Warren Stupidity]

29. Yes the residents of Gaza find their situation intolerable.

"No nation would tolerate the presence of rockets on their border, in the hands of a group that is responsible to no one , anymore than you or I would tolerate our neighbor having eight thousand to ten thousand rocks he can throw at our home any time he chooses."

Does your edict apply both ways, or just one way?

[Junkdrawer]

35. I've already made my suggestion. Israel, or more accurately, Likud...

decided that the best way to address the "Hezbollah Rockets" issue was to bomb Beirut and provoke Hezbollah into launching the missiles. To me, this was a cynical attempt to galvanize Likud's position with the Israeli public and may well be an attempt to provide a pretext for a joint US/Israeli attack on Iran. The one thing it is NOT is a rational, civilized attempt to deal with a specific security issue.

[burythehatchet]

14. Here's an example of a "poison poll"

That's my term. The poll goes beyond seeking a tabulatinon of opinions and incorporates an agenda or the writers personal bias. That makes the poll irrelevant. An example of the type of poll I am talking about:

Do you think child molesters should be executed without trial?

A. Yes

B. No, they should be allowed to continue molesting children.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. That Poll Would Be Loaded

I don't think my poll is.

[burythehatchet]

21. OK, your choice number 1

"Unilaterally Cease Fire And Let Hezbollah Keep Their Rockets"

I believe that is Israel stops the bombing, Hizbullah considers it a blessing, and they stop launching rockets. But them by adding "Let Hezbollah keep their rockets" you force the person to vote for a position that is incongruent with his belief.

This is typical in poll answers that contain two separate answers connected with an "and".

[DemocratSinceBirth]

27. The Rockets Are The Crux Of The Problem

because they don't have an "address"

Here...

If Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Iran, etcetera attack Israel , Israel knows whom to respond to. Hezbollah is a independent militia within a sovereign state. They can strike Israel with relative impunity because it will be their involuntary hosts who will suffer the inconsequences.

[burythehatchet]

30. "let them keep" is a loaded phrase

[cali]

41. There is nothing to indicate that H'zbollah would stop

firing rockets and every reason to believe they wouldn't. They've been firing them into Israel for the past 6 years.

[burythehatchet]

51. That's an opinion that has jack to do with a legitimate poll.

[cali]

56. Sad that you have

such a difficult time distinguishing fact from opinion. What I posted was part fact- H'zbollah has been firing rockets from Lebanon over the past several years- and part opinion- that judging from their past actions, H'zbollah would not stop firing rockets if Israel didn't retaliate against the rocket fire. My comment had everything to do with the poll and the questions asked-not that it's any of your business how I respond to anything.

http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/sib/5_05/shlomi_e.htm

[Hissyspit]

4. Self-delete.

[JVS]

5. Is there a choice for indiscriminate bombing?

[Skelington]

6. What is the advantage to allow Hezbollah,

to "keep thier rockets for another day"?

[originalpckelly]

11. Here is the deal I would try to get if I were President:

Hezbollah becomes part of the Lebanese Army. Their weapons are distributed to all of the Lebanese Army. They must promise to give up their terrorist activities. We set all of the prisoners Israel is holding free, but only if they didn't commit internationally recognized war crimes.

Israel will fully withdraw from the Lebanese border (if I recall correctly there are one or two places they still control. This was mentioned by the Hezbollah spokesman yesterday.)

We need to realize that Hezbollah, though they did blow up American facilities, is not al-Qaeda. They are a regional player not a global network like al-Qaeda.


Furthermore, to relieve the anti-Semitism in Lebanon, I would begin a massive exchange program, designed to show the humanity of both the Lebanese and the Israelis.

I would start a relative counseling program, which would bring together members from either side to grieve together for their losses.

Do I get the job or what?

[cali]

19. No, it's not a very good proposal

and insulting to the Lebanese people. There's not much to indicate that most citizens of Lebanon have any interest in H'zbollah becoming part of the army- or giving H'zbollah any more power at all. Most Lebanese do not want to live under fundamentalist Islamic rule, and that's the H'zbollah goal.

The Lebanese Israeli border is official and sanctioned by the UN. Are you in the habit of believing everything H'zbollah says.

Your proposal is truly condescending to both Israelis and Lebanese.

[originalpckelly]

25. So I guess the Lebanese like being bombed to the stone age?

If Hezbollah is destroyed as an organization it can no longer rain terror down on Israel. It can no longer forward the goal of a theocracy.

[cali]

38. Where did I say Lebanon should be bombed into the Stone age?

Oh, that's right, I didn't. Don't put words in my mouth. It's one of the lowest forms of argument. Actually, it's the lowest form.

I didn't answer the poll because I don't support Israel's bombing of Lebanon, but neither do I support their having to sit there and take H'zbollah rockets. Integrating H'zbollah into the army wouldn't destroy them anymore than integrating them into the elected gov't has.

[Tesha]

12. I've claimed for years that one solution to the problem...

I've claimed for years that one solution to the problem is
to relocate all of Israel to someplace in America. I've joked
"Brooklyn" but I don't think they'd actually all fit. Maybe
the entire New York Metropolitan Area (including northern
New Jersey and Fairfield County, CT)?

I've less-joked "Utah" since Israel would be an interesting
counterweight to the Mormon dominance of that state, and the
fundies in both groups ought to get along pretty well anyway.

But really, the involved parties have pretty-well proven that
this conflict will never end so long as both groups of combatants
are located in the same area. So separate them. We'd do it with
two-year-olds, why not do it with countries? And we have enough
space to house all of Israel without batting an eye.

Tesha

[originalpckelly]

20. I understand the whole tradition and roots thing, but I agree with you...

It is almost like putting a chicken in a fox den, and expecting the foxes not to go after the chicken.

I don't think many Americans would mind this either. They could be like the Amish (only they shouldn't beat their children.)

[Tesha]

36. Most Israelis would be nearly-indistinguishable from a lot of...

Most secular and non-Orthodox Israelis would be nearly-
indistinguishable from a lot of Americans, especially in
certain parts of the country that are already familiar
with the Jews and their lack of horns.

Speaking seriously, some of the more-religious Israelis
might choose certain communities in America that are
already strongly-flavored such as New Square, New York.

But we're only talking about 7 million people occupying
8,000 square miles. In both land and population, that's
slightly smaller than New Jersey! Does anyone really
doubt that we could accommodate another New Jersey's
worth of people in this country?

And although it would be a huge blow to the national
pride of some Zionists, it would be a massive relief
to many other Israelis and certainly much of the rest
of the world. It just might get us a peaceful Middle
East and let us avoid a nuclear war.

Tesha

[cali]

22. That's just so ridiculous

it's scarcely worth commenting on. And fairly disgusting too. You do realize that you're advocating the transfer of several million people, don't you?

[Tesha]

24. Nu?

> You do realize that you're advocating the transfer of several million people, don't you?

Yeah. So what?

Refugees happen during and after every war. I'm offering a
peaceful, productive way of ending the conflict.

The question I guess I'd ask you is:

Do you want to save lives? End the war?

Or do you just want to see Arabs getting their asses
kicked for a while before they finally come up with
the means to annihilate Israel? And it's coming, as
surely as the sun rises.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

26. What If They Don't Want To Leave?

What if they are willing to risk the annihilation that you see in their future?

[Tesha]

31. For the small portion that are nihilistic assholes, let them stay.

For the small portion that are nihilistic fundamentalist
assholes, let them stay. Stripped of support from the US
and their more-liberal former countrymates, they won't last
long. They'll either come to their senses or die.

At some point, you have to just stop "enabling" bad behavior
on the part of people. You have to recognize that the drunk
won't stop drinking, the wife-beater won't stop beating, and
the person addicted to war through fantasies of religious and
ethnic superiority just isn't about to be talked out of their
armaments and warfare.

And in the Middle East, we have a significant number of that
last group on both sides of the battle, which is why this
conflict can't be ended by any conventional means. Hence my
proposal toend this by the same means any mother would apply
to warring two-year olds: Separate them!

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

37. The Jews At Masada Committed Suicide

The Jews At Masada committed suicide rather than submit to Roman rule and they didn't have four hundred nuclear weapons and one of the most effective fighting machines in the world.

I would expect any person to fight to the death to protect his home and I don't think an Israeli would be any different.

DSB

[Tesha]

40. Some folks choose to live rather than die.

> The Jews At Masada committed suicide rather than submit to Roman rule

And Jim Jones convinced his followers to drink the grape Kool-Aid.
Some folks follow religiously insane leaders no matter what the
consequences.

Some other folks choose to live rather than die. They especially
tend that way when it is the lives of their children at stake.

Tesha

[cali]

43. I want to see

a viable Palestinian nation and an Israeli nation. I still believe that's the best solution, and if we'd had a competent administration over the past 6 years, it might well be close to happening.

And don't you think the Israelis might object to this charming little scheme of yours? Or do you just plan to tear them from their homes, all 5 million of them, at the end of the barrel of a gun, and march them off.

[Tesha]

47. Actually, 7 million...

> And don't you think the Israelis might object to
> this charming little scheme of yours? Or do you
> just plan to tear them from their homes, all 5
> million of them, at the end of the barrel of a
> gun, and march them off.

Actually, 7+ million.

I don't think gun barrels would be necessary. Sensible
people would make sensible choices and leave the Zionists
to suffer whatever fate happens to them.

But, BTW, wasn't that exactly how Israel was established?
At the barrels of guns aimed at the former occupants of
the land?

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

53. Some Questions

When does this plan start?

How will it be implemented?

Who will enforce it?

What is to be done with those who refuse to follow the plan?

What if the majority of Israelis refuse to move?

How is America going to accommodate seven million people in a short period? There are still Katrina victims living in "temporary" trailers

What makes you think Americans will welcome seven million Jews, many of whom are professionals such as doctors, engineers, and scientists, and will be competing for the best jobs?

After they are forcefully evicted from their homeland will these professionals have to start all over as janitors, maids, and shopkeepers like the first Cuban refugees?


As an aside this discussion reminds me of a grad level poli sci class I took where my friend came up with this half baked idea to replace our system of government. The professor called it for what it was, and I piped up sarcastically "it's a start" and the professor said "no , it's the end."

[Tesha]

57. Okay, I'm game.

> When does this plan start?

ASAP. Start tomorrow.


> How will it be implemented?

Divert the billions we're wasting in Iraq to hire all
sorts of transport. Buy El Al. Use planes belonging to
the Military Airlift Command. Use cargo container ships
for the household goods. Again. we're talking fewer people
than live in New jersey, tops.


> Who will enforce it?

Don't enforce it, advertise it. Sensible people will
be persuaded. There are very few Qassams and Katyushas
being launched from Long Island into Brooklyn, or the
Ramapo Hills into the Garden State Plaza.


> What is to be done with those who refuse to follow the plan?

Fuck 'em.


> What if the majority of Israelis refuse to move?

Bribe 'em -- it's the American way!


> How is America going to accommodate seven million
> people in a short period? There are still Katrina
> victims living in "temporary" trailers.

We're not talking about a million brown people that
nobody wanted around in the first place. We're talking
about a highly-educated, highly-motivated, technical
populace. Blue cities will be clamoring for these
immigrants.


> What makes you think Americans will welcome seven
> million Jews, many of whom are professionals such
> as doctors, engineers, and scientists, and will be
> competing for the best jobs?

Red America won't ever want them, not without an
inspection for horns. But Blue America will understand
that these are 7 million new consumers, not just people
slipping in on H1-B visas to steal jobs and then send
their salary elsewhere. Plus, a lot of these folks
will probably already have relatives here. We already
have a substantial Jewish culture here. This won't be
a shock to anyone who, for example, lives in the Northeast.


> After they are forcefully evicted from their homeland
> will these professionals have to start all over as
> janitors, maids, and shopkeepers like the first Cuban
> refugees?

Again, my joking about Utah aside, the new immigrants
are likely to settle in bluer rather than redder areas.
And they'll mostly all speak English straight-away.
And, as I said, many will have relatives here and there
are already large charitable organizations that could
help the others.


> "no , it's the end."

The end would be assuming we can go on with a belligerant
Israel constantly facing an enemy sworn to destroy it as
that enemy also finally gains access to nuclear weapons.

It's time to stop repeating what we've all been doing and
try something new.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. You Forgot Something

"Divert the billions we're wasting in Iraq to hire all
sorts of transport. Buy El Al. Use planes belonging to
the Military Airlift Command. Use cargo container ships
for the household goods. Again. we're talking fewer people
than live in New jersey, tops."

You forgot cattle cars.

[Tesha]

87. Oh my, how clever of you! (NT)

[cali]

59. Whatever the number is-

and I believe it's 6 million Israelis of whom 1 million are Arabs or others, the overwhelming number of those people love and support their country- just like most people anywhere. They may not support their government, and Israel does have a vibrant peace movement, but even those folks are unlikely to consider having their country dismantled and being shipped off to NJ or wherever.

As for Israel's creation, whether or not it was a good idea is certainly debatable, but it's a fait accompli, and though there was undoubtedly violence and injustice used to create it, it was also created by UN mandate.

Your solution is morally repugnant. It's every bit as disgusting and racist as suggestions that the Palestinians should go live in Jordan and other Arab countries.

Congratulations.

[Tesha]

61. Morally repugnant? Puh-leaze!

> but a fait accompli, ...

Bad decisions can be reversed once you decide to
quit "staying the course".


>Your solution is morally repugnant

Seeing 7 million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel) die
and not taking steps to prevent it is morally repugnant.

(I know you think it won't happen, but on the current
course, it's inevitable. And since the seven million
are armed with nukes, they'll probably take many millions
more with them as they go.)

I'm offering a far more-positive, far more-peaceful
alternative.


Tesha

[cali]

63. Let me repeat:

your solution is morally repugnant and completely unrealistic and your forecasts on the future have about as much legitimacy as a Oija board.

[Tesha]

66. Let's talk again in ten years.

> Let me repeat:
> your solution is morally repugnant and completely unrealistic
> and your forecasts on the future have about as much legitimacy
> as a Oija board.

Let's talk again in ten years.

We'll see how the situation has evolved.

We'll see what impact the availability of an Islamic Bomb has
had on the situation (because, by that time, an Islamic Bomb
will probably be available from several different sources).

We'll have a better perspective on what's morally repugnant
and what's just a real estate transaction.

Tesha


P.S.: Your use of the phrase "morally repugnant" is
only a slightly-veiled personal attack, and well beyond
the rules of this board.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

67. Or Miss Cleo

as a Oija board (Or Miss Cleo.)


Actually, Hezbollah's offer is more generous. Hezbollah's offer is more generous. Hezbollah leaders have said the Jews can stay as long as they submit to Sharia Law.

[Tesha]

72. As I said to Cali...

Let's talk again in ten years.

We'll see if you're still in a mocking mood then.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

76. Like Keynes Said

"In the long run we're all dead."

[Tesha]

79. Yes, but we live in the short run.

> Like Keynes Said: "In the long run we're all dead."

Yes, but we live in the short run.

And furthermore, it would be a shame if, in the long run,
we let a bunch of fools kill the only planet we and our
progeny have.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

82. Why Did You Address Cali In Yiddish ?

Nu?
Posted by Tesha


IMHO his English skills appear to be at least as good as yours. I'll leave it to others to embrace or reject my observation.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

23. Wouldn't That Be Ethnic Cleansing Writ Large?

ny

[Tesha]

28. Not in the way "ethnic cleansing" is usually meant.

Usually, the "cleansed" end up dead. Here, they end up in
condos or even nice split-entries in Bergen County.

What we'd be doing is offering anyone who wanted it the
chance to emmigrate away from the violence. They would,
of course, have to accept that the new place wouldn't be
a theocracy under their control, but it seems like a lot
of the more-secular Jews in Israel wouldn't be troubled
by that.

And I don't suppose it would have to be mandatory in any
way. If Israeli zionist fundamentalists wanted to stay behind
to die, who am I to argue with them? But I do think we would
have to remove the nuclear weapons from the territory, don't
you? And what was left behind probably couldn't afford to
maintain the IDF (including its air forces), especially
once we ended the US subsidies.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

34. Most Israelis Are Secular

Their attachement is to their homeland not to a theocracy. You're conflating them with Hizbollah which I think literally means "The Party Of God".


And the annihilation you predict is unlikely to materialize as long as the Israelis have four hundred nuclear warheads. It provides them with the capability to take their tormentors along with them.


As to your suggestion that be "denuclearized" and disarmed, who do you propose undertake this task, pray tell.

[Tesha]

39. Given an escape route...

Given an escape route, I think you'd find many Israelis
would choose to take it.

And as the country found itself depopulated, with less and
less ability to mount a standing army without tapping the
ultra-orthodox who are sitting on their prayerful but com-
pletely unproductive asses in yeshivas, even more would be
convinced to leave.

You wouldn't need to "invade" anything to secure the warheads;
in fact, you'd need to ensure that, unlike the RDX in Iraq,
they didn't fall into Arab hands merely by accident and in-
competence of guardianship.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

45. Why Would A Nation That Can Protect Itself Cut And Run

The Israelis have a GDP of $154 billion dollars, one of the most educated and productive work forces in the world . They produce 50% of their own military equipemrnt. They have four hundred nuclear warheads. They have missiles that can go 3,000 miles. Losing America's four billion dollars a year would hurt but it would be far from fatal.

[Tesha]

46. Because they can't protect themselves. Not in the long run.

Because they can't protect themselves. Not in the long run.
At least not without going nuclear.

Demographically, Israel is dwarfed by its neighbors and this
is likely to get worse in the future.

Energetically, Israel is dependent on foreign oil for transportation
fuel.

Their grasp on the land has been tenuous since the land was ceeded
to them in 1949 and, in the long run, they are in an unsustainable
position.

"Cut and Run"? That's a Republican phrase designed to provoke Machismo.
Realistic people make intelligent choices, and, offered the chance to
emigrate and live in peace, I think a lot of Israelis would turn out
to be realists. Or maybe just the women and children would leave,
letting all the machimso "men" play with their weapons.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

50. Japan Has Little In The Way Of Natural Resources And They Do Just Fine

Your definition of "intelligent choice" is funny for the lack of a better word.


If a bigger kid at school demands that my son give him his lunch money everyday at school the intelligent choice might be to tell him to give it to him. If I go to the principal and report him that might really piss the kid off and he might really hurt my son.

What would you recommend in that instance?


And I see nothing immoral about a nation using nuclear warheads as a last option to protect their sovereignty. It's called mutually assured destruction.


Would you deny the United States the right to use nuclear weapons if it's sovereignty was threatened?

[Tesha]

58. Japan doesn't have sworn enemies looking at them across a border.

> Japan Has Little In The Way Of Natural Resources And
> They Do Just Fine

Japan doesn't have sworn enemies looking at them eye-to-eye
across a border.

Even North Korea isn't in the same position vis-a-vis
Japan as the Palestinians, Lebanese, and Syrians are
vis-a-vis Isreal.


> And I see nothing immoral about a nation using nuclear
> warheads as a last option to protect their sovereignty.
> It's called mutually assured destruction.

Yes, but it's the mutual part of it that will really burn
your butt. If Israel starts throwing nukes, we're all going
to die. And if that were to be imminent, it would be far more
ethically-correct for the rest of the world to pre-emptively
nuke Israel than to allow them to touch off a nuclear war
that would eventually engulf the planet. 7 million deaths
versus 6 billion? No questionw here the ethically-correct
choice lies.

I'm offering a much more pleasant alternative.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. Have A Day

"Yes, but it's the mutual part of it that will really burn
your butt. If Israel starts throwing nukes, we're all going
to die. (((((((And if that were to be imminent, it would be far more
ethically-correct for the rest of the world to pre-emptively
nuke Israel than to allow them to touch off a nuclear war
that would eventually engulf the planet.)))) 7 million deaths
versus 6 billion? No questionw here the ethically-correct
choice lies."


It didn't take long to peel the skin off this onion.


As my teenage son would say "have a day."

[Tesha]

64. I only offer alternatives.

If you don't like my scenarios, if you don't think
that that is *PRECISELY* what the leaders of the rest
of the nations in the world would do if faced with
that scenario, then, as you say, "have a day".

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

65. You Can Have The Last Word

My job is done.

[JVS]

69. The Ainu are just biding their time! Some day Japan will be brought down

[Tesha]

70. :-) (NT)

[cali]

74. keep digging that hole

it's fun to watch. Your proposal morphs into stranger and stranger form with each succeeding post.

I hate to break this to you but Israelis who want to immigrate to the US can ususally do so. They already have an escape route out of Israel. Virtually no one would take you up on your offer. Try taking a look at opinion polling in Israel before you make such statements as "And as the country found itself depopulated..." You seem to have some childish fantasy that you can get rid of Israel, but your knowledge, not just about Israel, but about historical context, geopolitics and human nature, makes you manifestly unfit to make a realistic assessment.

[Tesha]

75. And you have nothing but personal attacks.

> You seem to have some childish fantasy
> but your knowledge makes you manifestly unfit

And you have nothing but personal attacks.

How typical.

Tesha

[DemocratSinceBirth]

83. Typical Of Who

"How typical."



Tesha


"Typical of who"



Pray tell

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. "Stay the course" is working well in Iraq.

About as well as Israel's oppression of the Palestinians.

[Tyler Durden]

18. Have we learned NOTHING from the Iraq Debacle?

The Israeli Army could occupy every inch of Lebanon until the end of time, and Hezbolla (sp?) would STILL be doing everything they can to piss in their soup.

Israel just does not get it. WITHDRAW. SHUT DOWN THE "SETTLEMENTS." STOP BUILDING THE "NEW BERLIN WALL." When you play like "Bush" you get treated like Bush.

My opinion: the Israeli invasion of Lebanon (the FIRST one) is the reason that Hezbolla (sp?) is in power there in the first place. It seems there were no terrorists in Iraq until we started BOMBING them; anyone else remember that?

[Iktomiwicasa]

32. I don't

side with the Blame Israel crowd. They need to stomp the dogshit out of Hezbollah.

[Tesha]

42. The problem, of course, is that there's always a bigger dog. (NT)

[JackNewtown]

44. Destroy Hezbollah once and for all; stop taking all of Lebanon hostage

[Tesha]

48. There will *ALWAYS* be another band of fundy nutjobs.

> Destroy Hezbollah once and for all; stop taking all of Lebanon hostage

There will *ALWAYS* be another band of fundy nutjobs to take
their place.

Haven't you learned this in America?

Tesha

[lonestarnot]

49. They've already started the job, may as well finish it.

[Tesha]

60. Call them Sisyphus...

> They've already started the job, may as well finish it.

Call them Sisyphus, then, because even though they roll
that rock up the hill once ("finishing of Hezbollah"),
they'll just get to do it over and over and over and over
again as new groups form to replace (and avenge!) the
old groups.

Thanks to the efforts of many folks over the last half
century, there are now far more Arabs who hate Israel
than there are Israelis.

Tesha

[lonestarnot]

81. I also agree with this. This whole damn thing is so confusing

that I can't see a remedy.

[Tesha]

85. I know what you mean.

> This whole damn thing is so confusing that I can't see a remedy.

I suggested a remedy up above, a pretty good, friendly, productive
one, I thought, but it turns out that I'm:

> morally repugnant

with a

> childish fantasy

and a

> (lack of) knowledge (that) makes (me) manifestly unfit

So it goes...

Some people seem awfully invested in war and killing going on
no matter what.

Tesha

[High Plains]

73. Gotta love all the newby warmongers showing up around here.

Pray tell, how are you going to "destroy Hezbollah once and for all"? The same way Israel "destroyed" the Palestinian resistance? The same way the US has "destroyed" the Iraqi insurgency?

Suggestions like that are a prescpription for disaster and mass murder. You do understand that Hezbollah is a social movement, a political party, and a military organization that represents Lebanon's Shiite population of 1.4 million people, right?

[cali]

80. I certainly don't agree

with the poster you're responding to, and I agree with everything you wrote about H'zbollah, but your chose of descriptives doesn't really tell the reader anything about who H'zbollah is.

[sendero]

52. Your poll leaves out the reasonable options....

... when did you stop beating your wife?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

54. How Is A Diplomatic Solution Not A Reasonable Option?

eom

[sendero]

55. It's not reasonable..

... because it isn't going to happen. Neither side WANTs a diplomatic solution.

The reasonable solution is for Israel to go after the terrorists, instead of the civilian population they happen to live among. Bombing civilian infrastructure is not reasonable, it is not moral and it is not, in the long term, effective.

[Bretttido]

71. Agreed, I choose not to vote for these worthless options

[noonwitch]

68. Hezbollah needs to be out of Lebanon

They are using the civilian population as hostages, in a way, because to attack them, you have to attack the whole area.

[mmonk]

78. Strike Hezbollah positions when possible

while seeking help to put international pressure on disarming Hezbollah. Seek international troops where possible to aid the situation being diffused.

[NaturalHigh]

84. No way Israel should just sit around...

and let Hezbollah keep their rockets. You don't let a sworn enemy keep weapons to lob at you just across the border.

[KamaAina]

86. You've seen "Raid on Entebbe", right?

The Israel I knew would have sent in a commando team to get the two soldiers back. End of story. Two days' worth of headlines, max.

But nooooooooo! No,no,no,no,no,no,no,no,no! </belushi> Now they have to go and maybe start WWIII!

I have a sneaking suspicion they've been looking for a pretext to do this since the Syrians pulled out of Lebanon. They certainly weren't going to do it when it might have provoked war with Syria.

[Tesha]

88. They've essentially admitted as much in interviews. (NT)