Israel has stared for too long into the abyss.

[Tyler Durden]

"He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."
Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, Aphorism 146

One can argue all day and night about the evils suffered by the Jews and by Israel, and they would be right.

And they would still not excuse the 1 for 100 killing practiced by the Israeli Army in Lebanon, Gaza, Sinai, and the West Bank of Jordan.

What's the formula? How many non-Israelis die for each Israeli? This does not excuse the killing of citizens of the state of Israel: but NOTHING excuses their GOVERNMENT'S over reactive killing sprees.

NOTHING.

If we are WRONG in IRAQ, the Israelis are WRONG in Lebanon.

[CanuckAmok]

1. Hear hear.

Well said.

Now all you have to do is sit back and wait for the more reactionry DUers accuse you of being antisemetic.

[Tyler Durden]

4. Still freaks me out...

...How decrying the killing of innocents can make someone call you a bigot.

Guess I'm an Anti-AmeriKKKan bigot, too, for opposing the slaughter in Iraq.

[porphyrian]

66. It's not that, it's the disproportionate response...

...and the, intentional or not, use of the terms "Jews," "Israel," and "Zionists" interchangably. When Israeli civilians are killed by the terrorists, it's news for part of a day. Now that Israel has decided enough is enough and seeking to destroy Hezbollah once and for all (and I don't agree with how they're doing it at all, by the way), it's a two-week-long pile up on Israel. Thus, the already-defensive people who care for Israel lash out, despite the fact that most of them here would otherwise be in agreement that the government of Israel is doing the wrong thing and that it is unacceptable to kill any civilians. Then, people like you who have been on the receiving end of it get offended and lash back, creating a perpetual argument mirroring on a smaller scale the fight in the Middle East with both sides feeling they are both right and under attack.

I'm not trying to fight with you, just 'splain it how I see it.

[sabbat hunter]

2. big difference

iraq didnt attack us nor pose a threat to us.

hizbollah did attack Israel. Lebanon's army/govt are too weak to do anything, especially with hizbollah a part of it.

israel is doing what it has to do to protect itself/

[CuteNFuzzy]

6. protecting itself against innocent children and ambulances?

[Poll_Blind]

13. (Photo) Direct hit on ambulance from Israeli missile, no mistake.

PB

[CanuckAmok]

Serves 'em right for painting those big red crosshairs on the roof.

Those terrorists... they're just nutty!

[leveymg]

31. Iconic photo. That's what a cluster-bomb does.

Shoots out thousands of steel spheres, like a giant shotgun blast. Rips right through sheet metal and the flesh inside.

Right on target.

[chimpymustgo]

33. Israel ATTACKED the clearly marked medic convoy. That's just murder.

There are NO EXCUSES!!!! God help them.

[LostinVA]

Yes there is, according to post #26

I have to put them on Ignore. Their post literally almost made me cry... this is DU, right? Not someplace else?

[DireStrike]

74. Can I please have the source page for this image?

I'm taking flak on another forum for posting it.

[Poll_Blind]

79. From this thread (link inside)...

Right here. The direct link to the picture is from Yahoo (right click on the picture and get properties).

PB

[sabbat hunter]

82. any proof it was an israeli missile

could it be a hizbollah rocket?

[Poll_Blind]

84. You go ahead and believe the destruction of Beirut is a conspiracy.

One big....biiiiiiiig.....Hezbollah conspiracy. Why, I'll bet IDF jets aren't even bombing the hell out of Lebanon- I'll bet it's a biiig conspiracy to make the poor IDF look bad.

Your comment reminds me of this message in which a poster dared me to prove that the dead Lebanese children were NOT Hezbollah operatives.

Good lord...

PB

[CanuckAmok]

91. well, for one thing, the damage is typical of a cluster-bomb,

not an H/E missile.

It could possibly be from a mortar round, but the inaccurate nature of mortars suggests that it's a one in a million shot.

In this former UN Peacekeeper's assessment, it's from a targeted cluster-bomb.

AFAIK, Hezbollah doesn't have access to cluster-bombs or CB delivery systems (ie aircraft).


But I reserve judgement on the origin of the munition. The bottom line is it's clearly a hit on an ambulance, and whether intentional or not, that's an obscenity.

[ShortnFiery]

Israel is doing an OVERKILL and isolating itself from the world eom

[shadowknows69]

8. Destroying civilian infrastructure and supply trucks

is not protecting Israel. It is igniting a conflagration.

[Tyler Durden]

Hizbollah does not pick up wounded in Red Cross ambulances.

Hizbollah DOES shoot largely ineffective Russian WWII surplus rockets into Israel, Which is WRONG, but a 1 to 100 dead ratio is hardly justifiable.

Is it?

[leveymg]

37. Red Crescent would mark a Hezb'allah ambulance.

This would appear to be a Lebanese Catholic or Mennonite vehicle.

[LostinVA]

16. That didn't take long n/t

[lastliberalintexas]

30. Rather ironic avatar you have there

[LostinVA]

43. Yup...

[shadowknows69]

An incredibly iconic icon you have there LostinVA

an it harm none, avatar what you will.

[LostinVA]

53. If it harms none, do what thou will

[Tyler Durden]

103. Forgot to reply to this earlier:

BULL SHIT.

I'm sure the injured in that ambulance couldn't WAIT to get back to Hezbollah.

I repeat: BULL SHIT.

[OneBlueSky]

117. "Israel is doing what it has to do to protect itself" . . .

I can't believe that you can say that while using a peace sign as your logo . . .

[Tesha]

120. Remind me again how many elected officials Israel "detains"?

> hizbollah did attack Israel.

Remind me again how many elected Hamas officials Israel "detains"?
How did they come by those detainees again?

How many political prisoners, excuse me, "detainees" do they hold
in total?

Tesha

[Taxloss]

3. I sincerely doubt that the Israeli army is deliberately maintaining a

ratio.

But I'm certain that Hezbollah would invert that ratio in a heartbeat if they could.

The ratio is a measure of relative capabilities, not intent.

[CuteNFuzzy]

10. we have no way of gauging intent

Nobody in charge of these things tells the truth

[ShortnFiery]

11. Still, every moment we give Israel a green light - More innocents are

Killed by the scores in Lebanon.

IMO, "intent" don't mean squat to the loved ones - Dead is dead!

[Taxloss]

19. People are dying in Israel as well.

And they also have loved ones.

[CuteNFuzzy]

21. nobody endorses killings of Israelis

The entire U.S. government endorses murdering Lebanese.

THAT is the problem

[Taxloss]

32. Iran and Syria endorse killing Israelis.

And, indeed, erasing Israel from the map. And they're the ones propping up Hezbollah. So there's another big problem.

[CuteNFuzzy]

40. Although I get the point

I'm not Iranian or Syrian. I'm a U.S. citizen.

[ShortnFiery]

28. Yes, I grant you that ... they mostly are not ...

but boy how they suffer in the bomb shelters. :eyes:

It's pretty chicken shit to fight an enemy with reinforced tanks and jets. That IMO is the height of cowardice.

Many more innocents are dying in Lebanon and you know it. Was it lost on you that one third of the dead are children below the age of 12?

But yeah, if you travel to Tel Aviv, Every thing's Fine! :(

[Taxloss]

36. I see ...

So Israel should match its enemy man for man, weapon for weapon, shelter for shelter, rocket for rocket? Since when has that standard applied to ANY war?

[ShortnFiery]

41. Not necessarily but cruel use of WP and Cluster bombs are a breech

of International Law. So is Bombing the Infrastructure.

Both sides are killing civilians but Israel is beginning what is forming up to be "a genocide." :(

[Taxloss]

47. Genocide is the systematic killing of an entire people.

If Israel planned to kill every man, woman and child inside Lebanon, it would be guilty of genocide. It does not, and is not.

[ShortnFiery]

58. It's NOT FINISHED YET!

That's why we need a cease fire!

Also the use of white phosphorus and cluster bombs is against international law.

WTF is wrong with you people. Every life is precious and a cease fire will stop the killing on both sides.

I'm sickened by the meme, "protect oneself."

BULLSHIT. Israel has all the war planes and the mighty tanks and the Army mostly subsidized by the USA.

It's like a grown man beating the shit out of a boy.

As the SUPER POWERS we (USA and ISRAEL) are expected to play THE ADULT.

This collective punishment is JUST WHAT THE NAZIS DID.

Again, WTF is wrong with you people who don't want an immediate cease fire?

[Taxloss]

129. I do want a ceasefire.

And have never said that I didn't.

And stop cheapening the term genocide. Acting "adult" hardly involves flinging around false accusations of genocide and comparing people to Nazis, does it? So knock it off.

[ShortnFiery]

63. Do you have any idea what it's like to "burn alive" under Willie Peat

WP, White Phosphorus. It's use on individuals is a clear WAR CRIME.

That is the MOST CRUEL death that has ever fated a human, to literally be burned alive. Israel is using WP in that manner.

Is the above merely the desires of Israel to "protect oneself?"

[CanuckAmok]

92. Anesthetised definitions of acts of barbarism.

Does anyone think that civilians being killed on either side stop to wonder if their deaths are going to be counted as part of a genocide or not, in some political think-tank?

[Lindacooks]

101. Why can't you understand the concept of PROPORTION?

THAT is what makes this a war crime! It's against the Geneva Convention - you know, that little piece of paper that ISRAEL ratified? Anyone who is grieving the loss of life in Lebanon does NOT cheer the loss of life in Israel. It's the massacre that we think is so reprehensible.

[Tyler Durden]

102. EXACTLY.

Every innocent man, woman or child that is killed in this adventurism belies the entire premise for the existence of Israel in the first place.

"He who saves one life, saves the world entire." The Talmud.

[Lindacooks]

112. Perfect quote and concept. Thank you.

eom

[Taxloss]

131. I refer you to my original comment in this thread.

The ratio is meaningless.

[Tyler Durden]

142. OF COURSE IT'S MEANINGLESS!!!

It would be meaningless if it were 10 Israelis for 1 Lebanese! Killing for this purpose is meaningless on both sides.

[alcibiades_mystery]

12. Who cares if it's a measure of "intent"?

If it is the inevitable consequence of the policy, and it appears to be, then that is de facto intent, whatever platitudinous purity the policy makers concoct for their consciences. If the result of a particular decision is inevitable, or even highly likely, then making that decision is all the inbtent one need bother with.

[Taxloss]

23. But the ratio is not a measure of relative intent.

I suspect - and this is simply my opinion - that Israel would greatly prefer its offensive to cause minimal loss of civilian life, which is why it has been scattering leaflets, sending texts and so on. But, I similarly think that the army high command is overly troubled by the ratio.

Hezbollah, however, would dearly like to maximise civilian casualties.

That does seem to be an impotant distinction to me.

[CuteNFuzzy]

35. I would love to believe that

But in this conflict exists a factor of hate on both sides that is impossible to ignore

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. Oh, I suspect Israel intends NO civilian casualties at all

That doesn't make a goddamn bit of difference to the hundreds of dead. This is not a matter of comparison. Israel's policy kills hundreds of civilians, and many even claim that this is "inevitable," while at the same time justifying it as non-deliberate. Whether they intend it or not seems utterly beside the point unless one is involved in the basest sort of apologetics.

[ShortnFiery]

51. People whose loved ones have been murdered don't give a shit about intent

It don't matter squat.

That's why the KILLING and DYING must stop under a CEASE FIRE a.s.a.p.

What the hell is the matter with Israel? They have turned into the people that they despise the most. Collective Punishment and the indiscriminate killing of civilians by taking out the nation's infrastructure are WAR CRIMES, and also, BTW very Hitler-esque.

Again, the Israeli government has turned into what they hate.

Depressive beyond belief. :cry:

[Tyler Durden]

15. I'm sure Bush's intent is not as great as Hitler's was...

Big fucking difference in my book.

Kill innocents-you suck. Period.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

24. Innocents Are Killed In Every War

Does that mean no war can be justified?

[ShortnFiery]

56. There's never been a bad PEACE, nor a good WAR

There is an opportunity to achieve a Cease Fire but our CRUEL and warmongering leaders in the USA remain silent. This is SO WRONG!

[Tyler Durden]

96. Missiles through ambulances.

Innocents. Case closed.

[LostinVA]

18. The end result is still the same -- the killing of innocents

This cannot be "spun" away. The OP is correct: it is exactly what we are against in Iraq.

[Taxloss]

26. Innocents die in war. It is tragic but almost unavoidable.

And I'm not spinning anything.

[LostinVA]

39. OMG -- I cannot believe you just said that

Do you know how evil that statement sounds? It literally made me gasp. How you can say that and mean it and still sleep at night is beyond me.

To quote another poster: On the seventh day, God created the Ignore button.

For shame.

[Taxloss]

45. It's a statement of fact.

It doesn't make any of those deaths less tragic, if you fling around bombs they kill people. Don't imagine I'm endorsing those deaths, I am not.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

48. Innocents Do Die In War. That's Why War Should Be Avoided.

Those are just facts not value statements.

[LostinVA]

55. That is not what the poster stated n/t

[Lindacooks]

109. If you haven't already put him on ignore, please report that post.

[LostinVA]

134. I did, immediately last night

Nothing was done.

And, they are on Ignore now....

Alert on it, too... maybe something will happen.

[Poll_Blind]

59. And in genocides, too. The Israeli military is intentionally attacking...

...the civilian infrastructure and clearly-marked civilian vehicles. I agree that innocents die in war, but the spirit of your comment implied these attacks on the civilian areas of Lebanon were unintentional. They are not.

PB

[Tyler Durden]

98. Please quote the formal, LEGAL, declaration of war...

...that applies to this conflict.

I'll say it again: The US, Israel, and Hizbollah should all stand side by side...

IN THE PRISONER'S DOCK AT THE INTERNATIONAL WAR CRIMES TRIBUNAL IN THE HAGUE.

[mhatrw]

114. Wholesale murder is avoidable.

As is war itself.

[muriel_volestrangler]

124. There's genuine debate if a ten to one ratio is deliberate

The Israeli air force is under orders to blast 10 buildings in south Beirut, a Hezbollah stronghold, for every rocket the Shi'ite militant group fires at the Israeli port of Haifa, army radio said on Monday.

"Army chief of staff Dan Halutz has given the order to the air force to destroy 10 multi-storey buildings in the Dahaya district (of Beirut) in response to every rocket fired on Haifa," a senior air force officer told the station.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Middle_East/0,,2-10-2075_1972537,00.html

Whether or not the IDF Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Dan Halutz really issued a directive to the air force to bomb 10 multistory buildings in south Beirut for every salvo of rockets fired at Haifa, the question of the price Israel should be exacting from Hizbullah and Lebanon in retaliation for the bombardment of its civilian population and what is a proportionate response remains a potent one.
...
Arad doesn't believe that Halutz actually gave the order to attack proportionally to the bombings on Israel. "It was probably just a figure of speech, but even using that kind of language is part of the same madness. Who says that the proportion is 10 to one? Perhaps it should be eight or four.

"We've got to get back to basics, to the time when the IDF's mission was to defend, attack and win the battle, without any talk of proportion. The missions should be drawn according to the objectives - that's the way it was from Clausewitz to Liddell Hart, all the way to Ariel Sharon in his younger military version."

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?apage=2&cid=1153291988363&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[Tyler Durden]

125. 1 to 100, 1 to 10, 1 to 5....

What ratio IS moral? Is it more moral if it's 1 to 1?

Why are we even talking about this?

[ulysses]

5. quite possibly so

although you have far more balls than I do to bring Nietzsche into a thread about Israel. :scared: :)

Seriously, though, I think you have a point. There are no winners in this, only victims.

[Tyler Durden]

17. A good observation is a good observation.

Wagner wrote some great music. He was an anti-Semetic PIG, but a musical genius.

[ulysses]

60. no doubt.

That's my favorite quote from dear old Fred, too. I'm just saying...

[LostinVA]

20. Ooh, I didn't even think about the Nietzsche quote

The OP's point is still a good one.

[movonne]

7. We are just as much apart of this sicking killing as Israel..this has

been in this administration's agenda for years...

[Poll_Blind]

9. Yep. Israel's up-front policy of collective punishment recently...

...surfaced again when a member of the government said that they would destroy 10 Lebanese buildings for each rocket fired into Israel. No-one refuses Israel the right to defend herself but this unflinching love of some of the most brutal tactics employed in conventional warfare is sickening, detrimental to Israel primarily and secondarily detrimental to Diasporic Jews who, though the Israeli media machine, are identified (likely unwillingly) as de facto supporters of the conservative Israeli government's "policies".

PB

[LostinVA]

14. Hear, hear -- good post

The very thing I've been saying, but which certainly people refuse to look at -- cognitive dissonance, as bad as any I've ever seen.

Stand firm against the nasty flames that may be headed your way, TD...

[AnnieBW]

22. When You Stare Into the Abyss

The abyss stares back at you. They have become what they hated most.

[CuteNFuzzy]

25. Worse, even.

[tom_paine]

27. I almost agree with you.

I simply do not understand how targeting the civilian neighborhoods and infrastructure is believed to be justifiable.

Target Hezbollah camps, put in ground troops in a buffer zone if you must but why the hell is Israel raining terror on Lebanon's civilians?

It is an over reaction, or a misdirected reaction, at the very least.

I believe Israel is getting advice from the Busheviks and taking it because of all the money we give Israel. It's a Faustian deal (for Israel) that may well end up killing millions in the end.

[magellan]

29. Hell, yeah!

No one's denying Israel the right to defend itself. But this is unjustifiable murder.

The ambulance incident should seal it for anyone. Right through the ambulance roof, direct hit. That was no accident. Until whoever in the IDF gave that order is held responsible but good, Israel as a whole deserves condemnation. Terrorists do this sort of thing, not supposedly civilized nations.

[LARED]

34. Actually it's more like one to ten

But no matter what the ratio is it stinks.

Do you expect Israel to wait for death tallies to decide the next move? Do you think Hezbollah will just stop bothering Israel if the Israelis stop bombing? Hezbollah is not going to just go away if you ignore them long enough. What should Israel do?

[LeftCoast]

54. If Hezbollah is a terrorist group and Israel matches its actions as you

suggest, what then, does that make Israel?

Israel is a nation, and as such is held to a different standard than a terrorist organization. Why can't people understand this?

[LARED]

64. I was not suggesting anything

My comment about the ratio being more like 1 to 10 verses, 1 to 100 was simply me trying to establish some facts verses hyperbole. As I said the whole thing stinks no matter how you choose to add it up.

The bottom line is that Israel is doing what it thinks necessary to secure themselves against Hezbollah. I don't think Isreal is purposefully targeting innocents in order to win this, the facts are that Hezbollah hides amoung civilians.

Should Israel do nothing?

[LeftCoast]

73. And I never said Israel should do nothing

However, Israel's response should be within the bounds of international law and human decency. IMO, bombing ambulances, carpet-bombing entire city blocks, desctruction of water and food infrastructure clearly begins to go beyond those boundaries.

[Taoschick]

81. Okay...

I wasn't aware that Israel was deliberately targeting civilians and kidnapping Hezbollah terrorists.

Unfortunately, the terrorists are cowards. That means they hide in civilian neighborhoods and fire missiles from civilian buildings.

How would you suggest Israel end the Hezbollah attacks?

[LeftCoast]

86. I'm saying that what Israel is doing is illegal and that they should be

held to a higher standard that a terrorist organization. It's not my job to solve Israel's problems, but I think I'm allowed to point out that their present solution is illegal.

[magellan]

68. It took a long time and many deaths to get here

It'll take a long time and many more deaths to correct the situation. Hear me out.

Hezbollah and Hamas weren't born spontaneously from nothing. The hatred that brings them new followers every day didn't just appear for no reason. Like it or not, Israel's brutal actions against civilians during its occupation of Lebanon and against the Palestinians over many decades are responsible for the existence of these extremist groups. And Israel's continued tit-for-tat brutality will only help these groups to continue to grow. That's why the situation is only getting worse in the long run, not better, despite short relatively quiet periods.

The real path to peace requires Israel to stop these heavy-handed tactics and take the moral high road. That isn't to say they should just sit back and wait to be hit. But they really should start considering whether striking back is worth wreaking the usual injury, death and general destruction that makes life hell for those affected...because that outcome always -- always -- radicalizes more of the population against Israel.

If Israel make an effort to stop their tactics of collective punishment, if they remove from the equation all the many bloody reasons they give youths to seethe with hatred and the desire for revenge, then over time Hezbollah and Hamas will not be able to recruit new members. Imagine it. Nasrallah speaks to a crowd one day, says, "Israel is a terrorist nation and must be destroyed!" The people listening think, "Israel hasn't done anything except kill and arrest the Hezbollah who keep bombing them. Sure, they used to kill and destroy anyone and anything in their path, but that was long ago. What's he on about?" AND THEY WALK AWAY, thinking him the madman he certainly is.

This may seem idealistic because it requires time and restraint. But it's the only way to stop terrorism -- apart from flattening the entire ME and killing everyone. (And then Israel would have to contend with an armed international response.) It won't happen overnight, and Israel will suffer while the process works it's way through a generation or two. But in the end, real peace will result.

btw, I believe this is also the only way for the US to achieve lasting peace without further tumbling down the rabbit hole of a police state to protect itself against terrorism. You can't kill an idea. You can, however, be smart and decent and completely undermine the reasoning that leads groups of people to kill.

[LARED]

76. Yes, it's very idealist

do you have any historical precedent to base your comment that it's the only way to stop terrorism because I sure would like to believe that you're right.

[magellan]

118. I'm not a historian, so I can't say 100%, but

...I believe if you look back over the last century at the wars fought between a nation and a guerilla faction -- and a terrorist group is very like a guerilla faction -- you'll find the guerillas rarely lose. Off the top of my head, think of the actions in Korea and Vietnam. There are also several examples in Latin America and Africa that have been raging for decades.

Consider Chile. For over 16 years Pinochet tried to obliterate his opposition. He murdered thousands of Chileans, and detained, tortured and expelled tens of thousands more. Anyone so much as suspected of sympathizing with the Left or of disagreeing with his regime suffered his tender mercies. Many fled the country outright, but others stayed and fought; armed rebel groups like MIR and the FPMR regularly terrorized the government and general population.

Yet despite having the advantages of absolute rule, Operation Condor, US support, and the front being located in his own country, Pinochet didn't win.

Now here is the interesting thing about MIR and FPMR since Chile's reversion to a democracy in 1990. MIR laid down its arms and reintegrated with the political system. The FPMR split, with one part returning to the political realm while the other, the FPMR/D, remained armed and continued its terroristic actions.

But here's the kicker from a page I found on the FPMR:

FPMR/D attacks civilians and international targets, including US businesses and Mormon churches (in Chile). In 1993, FPMR/D bombed two McDonald's restaurants and attempted to bomb a Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant. Successful government counterterrorist operations have significantly undercut the organization. Four FPMR members staged an escape from prison using a helicopter, however, in December 1996. On the night of April 30, 1997 FPMR held a clandestine press conference in Santiago to announce it is leaving the armed struggle and seeking to become a legal political organization.

Strength

Now believed to have between 50 and 100 members.

You can't kill an idea. You can only remove support for it by addressing the issues that radicalize people, which the Chilean government has obviously done.

[Justitia]

38. This is consistent (overwhelming force) w/ certain Israeli policy

in place for a long time. There are certain segments (not all) of Israeli policy making that believe Arab nations only respond to an overwhelming use of force.

There is history in the habit of "hitting back" disproportionately as a strategic measure.

These same policy-makers don't care what the outer world thinks of their actions, they are currently in survivalist tunnel-vision mode. They are operating in another complete mental plane from the rest of us.

Of course, we are horrified at the Lebanese people caught in the middle and we judge the actions of Israel as extreme overreaction.

I'm just pointing out that if you examine the historical record of the Arab-Israeli conflict, not a thing that has happened thus far will surprise you.

[chimpymustgo]

44. Racist excuse to murder. "That's ALL they understand..." Quit digging.

There is NO excuse for this carnage. It's wanton, hateful slaughter.

[Justitia]

52. Excuse me? I never said it was "MY" policy, it's Israel's.

And I am simply giving you the historical background on some of the factions of Israeli policy that brings us to where we are today.

I never said I agree with it - sheesh!

How can violence ever be stopped if no one takes the time to study the historical conflicts of the parties involved?

And BTW, there is racism on both sides of this conflict, so I'd throw that out as a "wash".

[jonnyblitz]

62. it's completely racist. that is why they have no problems

with what they are doing with this collective punishment crap they picked up from the nazi's. all this handing wringing about anti-semitism and nobody mentions the obvious anti-arab racism by the Israeli's and their supporters. the lives of their "enemy" are worth nothing.

[Raksha]

88. I used to subscribe to that belief myself,

i.e. the belief that the only thing that makes any impression on an Arab is overwhelming force. It seems so long ago, and as a matter of fact, IT WAS. It was back during the Six-Day War when Israel was attacked by Egypt and...was there another army too? Hell, I don't even remember. It might even make some kind of sense when you're dealing with a national army: hit 'em back 10 times as hard as they hit you, and they just might think twice about attacking you the next time.

But I've come to understand that the overkill approach simply DOES NOT work when dealing with terrorists, who hide among the civilian population because they were recruited from the civilian population and are a part of it. They are people with (usually) very personal grievances that motivate their terrorist affiliation. I'm not saying there aren't international terrorists, or what you might call "professional terrorists" like bin Laden because obviously there are.

But Hamas and Hezbollah don't fit that profile. They are homegrown terrorist organizations, and the heavy-handed overkill tactics being employed by Israel are only going to increase their recruitment into the foreseeable future. It's stupid, cruel and counterproductive.

[WilliamPitt]

46. An important point

The US-Iraq/Israel-Lebanon comparison isn't completely appropriate. No agents within the borders of Iraq ever attacked US civilians within the US borders. Hezbollah has been attacking Israel from within Lebanon for a long time.

Yours isn't a 1-1 comparison.

[CuteNFuzzy]

49. I think the point remains

No excuses for murdering innocent people.

(although I agree you can't take the analogy too far)

[Justitia]

57. Yes, we have lots of emotional responses which I think come from our own

currently outraged perspective over the war in Iraq.

This is a totally different ball of wax, and there is loads of historical precedent for the events unfolding in the ME today.

IMO, We just have some folks who are having trouble disassociating our current mess in Iraq with the long-standing, never ending, Arab-Israeli conflict.

[ShortnFiery]

61. The Arab people are NOT monsters like Israel paints them ...

You can't argue this continued "Collective Punishment" without making your enemy sub-human.

I'm not buying it.

There should be an cease fire a.s.a.p. for the protection of all innocents.

[Justitia]

65. I'm w/you on the cease fire. Cooler heads need to prevail. But, here's

the thing - you will never convince some Arab states that Israel has the right to exist, or for that matter, that Jews have the right to exist. So, in response, Israel says since they cannot co-exist peacefully, they have to show they will not flinch in the face of threats. That they won't pull any punches - no matter what the rest of us think. Never underestimate that core of belief.

Now, Israel, blinded by perception that their very existence is being threatened, are steamrolling innocent civilians and Lebanese much to the horror of the rest of us. And they have done equally as horrific acts in the past.

As long as Israel insists on having an independent Israeli state in the Middle East, they will have constant opposition from those who disagree with that concept, those who point out that Israel captured land & displaced Arabic peoples, and some who think any and all Jews should be marched into the sea.

Because I am not a religious person of any persuasion, I don't get the religious connection to this constantly fought-over "Holy Land" and I'd be petitioning for my State of Israel to pick up and find a new place. That is really oversimplifying many thousands of years of history, but that is precisely my point:

We cannot view these actions through the prisms of our own, limited Western experience.

[CuteNFuzzy]

67. There was a peace plan proposed by the Saudis

Israel would be granted "normal relations" with all Arab states, recognizing Israel's right to exist, Palestinians give up Right of Return, and Israel returns to '67 borders. Hamas accepted the plan.

Israel rejected it.

[Justitia]

70. If you are referring to the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, you are mistaken.

Yes it was proposed by the Saudis and members of the Arab League endorsed it, Israel welcomed it and wanted direct talks w/Palestinians, but during the summit Hamas carried out a suicide bombing, specifically stating it was their intent to bring a halt to the peace process.

Remember, the Arab League is a different entity of nation states who have advocated for peace in the region.

[CuteNFuzzy]

72. What specifically do you think I am mistaken on?

[Justitia]

75. Israel did not reject the plan & Hamas planned a bombing during the

summit, so you are mistaken in saying "Hamas accepted it".

It was a very high profile suicide bombing - they carried it out on Passover, against a room full of elderly Jews (some Holocaust survivors) who had gathered in a hotel as they had no family to celebrate with.

In the English media the Palistinian Authority condemned the attack and in the Arabic press they praised it.

Hamas specifically claimed responsibility for the attack and proclaimed it their intention to halt the peace process.

[CuteNFuzzy]

78. Yes, Israel rejected the plan

BBC: Israel rejects Arab peace plan

Arab leaders meeting in Beirut have unanimously endorsed Saudi Arabia's peace plan for the Middle East.

Israel, however, has rejected the peace initiative, which offers it "normal relations" and full peace with Arab states, if it pulls out of all Arab land it occupied in 1967.

[Justitia]

83. Uh, after a suicide bombing the night before, it became a "non-starter"

And went absolutely nowhere. It was a very nebulous proposal at best, but it definitely got regulated to the back burner when Hamas bombed the hotel during the summit.

The official press release:

Response of FM Peres to the decisions of the Arab Summit in Beirut - 28-Mar-2002

28 Mar 2002


Response of FM Peres to the decisions of the Arab Summit in Beirut
(Communicated by the Foreign Ministry Spokesperson)
March 28, 2002

In response to questions from the press regarding the decision by the Arab Summit in Beirut to adopt the Saudi initiative, Foreign Minister Shimon Peres said:

"Israel views positively every initiative aimed at arriving at peace and normalization. In this respect, the Saudi step is an important one, but it is liable to founder if terrorism is not stopped. We cannot, of course, ignore the problematic aspects which arose at the Beirut Summit and the harsh and rejectionist language used by some of the speakers.

It is also clear that the details of every peace plan must be discussed directly between Israel and the Palestinians, and to make this possible, the Palestinian Authority must put an end to terror, the horrifying expression of which we witnessed just last night in Netanya."

[CuteNFuzzy]

85. We can debate about the reasons

But the fact still remains: Israel rejected the plan.

I take it on this one point you now admit to being mistaken?

[Justitia]

89. You do understand that the "plan" never materialized, it was a proposal

that was never even communicated in writing. The King of Jordan and the President of Egypt didn't even show up at the summit. The Palestinian Authority wasn't there either. I think you are overstating this unwritten "proposal", treating it as if it were a written truce just awaiting Israel's signature - it never got to that point, it never got anywhere. The largest players in this didn't even attend the "summit" (except Israel).

Then, the two main subjects of such a proposed plan were involved in a suicide bombing during the summit, so it went nowhere beyond the talking stage.

You admit to being mistaken that "Hamas accepted it"?

[CuteNFuzzy]

93. Again, wrong

Look, here is an article from the extremely pro-Israel Jerusalem Post:

Hamas will accept the Saudi Initiative

Please note the following:

The Hamas-led Palestinian government will accept the Saudi Initiative, thereby recognizing Israel, MK Taleb A-Sanaa told The Jerusalem Post Wednesday, following a meeting with Hamas parliamentarians.

"They are adopting the Arab Peace Initiative that was passed by the Arab League in Beirut," said A-Sanaa. "This is their plan."

All 22 members of the League of Arab States - including Syria and Saddam Hussein's Iraq - unanimously endorsed it. Israel dismissed the offer.

Even pro-Israel J-Post states that Israel dismissed the plan.

And if you object to the fact that this acceptance was recent, here is a 2002 SF Chronicle article:

Hamas would accept Saudi peace plan, spokesman says

Sunday, April 28, 2002

In a startling move, the militant Islamic movement Hamas has accepted the terms of the Saudi peace proposal and is willing to stop attacks on Israel if it returns to pre-1967 borders, a Hamas spokesman told The Chronicle.

The spokesman, Ismail Abu Shanab, said that if Israel agrees to the Saudi plan, which calls for the Jewish state to return to its pre-1967 borders in return for "normal relations" with Arab nations, Hamas will "cease all military activities."

"That would be satisfactory for all Palestinian military groups to stop and build our state, to be busy in our own affairs, and have good neighborhood with Israelis," he said.

The interview with Shanab, a member of the five-person executive committee of Hamas, took place at his home in Gaza City on Friday night. Asked if he was speaking for the entire Hamas organization, Shanab said, "Yes."

[Justitia]

94. Those points are ridiculous - the first one: 4 years later?! The second

article is an interview with ONE guy from Hamas and could not be confirmed with any other member of Hamas. It is a month after the Passover bombing and he admitted that the Israelis would most likely not go for it, but it appears he was trying to avoid Israeli retaliation for the suicide bombings by disingenuously saying they were trying to affect peace. Ludicrous, and it states as much in the exact same article.

It seems like you are desperately looking for some occasion where Israel rejected Hamas' promise not to bomb them and treating it like Israel rejects all forms of a peaceful solution. I only commented on this thread to comment on the very specific surroundings of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative and that Hamas did not "accept it" as you said, unless you contend they accepted it 4 yrs later after admitting they suicide bombed during the summit in order to stop it.

I do not want to seem an advocate for the Israeli side in all of this as I am acquainted with the history of these conflicts, but seriously, the Palestinians back then had a documented history of asking for peace right after bombing the fuck out of some place, hoping to make it look like exactly what you have postulated. The antics of Arafat in this regard are legendary. And Sharon got to a point when he refused to entertain the idea of peace because he could never take them seriously. It was intolerable for BOTH SIDES.

And here we are, again today.

[CuteNFuzzy]

145. Nothing ridiculous about it

It is stated right there in these articles. Hamas accepts the proposal, Israel dismisses it. And, that is from a pro-israel website. I'm not sure what further substantiation is required?

[Tyler Durden]

97. My point was: stop killing innocents.

We kill innocents, Israel kills innocents, Hizbollah kills innocents.

Do you really want to justify us all belonging to the same club?

I still point at the US made rocket fired from a US made F16 through the center of the red cross on the top of an ambulance.

The Geneva Convention and International Law forbids this under ANY circumstances.

In a more perfect world, the US, Israel AND Hizbollah would all stand side by side...

IN THE PRISONER'S DOCK AT THE HAGUE AS INTERNATIONAL WAR CRIMINALS.

[stepnw1f]

126. Good Post and Thread Tyler

we need to stop taking sides and look at this situation without bias. Peace will never prevail as long as fighting continues and both sides blame the other.

[malaise]

50. Ditto

That's my view from day one of this slaughter.

[Jose Diablo]

69. Agreed, they have stared at the abyss too long

It's now time to step into the abyss.

[ulysses]

71. meaning what?

[Jose Diablo]

99. Did I stutter?

I was speaking English, and that is the normal language used on this board. Maybe one of the words confused you.

Let me see; It's...now...time...to...step...into...the...abyss. Maybe the contraction "It's" confused you. "It's" means "it is".

So to pars the sentence, "it is now time"...OK this means the time is now to do something... and that something to do is "to step into the abyss"...Therefore the time is now, to step into the abyss. But who? Well, the who is implied by the OP as saying Israel has for too long stared into the abyss, meaning Israel has faced dissolution as a country for too long, and I agreed. It's now time for that country to be thrown on the trash heap of history as they have been aggressors and in truth, undemocratic for far too long.

They have had what is it, about 60 years to make peace with their neighbors and for an equal amount of time refused peace, prefering to make war, just like their benefactors in DC want them to do, because it's profitable for the war hawks in DC during war.

So Israel is setting it up for Bu$h to attack Iran, just like the neocon game plan specifies, just like a good little puppet they are.

Why do you think Israel even exists? If it wasn't for the oil, and the power elite's in this country desire to maintain a military presence in the middle east to protect the oil, do you think anyone would give a shit about Israel, except for a few PACs in DC? I doubt it.

Question is, why do you care about Israel?

[Tyler Durden]

100. I didn't think you did.

Frankly, after 50+ years of watching people waste each other over the idiotic concept of where they have drawn an artificial border on the land, I'm heartily sick and tired of the whole thing.

Childish, testosterone laden bullshit.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

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

[Tyler Durden]

106. I don't think he's crazy...

Extreme, but not crazy.

Think about this one:

Whites in one area whup on the blacks and exile them to an area next door. After decades of strife, the Whites want peace, but the blacks want to come back to where their ancestors were. The Whites say "NO WAY," because the blacks will outnumber them and dilute their power.

Now substitute Jews for Whites and Arabs for Blacks.

Hmmmmmm.

This may sound a little simplistic, but there is more than a grain of truth in it. If I were an Arab kicked out of Israel, I'd want MY home back, too.

[Jose Diablo]

113. Well, you know what the ignore button does

At least you are intellegent enough to have figured that out. Maybe you should work on your understanding of what is happening in the world, or do you prefer our country continue to make war to benefit the wealthy?

It makes no difference to me what you think. I stopped listening to ignorant people long before you came along.

Edit to add: From my Shakespearian Insult kit; Thou dissembling beef-witted mammet!!!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

128. Edit to add: From my Shakespearian Insult kit; Thou dissembling beef-witte

“It is a tale told by an idiot,full of sound and fury; signifying nothing."

[DemocratSinceBirth]

130. I Think You Spelled Intell(i)gent Wrong.

I only point it out because it's declasse to challenge the intell(i)gence of virtual strangers.

[TahitiNut]

133. Wow! I've read some personal attacks on DU, but yours is sure Top Ten.

... or is that "Bottom Ten"? :eyes: I guess the rules don't apply if one's feeling self-righteous enough, huh? :puke: (I know how it feels.)

3. Civility: Treat other members with respect. Do not post personal attacks against other members of this discussion forum.
4. Content: Do not post messages that are inflammatory, extreme, divisive, incoherent, or otherwise inappropriate. Do not engage in anti-social, disruptive, or trolling behavior. Do not post broad-brush, bigoted statements. The moderators and administrators work very hard to enforce some minimal standards regarding what content is appropriate. But please remember that this is a large and diverse community that includes a broad range of opinion. People who are easily offended, or who are not accustomed to having their opinions (including deeply personal convictions) challenged may not feel entirely comfortable here. A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum.

[bling bling]

135. Maybe so.

Reading the radical assertion that Israel deserves to be on the trash heap of history was so beyond belief to me that I wasn't feeling level-headed at the moment. Granted, #3 and #4 may apply to my post but I think they would also apply to the poster I was responding to as well. His/her response to the person asking for clarification was rude and disrepectful (Do I stutter??? Followed by a sarcastic condesending response). Furthermore, the content calling for the end to Israel was extreme, racist, and divisive.

[TahitiNut]

137. That's what the 'Alert' button is for.

We have moderators so we don't need vigilantes. :shrug: It's far better to focus on the message than on the messenger.

[bling bling]

139. I'll try to keep that in mind.

I become irrational after reading posts that literally stun, shock, and disgust the hell out of me (such as advocating the extinction of Israel). As a result, I think it's bringing out the ugliness in me.

[ulysses]

119. no.

I just wanted a little clarity about what you meant, and whether or not your meaning deserved the consideration your attitude demands. It doesn't.

So to pars the sentence

I think you mean "parse".

meaning Israel has faced dissolution as a country for too long

I don't think that's what the OP meant. I could be wrong.

It's now time for that country to be thrown on the trash heap of history

A grandiose and stupid idea.

Question is, why do you care about Israel?

In part, because I don't believe your simplistic explanation for its existence.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

127. Did I stutter?

LOL

[DaveT]

77. This "defending ourselves" line is a crock.

Just as it was impossible to say anything good about Saddam Hussein, it is equally impossible to say anything good about Hezbollah. So what?

Since when do we measure ourselves by the moral standards of terrorists?


The "argument" that Israel is "defending itself" by bombing Beirut is an insult to the world's intelligence. It is on a par with, "We are fighting them there so that we don't have to fight them here."

It is a cynical lie. It is illogical on its face. Israel's loyal friends should hide their heads in shame for repeating this ludicrous line of crap.

It is also a lie wrapped within a much larger lie. Not only is Israel bombing Beirut for reasons other than "defending itself" from Hezbollah -- the alleged strategic rationale of trying to induce Lebanon to exercise its sovereignty and disarm Hezbollah is a crock of crap as well.

Israel knows better than anybody that destroying the infrastructure of Lebanon while collateral damage claims hundreds of fatalities will never induce the Lebanese polity to co-operate with Israel against Hezbollah. Nobody on earth is that stupid. Not even the American neoconservatives who so laughably claimed that the Yankee invaders of Iraq would be welcomed as liberators are that divorced from reality.

No, Israel sees the chaos of sectarian civil war in Iraq, and hopes to replicate it throughout the middle east. Instead of stable governments in Beirut, Damascus, Tehran and the rest of the middle east -- Israel wants regional chaos, pitting Arab against Persian, Sunni against Shiite, secular against religious, authoritarian against democratic.

General Shinshecki knew -- as did almost the entire world -- that America invading Iraq with less than 400,000 troops would lead to chaos. The various cover stories for that war (WMD, spreading democracy, payback for attempting to assassinate Poppy) were all ludicrous on their face. To this day, most American leftists just think that Bush is an idiot and his advisers are lunatics (which are both defensible notions, by the way), but refuse to give them enough credit to suspect that they might really have a coherent strategy that provides perpetual war profits for their sponsors and a long term ambition to re-colonize the entire region.

Israel is launching Phase II of this grand Armageddon Strategy.

Chaos reigns in Iraq; and it is about to reign again in Lebanon. The propaganda has already started "linking" these two separate provinces of Hell to the terrorist regimes in Syria and Iran.

Once some kind of war can be hoked up with those two countries, we will see American and Israeli bases on the soil of each of those countries while local government by irregular militia provides what little civic life as will exist.

After a decade or so of this perpetual chaos, somehow a well behaved polity will emerge across the region -- the swamp will have been drained in the cutesy metaphor of the American neocons.



If I were an Israeli, looking back at 58 years of war, I might be ready for this Armageddon Strategy. Piecemeal wars and perpetually faltering peace negotiations have done nothing to make Israel a secure and normal country. It is seems to be eternally under siege.

I honestly don't know how I would feel if I had to live with suicide bombers and night riding rocketeers.



But a truthful rendition of the Armageddon Strategy won't play in Peoria. So the propaganda gets catapulted -- WMD, democracy, self-defense, collective punishment -- all of it morally questionable, but all of it bogus.


As an American, I might even support a frank declaration of war against all the backward cultures of the world -- if I thought we could win it.

But we can't.

And neither can Israel.

Which is why these bogus rationales are so despicable. They are all based on the assumption that the American and Israeli military might can remake the civilization of half a billion or so human beings -- and the further assumption that the poor dumb masses won't support World War III if it looks like we started it.

The fantasy of infinite power is the most dangerous delusion on earth.

[PATRICK]

90. If we keep just to the immediate history

it gets a lot clearer that the "defense" we are talking about is linked directly to WH policy- which they wanted and abetted. The Iranians and Shiites and all their connections are emboldened and threatened simultaneously. Thanks to Bush. They are poised in their own "defense" against a pretty well advertised imminent attack and will not go down like Bunker Breath Saddam. They are being pre-emptive in ways not to directly provoke the US but advertise what they will do in the region.

Whether Bush does attack Iran or not(which do Israeli hardliners fear more?) the Israelis are responding at the first provocation to pre-empt the inevitable widescale attack from neighbors which in the context of a larger Iranian war would make this look like a tea party.

So Israel is reduced in Bushworld to another ghetto gang, with its only ally a lame duck crook who has no real loyalty to anyone in the region. A pretty sorry state, to think you can only shoot your way out of a
trap that was supposed to be long term "pacification" strategy. But that is exactly what you get for anything crafted by the likes of fading strongmen like Cheney and Sharon. Abysmal, cataclysmic, despairing failure, Macbeth-style. The consequences of their mess is that it must very well appear in that PNAC vision Israel has committed itself to great loss and no choices.

[murray hill farm]

80. The actual Nietzche quote is this.........

everyone always gets it wrong. It is "If you look too long into the abyss, the abyss stares back into you". Whatever, I agree with you....and we supported and continue to support that way too long look into the abyss.

[Tyler Durden]

95. Different translations.

Whatever the translation, they are becoming the monster they hunt.

[murray hill farm]

110. So true!

And of course you are right about the diff translations...duh! Ha!

[leftofthedial]

87. I agree

they have become the very thing they hate

[Homer Wells]

105. Kicked and Recommended

been thinking about writing something like that myself; thanks for having the cojones to say it.

:toast:

[Tyler Durden]

108. Thanks for the comment...

...but I'm just tired of the bloodshed. I wish we could see all of them at The Hague.

[Douglas Carpenter]

107. There is an offer for peace between Arab countries and Israel:

There is an offer for peace between Arab countries and Israel:

This specific offer was unanimously affirmed by the Arab League and immediately endorsed by the Palestinian leadership in March 2002. However, more or less the same plan has been offered by the Arab League and endorsed enthusiastically by the Palestinian leadership going back much, much longer:

link:

http://www.mideastweb.org/saudipeace.htm

"The Arab Peace Initiative
(translation by Reuters).

The Council of Arab States at the Summit Level at its 14th Ordinary Session, reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extra-Ordinary Arab Summit that a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab countries, to be achieved in accordance with international legality, and which would require a comparable commitment on the part of the Israeli government.

Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in which his highness presented his initiative calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land-for-peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel.

Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:

1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.

2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:

I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194.

III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:

I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region

II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries

5. Calls upon the government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighborliness and provide future generations with security, stability and prosperity

6. Invites the international community and all countries and organizations to support this initiative.

7. Requests the chairman of the summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the secretary general of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim states and the European Union."
___________

And this is the offer Israel made at Camp David in 2000:

link:

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1113

"The annexations and security arrangements would divide the West Bank into three disconnected cantons. In exchange for taking fertile West Bank lands that happen to contain most of the region’s scarce water aquifers, Israel offered to give up a piece of its own territory in the Negev Desert--about one-tenth the size of the land it would annex--including a former toxic waste dump.

Because of the geographic placement of Israel’s proposed West Bank annexations, Palestinians living in their new “independent state” would be forced to cross Israeli territory every time they traveled or shipped goods from one section of the West Bank to another, and Israel could close those routes at will. Israel would also retain a network of so-called “bypass roads” that would crisscross the Palestinian state while remaining sovereign Israeli territory, further dividing the West Bank.

Israel was also to have kept "security control" for an indefinite period of time over the Jordan Valley, the strip of territory that forms the border between the West Bank and neighboring Jordan. Palestine would not have free access to its own international borders with Jordan and Egypt--putting Palestinian trade, and therefore its economy, at the mercy of the Israeli military.

Had Arafat agreed to these arrangements, the Palestinians would have permanently locked in place many of the worst aspects of the very occupation they were trying to bring to an end. For at Camp David, Israel also demanded that Arafat sign an "end-of-conflict" agreement stating that the decades-old war between Israel and the Palestinians was over and waiving all further claims against Israel"

snip:"In April 2002, the countries of the Arab League--from moderate Jordan to hardline Iraq--unanimously agreed on a Saudi peace plan centering around full peace, recognition and normalization of relations with Israel in exchange for a complete Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 borders as well as a "just resolution" to the refugee issue. Palestinian negotiator Nabil Sha'ath declared himself "delighted" with the plan. "The proposal constitutes the best terms of reference for our political struggle," he told the Jordan Times (3/28/02)."

read full article:

The Myth of the Generous Offer
Distorting the Camp David negotiations

By Seth Ackerman

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1113

[EVDebs]

111. Israel's selective assassinations program was more effective than what's

going on right now. What were they thinking ? Fire all of your guns at once and explode into space ...

[cigsandcoffee]

115. Nietzsche was an asshole. n/t

[Clarkie1]

116. Strongly disagree.

Israel is not deliberately targeting civilians. Israel is defending itself from attack. You cannot say that Israel is less moral because more people have died on one side that the other. This conflict has been going on for thousands of years...right now, Israel wants peace, but they are not being allowed to live in peace.

If only Hezbollah and Hamas and the like would stop attacking Israel, there would be peace. It is up to them.

[Tyler Durden]

123. Riiiight.

And if the Jews in WWII would have just worn their Stars and shut up, there would have been no concentration camps.

Don't you see? The names have changed, and the degree is lessened, but the tactics are always the same.

[Taxloss]

132. Your comparing Hezbollah to Holocaust victims?

For shame.

[kiki]

136. Yeah, cause EVERY SINGLE BOMB

is hitting a card-carrying, certified Hezbollah member, right?

Oh yeah, my bad, the ratio of innocent civilians to actual Hezbollah being hit is apparently about 30 to 1.

But of course, every post supporting Arabs or Muslims is actually a publicity drive for Hezbollah.
:eyes:

[Taxloss]

140. What's the number one obstacle to a ceasefire right now?

I'll give you a clue: it begins with H.

[Tyler Durden]

141. NO, I am NOT.

I am stating that a group victimized by so much evil and so many nations has a lot of gall behaving like their oppressors did.

AND, I am advocating for the INNOCENT VICTIMS of the aggression in the middle east, be they Lebanese or Iraqi.

And YOU should be ashamed for your "Protecting ourselves," attitude toward baby killers, no matter what their nation or ethnicity.

[Marie26]

143. Uh

I'm missing the analogy there.

[Tyler Durden]

144. Allow me to clarify my opinion:

Here's an analogy:

I hate my ex-wife, she hates me. Occasionally, she throws a nasty little meaningless lawsuit at me that she invariably loses.

But it still causes emotional trauma to the kids (I have custody), it costs me $1000+ a throw in lawyer's fees, and I can't recoup anything without sueing her in Civil Court, where she can claim poverty (her current husband funds her legal adventures).

So I guess I have the moral High Ground to do anything I want, legally or semi-legally to make her life Hell simply because I CAN.

Right?

WRONG.

There are avenues I can follow, it's just that they are expensive and difficult. If I don't choose to follow them, that, unfortunately, is MY problem.

There are ways to do what Israel wants to do without murdering hundreds of innocent civilians. Send in MOSSAD. Comply with UN Resolutions, THEN take their case to the UN: the militants/terrorist rely on them all the time; play their game and WIN.

Or keep bombing civilians, ambulances, and UN outposts; thereby insuring that you will keep rising on the world's asshole scale to where you eventually pass even the United States.

[Guaranteed]

121. Yes, BUT:

"A man looks in the abyss, there is nothing staring back at him. At that moment he discovers his character. That keeps the man out of the abyss."

[malaise]

122. Lovely post n/t

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

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