Couldn't Hamas and Hezbollah bring peace in an instant...

[cigsandcoffee]

...if they loudly and publicly vowed to cease all rocket and terrorist attacks against Israel (and kept their word)? Israel would have no choice but to withdraw.

That seems to me to be the absolute fastest recipe for peace. How can those groups be convinced to offer an end to hostilities and call for harmony in the region?

[aquart]

1. LOLOLOLOLOL!

You're so funny.

[cigsandcoffee]

4. I don't mean to be funny.

I mean it to be taken at face value. If the leader of Hezbollah came out tomorrow and said he would respect Israel's territory and cease all terrorist and rocket attacks within its borders, wouldn't peace break out in an instant?

Is that too much to expect of their leaders? To ask for peace and stop using terrorist attacks? Why accept their militance, and even expect it?

[Cameron27]

73. cigsandcoffee

You've found the solution, simple but brilliant.



Kicked and recommended

[zonkers]

96. I doubt Israel will accept a ceasefire unless rocket launch positions are

abandoned also and this pretty much means a total pullout from the south. Not at this point.

[Cameron27]

99. I know...

but if say, Nazrallah had a revelation and proclaimed peace from this day forward, the world would rejoice, Hezbollah would be praised, and Manna from Heaven would rain down upon the ME.

I'm being facetious, but seriously, Nazrallah has peace in the palms of his hands if he really wants it.

[cigsandcoffee]

184. Indeed. He'd get the Nobel Prize.

...and bring honor and support to his people.

[Maestro]

225. In all seriousness, he'd be assaassinated by

the fundamental muslims probably as a collaborator or as someone who gave in to Israel. An extreme conservative Jew assassinated Rabin because he perceived Rabin as being soft. I am not sure if peace can ever come to the ME unless a third party comes in to grant homelands to Palestinians and then Israel's right to survive is recognized.

[cigsandcoffee]

226. It bothers me that you are probably right.

If a Muslim leader can't call for peace in the ME...while still opposing Israel with nonviolent resistance, then we are in for a long and bloody war until one side or the other wins.

I hate to think that the fundamentalists hold that much sway over ME politics, but I guess they do. Where the hell are the moderates?

[ileus]

162. They both are terrorist groups, they get paid to kill.

Just like any thing in life follow the money.

[smacky44]

185. Israel could bring peace in an instant also. But they won't

[KOBUK]

195. How might they do that ? *

*

[mykpart]

2. There would be no problem if they would all behave like Christians.

Sorry, that's a very old joke, but I couldn't resist!

[reincarnated]

52. For Real!! What happened to tun the other cheek?!? n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

3. Just think, what if we could get all the nations to sign peace treaties

with each other, fully normalizing relations, recognizing each other's right to exist, pledging not to attack one another and also pledging not to tolerate criminal terrorists operating from within their territory?

I can't understand why so many people are clearly opposed to PEACE. Lets get everyone to sign treaties to that effect, and end the de facto state of war that has existed for the past 60 years!

[Erika]

5. And nations would sign peace agreements as

well as insurgents/freedom fighters/ terrorists or whatever they are called. All would be on an equal basis.

[Solo_in_MD]

102. Hezbollah is not a recognized governement and can not sign a peace treaty

All the other militias in Lebanon have disarmed in favor of their national governments except Hezbollah. Nasarallah has stated he will scorch the earth of Lebanon before Hezbollah disarms.

[Warren DeMontague]

193. Re-read what I wrote:

get all the nations to sign peace treaties with each other, fully normalizing relations, recognizing each other's right to exist, pledging not to attack one another and also pledging not to tolerate criminal terrorists operating from within their territory?

That would be predicated upon someone doing something to keep Hezbollah from attacking or terrorizing.

And I think Nasrallah *IS* scorching the Earth. While I think Israel has overreacted, I fully lay the blame for this situation's origins at the feet of Hezbollah.

[everythingsxen]

6. Yes, that is a nice dream... but it will never happen.

Just like if Israel were to unilaterally withdraw back to the original borders Hamas and Hezbollah (and more importantly their backers Iran and Syria) would continue to attack Israel. They are utterly committed to the destruction of the state of Israel. And one can infer a lot from the various comments the leaders of those groups have made about what they want to do to Jewish people in general.

There is no way they will rest. They are on a mission from God.

(In all fairness, Syria technically isn't on a mission from God, but the Ba'ath party is the bastard son of the Nazi party....)

[Erika]

8. If Israel would commit itself to peace, violations of others

would be put down.

[cigsandcoffee]

10. Maybe Israel is incurably unreasonable.

...and incapable of making the first move...

Maybe we should work on Hezbollah and Hamas, instead. They could make a very public call for peace by offering an end to their hostilities, and that would surely shame Israel in to withdrawing. The global pressure on them would be enourmous - far moreso than it is now.

They could make peace. In an instant.

[Erika]

11. Israel is much more prominent than insurgents

A peace message sent by them would be most powerful.

[cigsandcoffee]

14. Maybe so...

...but imagine the global response to a peace message from Hezbollah! Israel would come under massive pressure to take them up on the offer.

If they did it tomorrow, we'd have an indefinite and lasting peace in the region. I can't think of a more simple solution to the problems there.

[Erika]

18. The world would listen to Israel

but not a terrorist group.

[cigsandcoffee]

24. I very much disagree.

A peace offer by the leader of Hezbollah would be in bold print on the front page of every newspaper on the globe. It would be an enormous and pivotal development in this conflict.

[Erika]

27. Israel is the country. Not side groups. Who listens to side

groups? Israel could change the course of the world.

[cigsandcoffee]

32. Side groups?

They have an enormous platform. People will listen. Israel would be forced to withdraw by global and public outcry.

http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLG,GGLG:2006-12,GGLG:en&q=Nasrallah&sa=N&tab=wn

That man holds the key to peace in the palm of his hand.

[madeline_con]

80. Israel is more accustomed to using force, not being forced. n/t

[cigsandcoffee]

113. Indeed, but a call for peace from Hezbollah would shame them...

...and yes, force their hand. All Hezbollah would have to do is publicly renounce terrorist and rocket attacks, and Israel would have no choice but to end hostilities and join them in a peace process - if they didn't, world pressure on Israel would become overbearing.

[madeline_con]

78. It would mean so much more if Israel made the offer first.

Everyone knows and repsects the sincerity of Israel.

[cigsandcoffee]

118. I disagree....

It would be so unexpected and powerful coming from Hezbollah and Hamas that it might change the entire dynamic of the conflict - from one negotiated by war to one handled through peace.

[everythingsxen]

19. I agree with you, but they never will. (NT)

[madeline_con]

76. Israel is always influenced by world opinion.

[everythingsxen]

16. It would be powerful, but Hezbollah would never do it...

they would never stick to any peace. They are fanatics. (I realise that is a sweeping generalization, but all sources biased and unbiased seem to agree on that point)

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[Erika]

30. Who said that? n/t

[PA Democrat]

101. This map depicts a major issue- the elephant in the room that no

one wishes to talk about. Israel continues to build more settlements on Palestinian land in the West Bank. As recently as May, expansion of the boundaries of 4 existing settlements was approved by the Israeli government.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-21-israel-settlements_x.htm

Last month, Israel began construction on a new settlement deep in the West Bank.

http://wcbs880.com/pages/42306.php

There has to be movement by both sides to make peace and the issue of these settlements must be addressed. There is no good guy in this conflict. Both sides are utterly despicable in their actions, and use the other side's wrongs to justify their own atrocities.

[cigsandcoffee]

116. Of course that's an issue....

....but continued terrorism gives Israel an excuse to keep the pressure up and refuse Palestinian demands. By calling for peace and swearing off terrorism (and thus publicly shaming the Israelis), Hamas and Hezbollah would be in a much more powerful position to make gains at the negotiating table - wouldn't they?

[PA Democrat]

130. The problem is that with hundreds of thousands of Israelis living in

illegal settlements, it's pretty much a given that Israel will not give all of the land back. That's been a huge sticking point in all of the negotiations. Both sides have violated the conditions of the so-called road map to peace. Israel was supposed to stop expanding and building new settlements and they have failed to do so. Attacks have continued on both sides.

It's a horrible situation. I brought up the settlement issue because it is rarely covered in the US media, how these settlements with their special access roads and security check points have disrupted the lives of Palestinians. People trying to get to their jobs, or to the hospital face 4 hours of waiting at checkpoints for what should be a 10 minute trip.

The whole situation is a mess, with each side retaliating against the other and increasing the hatred, and the cycle of retribution goes on and on.

I doubt that Hamas and Hezbollah laying down their arms, if they would do that, would lead to a lasting peace. Not when there are so many other unresolved issues involved.

[cigsandcoffee]

147. But Hamas and Hezbollah perpetrate the majority of...

...the anti-Israeli violence. Of course their laying down their arms would bring peace, as Israel would be under enormous global pressure to respond to that overture. Hezbollah and Hamas continuing their end of the violence sure as hell isn't going to lead to peace. But adopting the approach of Gandhi might well end with Israel retreating to the 1967 borders while under international pressure. They wouldn't have the violence to use as an excuse.

[PA Democrat]

153. Olmert has sent pretty clear signals that he has NO intentions of

returning to 1967 borders.

BEITAR ILLIT, West Bank (AP) — Officials said Sunday that Israel has approved plans to expand four Jewish settlements in the West Bank, a practice the United States has opposed in the past.
The settlements slated for expansion lie within areas that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert hopes to incorporate within Israel's final borders. The United States, which opposes settlement activity in the West Bank, has not endorsed Olmert's plan.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-05-21-israel-settlements_x.htm

[Iktomiwicasa]

216. Lot of good...

...that would do. Terrorist organizations aren't well known for sticking to their agreements.

[everythingsxen]

13. Why?

Hezbollah has been attacking for years and Israel has complained to the UN and the UN did nothing.

[Erika]

25. So why doesn't Israel take the adult role

and offer peace and conditions? Kind of like treating school kids.

[cigsandcoffee]

28. Apparently they won't.

Can't we then expect the public and powerful leaders of Hezbollah and Hamas to act like compassionate adults who want peace for their people? If not, please tell me why not.

[Erika]

33. I would think elected governments would have more weight than

others? Do you disagree?

[cigsandcoffee]

38. In this situation, I think they carry equal weight.

The first side to offer an end to hostilities would surely get a very large platform in this very public war. I'd even say it would have a much larger impact if Hezbollah and Hamas offered to stop the hostilities, because nobody seems to expect it from them.

[Erika]

47. No, Israel is the recognized government

and the power in the area. It would show Israel had compassion and caring for those who disagreed with some of their policies. It would be a gracious gesture.

[madeline_con]

83. Israel has won the moral high ground with those who could have

made a difference, and they sent them more bombs.

[madeline_con]

81. They've written over 100 sanctions, but Israel ignores them. n/t

[everythingsxen]

205. Too true!

That one sanction not allowing them to have a parade was particularly damning!

As was the follow up resolution condemning Israel for having the parade anyway!

[eridani]

90. They stopped in 2000--

--after Israel withdrew from Lebanon, and didn't start again until the recent invasion.

[Lurking Dem]

174. No they didn't.

They even kidnapped soldiers to exchange for prisoners. Israel got back their dead bodies in return.

[eridani]

212. I said they stopped bombing, not kidnapping

Israel was doing its own kidnapping as well. There are a minimum of 9000 Palestinians and other Arabs in the Israeli versions of Gitmo. If they were bombing, why are northern Israelis now griping about the fact that their bomb shelters haven't been properly maintained since 2000?

[PaDem]

191. well I'll be............

I wonder what could have motivated Hezbollah or Hamas to ever in a million years consider being antagonistic towards Israel?

[everythingsxen]

206. Hamas has reasonable motives for being upset...

Hezbollah on the other hand... they are a genocidal terrorist group.

[PaDem]

207. whether they are or aren't matters not.............

what matters is what the overwhelming majority of Middle East Arabs think.

[JerseygirlCT]

103. Until the goal of both sides is peace, this won't happen

Right now, Israel's main goal is security.

Hamas and Hezbollah's? Total annihilation of Israel.

They're rather at odds.

[everythingsxen]

208. BINGO

And given those 2 choices:

Extermination of Jews/Israel

or

Peace and Security for Israel

Which choice do you make? To me there is only one choice.

[Snivi Yllom]

220. ummmm, Israel did withdraw from Lebanon

Hezbollah broke the deal

[PDJane]

15. Oh, that's a line of .........

non-chemical fertilizer.

Hizbollah was a by-product of Israel's actions, in the same way as the Taliban is a by-product of American policy and American funding (Carter signed the document that gave the Taliban its original fuding, as a way to keep Russia under control).

Israel has NEVER given anything to the Palestinians......even the offer of a Palestinian land did not give the Palestinians control of their land, their aquifiers, or their destiny. The failure of those negotiations was never in question. The offer could not have been accepted.

In fact, the intifada had nothing to do with Camp David, but on the facts on the ground, including unfair water allocations. It was NOT a peace process, and the Palestinians were quite aware of it.

[cigsandcoffee]

22. But what does Hezbollah have to lose by calling for peace?

Do you think Israel would endure the enormous global pressure they'd come under if they kept up the aggression in the wake of a peace offer from Hezbollah?

Such an offer would invoke the power of Gandhi.

[madeline_con]

84. Face, for one thing.

[Warren DeMontague]

97. Another thing, they can't have negotiate peace with them whom they have

sworn to destroy. It's the same thing with Hamas.

Until they get over their fetish for eliminating the State of Israel, they're going to be tough to negotiate with. To say the least.

[cigsandcoffee]

115. Face? I can't expect them to swear to keep killing....

...just so they can save face. Do you?

And anyway, imagine how their stature would be raised on the world stage if they called for peace and vowed to end terrorist operations. Money and support would flow like water to them.

[Taoschick]

128. Why would anyone give them money?

Who is going to send them money to wipe out Israel if they repudiate their very reason for existence?

[cigsandcoffee]

150. The world supports peace movements.

If Hamas and Hezbollah wrapped themselves in the flag of Gandhi style peaceful resistence, funds would flow in from all around the world and help the people there.

[Taoschick]

209. Um...

If Hezbollah and Hammas laid down their weapons and decided they no longer wanted to drive the Jews into the sea, there would be no Hezbollah and no Hammas. They only exist to fight Israel. Without them, the Israelis would only need to worry about the actual countries that surround them, not the terrorist groups they harbor.

[cigsandcoffee]

222. That's not entirely true.

Hamas is the elected leading party of the Palestinians, and Hezbollah is represented in the Lebanese parliament. The groups could become a peaceful resistance movement and still maintain their organization.

[reincarnated]

20. It wasn't until 1881 and later that the Jews were buying and "settling" ..

land and

"The establishment of Zionism led to the Second Aliyah (1904–1914) with the influx of around 40,000 Jews. In 1917, the British Foreign Secretary Arthur J. Balfour issued the Balfour Declaration that "view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people." In 1920, Palestine became a League of Nations mandate administered by Britain."

So you see, its ludacris to pretend not to aknowledge these facts..

[madeline_con]

85. Zionism

"We must expropriate gently the private property on the state assigned to us. We shall try to spirit the penniless population across the border by procuring employment for it in the transit countries, while denying it employment in our country. The property owners will come over to our side. Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discretely and circumspectly. Let the owners of the immoveable property believe that they are cheating us, selling us things for more than they are worth. But we are not going to sell them anything back."

Herzl

[Warren DeMontague]

95. "its ludacris"? You mean this guy?

Good god, Frozen Pizza man. I see you've been sent on your way, but not before delivering a stunning (if unintentional) rebuke to the drastic public education funding cuts this nation has endured for the past several decades.

[TomInTib]

7. Last Night I Had the Strangest Dream

Last Night I Had The Strangest Dream
words and music by Ed McCurdy

Last night I had the strangest dream
I'd ever dreamed before
I dreamed the world had all agreed
To put an end to war

I dreamed I saw a mighty room
Filled with women and men
And the paper they were signing said
They'd never fight again

And when the paper was all signed
And a million copies made
They all joined hands and bowed their heads
And grateful pray'rs were prayed

And the people in the streets below
Were dancing 'round and 'round
While swords and guns and uniforms
Were scattered on the ground

Last night I had the strangest dream
I'd never dreamed before
I dreamed the world had all agreed
To put an end to war.

TRO-©1950,1951 & 1955 Almanac Music, Inc.
New York, N.Y. Copyrights renewed
Used by permission

[Erika]

9. How beautiful n/t

[TomInTib]

12. Pre-Korean War and post- WWII

It didn't start with us and, hopefully, it will not end here.

This fight (anti-fight?) is ours to wage.

[Clarkie1]

21. Israel is on board with that; unfortunately Hezbollah is not. nt

[Erika]

29. Israel is on board for what?

[Clarkie1]

36. The sentiments expressed in the beautiful poem.

It's what Israel wants. Unfortuntately, Hezbollah doesn't want to stop fighting. They want Israel destroyed.

[Erika]

45. They can be won over through love and peace per Ghandi

We need to change our thinking to a peace mode rather than a warring mode. It will help us all.

[Clarkie1]

46. Well, Israel is a peaceful country and people.

So, it would seem it is Hezbollah that needs to change their thinking to a mode that accepts the existence of Israel, and the right of Israelis to live in peace.

Unfortunately, an organization like Hezbollah, which delights in Lebanese civilian casualties and cowardly places their militiamen between civilians and soldiers on the other side, prefers war to peace.

If only Hezbollah were more like Israel and loved their own childen as much as the Israelis love theirs...but that is not the case, and as John Kerry (for one) recently said: Hezbollah needs to be destroyed. It will take military force as well as political force to destroy them.

Negotiating with Hezbollah is as foolhardy as negotiating with Nazis, and clearly Israel has made a strategic decision that they are done with all such nonesense. In the long run, it's the only path to peace.

Unless of course Hezbollah stops their genocidal quest and begins acting like Ghandi. Of course, it was not Ghandis goal to annihilate a country and people, so it would require not only changing tactics, but changing beliefs on Hezbollah's part.

[Erika]

54. Why would you expect a terrorist organization to act reasonable?

Israel needs to be the adult in the situation.

[Clarkie1]

57. Meaning they should not target the terrorists? nt

[Erika]

60. Why do you say that? n/t

[Clarkie1]

61. What do you mean by "be the adult?" nt

[Erika]

67. One takes the role of the adult and supervises the other

as the child. No venom, no killing, just adult reasoning and mentoring. Guiding the child in their search for adulthood. It is a very common phrase.

[Clarkie1]

69. OMG...you can' t be serious.

You cannot not reason with someone when they have a gun pointed to your head and are pulling on the trigger.

[Erika]

72. The thought is to establish control before one points the gun

at the other.

[Clarkie1]

75. The gun is already pointed. Too late.

Hezbollah needs to be taken out, and it's going to require a political as well as military solution. The Lebanese government must expel leaders of Hezbollah from government and try them as criminals. The international community must aid in this effort by providing aid and assistance. Hezbollah must not be permitted to be a terrorist social service agency operating autonomously out of control of the Lebanese government ever again.

[Erika]

79. It is never too late to establish authority in a humane style

Much like cops who talk killers into surrendering. Think about it.

[Clarkie1]

82. What about when the killers would rather die than surrender? nt

[eridani]

92. Why did this "genocidal" quest wait until 1986?

Israel created Hezbollah by invading Lebanon in 1982. Hezbollah was founded four years later, with no other goal than getting Israel out of Lebanon.

Homemade rockets = Hitler's war machine? On what planet?

[Iktomiwicasa]

217. "They can be won over through love and peace per Ghandi"

Bullshit. Radical Islam seeks the destruction of the west, Israel in particular. They laugh at peaceniks while they saw off their heads.

[TomInTib]

37. C'mon, Hezbollah is throwing stones, Israel is launching boulders...

and we are paying for it in every form imaginable.

This thing is so fucked up that it must stop before it consumes us all

[Clarkie1]

41. How else would you propose Israel attacks those who are attacking Israel?

You do understand that Hezbollah has been condemed by the U.N. this week for deliberately placing themselves amongst civilians in order to cause more civilian casualties, and less Hezbollah militia casualties.

Hezbollah is proud of the Lebanese civilian deaths. They are all matrys for the cause to them. You do understand that, right?

[reincarnated]

49. Israel has been condemned by the UN more than Hezbollah.. n/t

[Clarkie1]

53. Shame on the U.N. then if that is true. nt

[reincarnated]

64. Holy Crap I hope you are being sarcastic..

1955-1992:
* Resolution 106: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for Gaza raid".
* Resolution 111: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people".
* Resolution 127: " . . . 'recommends' Israel suspends it's 'no-man's zone' in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 162: " . . . 'urges' Israel to comply with UN decisions".
* Resolution 171: " . . . determines flagrant violations' by Israel in its attack on Syria".
* Resolution 228: " . . . 'censures' Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control".
* Resolution 237: " . . . 'urges' Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees".
* Resolution 248: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan".
* Resolution 250: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem".
* Resolution 251: " . . . 'deeply deplores' Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250".
* Resolution 252: " . . . 'declares invalid' Israel's acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital".
* Resolution 256: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli raids on Jordan as 'flagrant violation".
* Resolution 259: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation".
* Resolution 262: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for attack on Beirut airport".
* Resolution 265: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan".
* Resolution 267: " . . . 'censures' Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem".
*Resolution 270: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon".
* Resolution 271: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem".
* Resolution 279: " . . . 'demands' withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 280: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli's attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 285: " . . . 'demands' immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon".
* Resolution 298: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's changing of the status of Jerusalem".
* Resolution 313: " . . . 'demands' that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 316: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 317: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon".
* Resolution 332: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's repeated attacks against Lebanon".
* Resolution 337: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violating Lebanon's sovereignty".
* Resolution 347: " . . . 'condemns' Israeli attacks on Lebanon".
* Resolution 425: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 427: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon.
* Resolution 444: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces".
* Resolution 446: " . . . 'determines' that Israeli settlements are a 'serious
obstruction' to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 450: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon".
* Resolution 452: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories".
* Resolution 465: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's settlements and asks all member
states not to assist Israel's settlements program".
* Resolution 467: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's military intervention in Lebanon".
* Resolution 468: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of
two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return".
* Resolution 469: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's failure to observe the
council's order not to deport Palestinians".
* Resolution 471: " . . . 'expresses deep concern' at Israel's failure to abide
by the Fourth Geneva Convention".
* Resolution 476: " . . . 'reiterates' that Israel's claim to Jerusalem are 'null and void'".
* Resolution 478: " . . . 'censures (Israel) in the strongest terms' for its
claim to Jerusalem in its 'Basic Law'".
* Resolution 484: " . . . 'declares it imperative' that Israel re-admit two deported
Palestinian mayors".
* Resolution 487: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel for its attack on Iraq's
nuclear facility".
* Resolution 497: " . . . 'decides' that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan
Heights is 'null and void' and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith".
* Resolution 498: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon".
* Resolution 501: " . . . 'calls' on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops".
* Resolution 509: " . . . 'demands' that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon".
* Resolution 515: " . . . 'demands' that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and
allow food supplies to be brought in".
* Resolution 517: " . . . 'censures' Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions
and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon".
* Resolution 518: " . . . 'demands' that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon".
* Resolution 520: " . . . 'condemns' Israel's attack into West Beirut".
* Resolution 573: " . . . 'condemns' Israel 'vigorously' for bombing Tunisia
in attack on PLO headquarters.
* Resolution 587: " . . . 'takes note' of previous calls on Israel to withdraw
its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw".
* Resolution 592: " . . . 'strongly deplores' the killing of Palestinian students
at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops".
* Resolution 605: " . . . 'strongly deplores' Israel's policies and practices
denying the human rights of Palestinians.
* Resolution 607: " . . . 'calls' on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly
requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention.
* Resolution 608: " . . . 'deeply regrets' that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians".
* Resolution 636: " . . . 'deeply regrets' Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians.
* Resolution 641: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 672: " . . . 'condemns' Israel for violence against Palestinians
at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount.
* Resolution 673: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's refusal to cooperate with the United
Nations.
* Resolution 681: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's resumption of the deportation of
Palestinians.
* Resolution 694: " . . . 'deplores' Israel's deportation of Palestinians and
calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return.
* Resolution 726: " . . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of Palestinians.
* Resolution 799: ". . . 'strongly condemns' Israel's deportation of 413 Palestinians
and calls for their immediate return.

[Clarkie1]

65. Nope, not being sarcastic. nt

[TomInTib]

66. I would have Israel respond with total obliteration...

White Phosphorus, rocket strikes on fleeing families, etc.

[Clarkie1]

68. You do realize Hezbollah deliberately places themselves

among the highest number of civilians possible, to maximize the deaths of innocent men, women, and children, of course.

[TomInTib]

74. But nothing, NOTHING,...

excuses what hell they are raining down on the innocent peoples of Palestine.

Hezbollah may be hiding amongst the populace, but what justifies killing innocent folks in the faint hope that they might - just might be sheltering Hezbollah guerillas?

[JerseygirlCT]

105. And you don't think that Hezbollah would hesitate to use any

arms at its disposal?

They're not holding back, hoping for peace here. They might not be as well armed as Israel -- being a terrorist organization and not a state. But they won't hesitate to throw anything they have at Israel.

[Clarkie1]

17. YES, YES, YES, YES, YES, a thousand times yes!

Israel wants only to live in peace!

[eridani]

94. No, they want Lebanon's water n/t

[Zodiak]

169. Ignore time

I have watched your posts for days. You love this war, it seems. You cheer it on, and you have a peace sign in your avatar. You say the same talking points on every thread, and none of them serve the concept of peace.

I'm sorry, but I do not want to read 100+ posts of yours a day in which you pretend to learn absolutely nothing from your involvement in other threads.

Good day to you and I hope you understand what carnage you advocate.

[LostinVA]

186. That's why yesterday I saved my sanity

And put this poster on Ignore.

[Zodiak]

188. I understand.

"With a fool no seasons spend
lest ye be counted as his friend."

It is part of your religion to save your sanity in this way, no?

[LostinVA]

190. Yes -- but I don't listen to that inner voice enough

[Selatius]

26. Israel would be defeated as a colonial power in the West Bank/Gaza if true

Gandhi is the prime example of people using non-violent resistance to defeat an imperial colonial power. The West Bank is dotted with colonial settlements now, and parts of it have been annexed outright from the Palestinians. Something like 200,000+ settlers now live in the West Bank. The colonist population increased quite a bit during the period of peace between the Intifadahs.

Ultra-rightwing elements in Israel who are extremely pro-settlement fear a Palestinian equivalent of Gandhi or Martin Luther King.

Of course, you will probably have others who will cite more violent examples like the African National Congress of South Africa to try to validate the use of violence, but they will wash over the fact that the ANC more often than not targeted soldiers and officers and those associated with the ruling regime, not civilians. At least, they mostly avoided civilians.

[cigsandcoffee]

35. Indeed. If Hamas and Hezbollah adopted Gandhi's tactics...

...we'd have lasting peace in the region within days. Weeks, anyway.

[Clarkie1]

42. Yep. nt

[Erika]

48. But Israel doing so would have so much stature

I'm sure you will agree.

[Clarkie1]

56. Israel doing what, acting like Ghandi?

That would lead to their certain annihilation.

[Erika]

70. That was not the case with India, was it?

These people have their own cases to plead.

[Clarkie1]

71. Completely different situation.

Israel is a sovereign state, not an occupied colony. Are you proposing Israelis simply peacefully resist as terrorist attacks continue?

[Erika]

77. Isreael needs to accept it exists only by Western mandates

after WW II. There are hard feelings out there by the nations who had their land taken to give to establish Israel. If Israel did that in Ghandi style, they could diffuse this situation completely.

[Clarkie1]

86. NO WAY.

Are you crazy? That would do nothing but encourage more terrorism against Israel.

Hezbollah DOES NOT WANT TO DIFFUSE THE SITUATION!

This conflict will only end when Hezbollah is destroyed as a political and military entity in Southern Lebanon, not before.

[Selatius]

91. Gandhi's tactics were formulated for the powerless; Israel is powerful

Palestinians would be better served if they utilized methods of non-violent resistance utilized by people from Gandhi to Martin Luther King, Jr. The Israeli government would never utilize such a tactic, as the Israeli government has and will continue to support the colonization/occupation of the West Bank for the forseeable future. If there is to be a Gandhi-like resistance within Israel as well, it will be with conscientious people demanding that their own government stop committing the violence of colonialism against their Palestinian neighbors in the West Bank.

[theboss]

107. A sovereign nation is a little different than an oppressed people

Non-violent resistance doesn't work against people bent on your total annihilation.

[ContraBass Black]

31. No. They wouldn't be taken at face value

And the bombing would continue.

[cigsandcoffee]

34. How do they know until they try?

I hear them speak of war and revenge. Have they tried to ask for peace?

I expect them to resist Israel like Gandhi did the British. Wouldn't you?

[Selatius]

39. If Gandhi's methods ended colonialism in India, it can in the West Bank

The only difference is that the British Crown didn't transplant hundreds of thousands of English settlers onto South Asian land. They merely reduced the land and its peoples into a resource satellite.

[Erika]

40. I would expect Israel to be the follower of Ghandi

and ask for peace. Wouldn't you?

[cigsandcoffee]

43. What are your expectations for Hezbollah and Hamas?

I expect them to make a global appeal for peace and an end to hostilities. How is that unreasonable?

[Erika]

51. Why would you expect terrorists to act reasonable?

That is why the burden is put on Israel.

[Clarkie1]

55. How do you negotiate with Nazis? nt

[Erika]

58. What an odd question

Are you saying that Hezbollah has the same military standing and support as Hitler did?

[Clarkie1]

59. No...

but they both want war and the annihilation of the Jewish people. How do you negotiate with that?

How do you negotiate for peace with people who do not want peace?

[Erika]

62. Many people want many things

some reasonable, some not.

[Clarkie1]

63. Yes, and your point is??? nt

[Clarkie1]

44. Israel wants nothing but peace. nt

[Erika]

50. Then Ghandi's thoughts would be so vital to the peace process

Good thought.

[Selatius]

93. The Israeli people want peace; their gov't's desires are dubious at best

The fact that Israel has up until now continued to expand colonial settlements in the West Bank to the detriment of Palestinians shows the Israeli government's commitment to a just peace is still not assured.

[ContraBass Black]

87. From their standpoint, to do so would be foolish.

Gandhi readily accepted the possibility that the first soldier he faced might shoot him dead on the spot. Hezbollah and Hamas are committed to survival, so laying down their arms and taking the risk that their enemy might simply take the opportunity to kill them and thus ensure its own survival is out of the question. Dying to prove the point is as far outside of their goal set as defeat.

For Israel, it is similar. Their enemy poses a credible threat, and is struggling against them for survival, so to disarm altogether and speak for peace looks the same as surrendering and marching to the chopping block.

This why a cease-fire must be mutual to succeed.

[Ignoramus]

88. Cycles of violence, Justice and the mythical Villain

Wanting peace with a pre-condition that the enemy first stop attacking, is not peace at all. It is what conflict is. It is essentially a nice sounding way to describe compelling someone to obey you.

Peace requires abandoning the pre-condition that the enemy stop attacking.

But, there is also a notion of justice. Peace without justice is also called subjegation. Slaves that don't complain about their treatment are not in a relationship of peace with their masters. So, without justice, there can be no peace.

Along those lines, there is a big difference between being terrorized by criminals and being oppressed by an armed power. In a prison analogy, while inmates can subject the guards and staff to violence, they don't have the control that the prison system has to oppress the inmates. In a conflict between the prison and the inmates, the prison can be said to give justice by treating the inmates fairly. The inmates can't give out justice, because they have no control over the system of justice.

Suicide bombings exist only because the people involved don't have a military to fight against Israel and the US with. So, in pursuing peace in a conflict between those with an army and those without, there are different expectations for the two. The over-dog has different options than the under-dog.

In these conflicts, all sides believe they are justified. Generally, people don't do something because they think it is wrong. The villain that cackles with laughter and vowes to work for the sake of evil, is a myth.

A person might be willing to cheat someone, but they will justify the cheating to themselves. If the persons actions require the cooperation of a large number of people, it becomes necessary to support a moral justification. So, even if cheating is at the heart of such an action, there is a moral grievence to address in dealing with the people cooperating against you. Conflict can't be resolved without that grievence being addressed, even if you think it's not a valid grievence.

[eridani]

89. Hezbollah already did that in 2000

After Israel withdrew from Lebanon. As a result, bomb shelters in northern Israel were not maintained.

[Behind the Aegis]

98. Were it that simple...

It might work with Hizb'allah, but not Hamas. The hydra that is the current Palestinian government is not as easy. Even if Hamas declared a truce, there is no guarantee that the other terrorist groups would accept...the recent "cease-fire proposal" is a perfect example. The only thing that will send up a dove of peace is when the PA actually corrals the terrorists and when Lebanon (or another group) expels Hizb'allah!

[Warren Stupidity]

100. Is this bilateral? Does Israel have to stop killing too?

Or are you suggesting a unilateral ceasefire? Or are you under the delusion that the killing is all being initiated from one side?

[Solo_in_MD]

104. If the rockets and raids were to stop and Hezbollah disarm and allow

the Lebanese government to take over, I believe the Israel would stand down as well.

The current government removed the settlers by force in the west bank. Its was a very trying time for Israel. The IDF was used against its own people. Few outside Israel realized just how wrenching that was.

The kidnappings and rocket attacks are giving those who did not want to give up an inch or allow the PA to standup a lot of ammunition within in Israel. If Hamas and Hezbollah had thought with their heads and not their d**ks, this never would have happened.

The trigger might have been the kidnappings, but the real pressure is from the constant attacks. When those stop and the people are returned, Israel will pull back.

Based on statements made by Fatah, Hezbollah and others...don't count on it

[JerseygirlCT]

106. I agree. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

210. Another myth

"The IDF was used against its own people." Well not really, at least not in the sense you mean. The actual settlers left Gaza on their own, with very nice relocation packages. They were replaced by young Israeli activists who staged a 'heart wrenching' theatrical display for the media. The only thing was they didn't even live there. It was a nice show, most likely staged for the US audience, as I suspect most Israelis knew what was going on.

"but the real pressure is from the constant attacks" There were no constant attacks by Hezbollah against Israel, outside of the dispute over the Shebba Farms region, from 2000-2005. Rocket attacks by Hezbollah stopped after the Israeli pullout in 2000. There was peace, with the exception of the low level conflict over the Shebba Farms region, which both sides dispute the ownership of. There was one rocket attack in that period, on Kiryat Shmona, after a Hezbollah leader was assasinated by Israel in Beirut.

That brings me to my point: is Israel going to stop its killings? Or is the cease fire to be unilateral? If you want peace, both side have to agree to stop killing each other.

[Solo_in_MD]

219. You might check with someone a little closer to what was going on

The actual settlers left Gaza on their own, with very nice relocation packages. They were replaced by young Israeli activists who staged a 'heart wrenching' theatrical display for the media.
There was some of that, but there were also long term settlers who were forced out in manacles, legal orders that forced activist residents from the area prior, coupled with lengthly interrogations and criminal complaints. There was tremendous dissent in the IDF over it including a number of refuseniks in uniform. Its not clear what the fraction of the settlers that fought relocation was, but clearly some did.

That brings me to my point: is Israel going to stop its killings? Or is the cease fire to be unilateral? If you want peace, both side have to agree to stop killing each other.
If publicly Hezbollah were to announce it was ceasing fire, returning the two soldiers, and then disarming, followed by actually doing so, the IDF would have no choice but to stand down. The killing would stop as soon Hezbollah stopped launching rockets and a time & place for the return of soldiers set up. Given that Nasrallah has already declared a scorched earth policy before Hezbollah disarms and his dark hints of secret weapons and capabilities, I would not get my hopes up. Hezbollah is an externally supported illegal militia. I would not trust anything they say unless it is publicly demanded by their Iranian and Syrian paymasters. More likely is a unilateral ceasefire from the Israelis once they think the buffer zone is of adequate depth and they think that have done what they can to break Hezbollah's military capabilities.

If Hezbollah was defunded by Syria and Iran, it would wither and die in short order, but there is little chance of that. Its too convenient for them to use a surrogate to poke at Israel. However, if the neutral zone is of sufficient size and the UN forces are actually effective, it may work and give the Lebanese government a chance to rid itself of Hezbollah for good. Key item will be the policing of what gets brought in to the country...that Hezbollah had Iranian C-802s is an example of the issues there.

[Warren Stupidity]

224. My yes indeed

"If publicly Hezbollah were to announce it was ceasing fire, returning the two soldiers, and then disarming, followed by actually doing so, the IDF would have no choice but to stand down."

Actually if every member of Hezbollah just stood out in the open waving their AK-47s in the air until the IDF finished them off then also Israel would have no choice but to stop fighting. A brillinat recipe for peace there.

Given that Hezbollah held its own against the IDF the last time, and appears to be holding its own against the IDF this time, given that the IDF was forced to withdraw in 2000, why exactly would Hezbollah be going for your massively unilateral peace plan?

If you want peace you have to be willing to stop fighting, you cannot simply demand that your opponent surrender.

[cigsandcoffee]

109. I'm not putting down pre-conditions at all...

I think Hezbollah could shame Israel and give their people peace in an instant if they publicly vowed to stop attacking Israeli cities with rockets and other forms of terrorism, and thus put Israel on the spot.

Hezbollah has the opportunity to act like "the bigger man" in this conflict by offering peace, and adopting non-violent tactics. Is that too much to expect from them - a move toward peace?

[MadHound]

108. Given how Israel keeps moving the goal posts for peace,

Somehow I doubt it. At first it was the return of the two soldiers. Then it was return the soldiers and stop rocket fire. Then it was the soldiers, rocket fire and a buffer zone of indeterminate size. Last I heard it was the soldiers, rocket fire, buffer zone, and the complete elimination of Hezbollah. Tommorrow, who knows.

So no, I don't think that stopping the rockets would stop Israel's aggression. They would just move the goal posts again.

[cigsandcoffee]

112. I'm not talking about stopping the rockets....

....I'm talking about Hezbollah shaming Israel first to end hostilities, and then to the negotiating table by making a public outreach for peace. If Hezbollah renounced terrorism on the world stage, what choice would Israel have but to negotiate peace?

It seems that Nasrallah could give peace to his people in a moment, and shame Israel in to the bargain. Is that too much to expect from him?

[MadHound]

117. Frankly, given Israel's over the top reaction to the kidnapping

I seriously doubt that Israel has any shame whatsoever left. I would be willing to bet dollars to doughnuts that if Hezbollah put down their arms today, Israel would still be shelling them next week. Like I said, Israel continues to move the goalposts on this one, and nobody but Israel, and possibly Bushco, have any real idea what Israel's true objectives are.

What's real sad is that Israel could have avoided all of this is they had simply done what they've done many times before in these situations, negotiated for a prisoner exchange. Instead they went over the top and started a war, for reasons that are truly only known to themselves.

[cigsandcoffee]

119. If Hezbollah put down their arms....

...and Israel kept shelling them, that nation would become an immediate international pariah in line with the old South African regime. It would seem that Hezbollah has the power to apply enormous international pressure on Israel if they only swear off terrorism and publicly seek a dialogue toward peace.

[MadHound]

123. In the eyes of many, Israel is a pariah now

Their over the top reaction has drawn condemnation from virtually everybody outside the Bush administration. What makes you think that a bit more would stop them? One of Israel's stated goals is to wipe out Hezbollah, and seriously, I doubt that they will stop at anything short of that, world opinion be damned.

They have already proven that they don't give a rat's ass about world condemnation now, what makes you think that they would in the future? After all, they are killing unarmed innocent men, women and children, and the moral repugnance of those actions haven't halted them, what makes you think the prospect of killing unarmed Hezbollah members would? They would simply take it as an opportunity to kill even more, and further roll up Lebanese territory.

[cigsandcoffee]

144. Hezbollah's violence gives Israel an excuse.

If they were instead calling for peace and Israel continued the agression, it would be all over for Israel as a global trading partner. Europe would dump them like a sack of hot potatoes.

I really don't see how Hezbollah could lose by making a big show out of calling for peace, renouncing violence, and thus putting Israel on the spot. Surely you don't think Hezbollah should continue to go head to head militarily with Israel? How could that possibly work for them?

[MadHound]

158. Frankly I think a cease fire needs to be called for by the entire world

But sadly, that's not going to happen.

In light of that, I think that it is foolish for one party to put down their arms when they know that the other party is hell bent on their destruction, with or without armament.

As far as Hezbollah going head to head with Israel, well, the idea isn't as far-fetched as you think. After all, look how well we're doing in Iraq, going head to head with Al-Qadea:shrug: This is a guerilla war friend, and an invader simply cannot win a guerilla war unles they are willing to lay waste to the entire country and make the land uninhabitable.

Let us try your scenario however. Let us say that Hezbollah puts down its weapons. Israel will simply accellerate their destruction. World opinion will mount, but the Bush and other key administations will continue to back Israel. Therefore, knowing no shame, Israel will continue to destruction. And all that many more people will die. Sorry, but that is a really bad idea.

[cigsandcoffee]

173. I could not disagree more.

I think that if Hezbolla were to make a public call for peace (something they've never done), and give up violence against Israel, the IDF would have to immediately stop their aggression and let the diplomats take over.

Israel could never get away with continuing violence in the wake of Gandhi-style peaceful resistence. But Hezbollah's violence gives them just the excuse they need.

[MadHound]

192. Please, Israel has gotten away with it for years

Perhaps not on this scale, but still and all, they have gotten away with killing the unarmed and the innocent. Witness Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon circa '82 and even now. Who is going to stop them? The US, don't make me laugh, not with Bush in power. The UN? Again, they would be useless without US muscle.

Sorry, but it would literally be suicide for Hezbollah or any Lebanese to toss down their weapons now. They cannot, nor will they receive any mercy from the Israelis who are out to destroy Hezbollah root and branch, and by God they're going to destroy an entire country doing so.

[cigsandcoffee]

211. Was it suicide for Gandhi to use nonviolence against the British?

Surely you're not suggesting that Hamas and Hezbollah are better off keeping up the rocket and terrorist attacks against Israel instead of using peaceful resistance (and loudly calling for world attention). As is often said, violence begets violence.

But if they undertook peaceful protest against Israel, they may be able to stop the violence once and for all.

[w4rma]

110. No. Israeli neo-cons will then tell them to disarm before a cease-fire. nt

[cigsandcoffee]

120. What a gesture of peace it would be....

...if they disarmed themselves. Israel could never excuse attacks on a disarming Hezbollah, and would become fully isolated from the world if they did so.

[w4rma]

203. They won't disarm, though. They don't trust Israel enough to believe that

Israel won't just take advantage of a disarmament and do what they want with them anyway.

Heck, Israel is even deliberately destroying UN observer positions (4 UN people killed):

Mr Annan described the strike as a "co-ordinated artillery and aerial attack on a long established and clearly marked UN post." He said it took place "despite personal assurances given to me by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that UN positions would be spared Israeli fire."
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,19916610-5005961,00.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2412976&mesg_id=2412976

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/25/mideast.main/index.html
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/world/AP-Mideast-Fighting-UN-Observers.html
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1729345

[The Stranger]

111. That would be a good start, but even the U.S. Secretary of State would

appear not to want that to happen.

[cigsandcoffee]

114. It's not up to the USA, though.

Hezbollah could use the world press to make their peace offer, and the US and Israel would be forced to play ball.

[The Stranger]

126. Although Israel has made deals with Hezbollah before,

the U.S. won't talk to Hezbollah, which makes Rice's "shuttle diplomacy" go nowhere, literally.

For the first time in its history, the U.S. cannot engage the Middle East conflict because it refuses to talk to one side.

[cigsandcoffee]

136. Hezbollah could make the US irrelevant, though.

There are plenty of other powerful countries that would deeply support them in a calling for peace. That would force Israel and the US to the bargaining table.

[The Stranger]

142. Israel needs an out from this quagmire, and the U.S. would provide that.

Unfortunately, the U.S. is paralyzed by the catastrophe that is the Bush Administration, and they cannot do even this.

Maybe the "international force" from various heretofore unheard-of third world nations will allow a stand-down.

The best way to defeat Hezbollah was the fledgling Lebanese Government, and that has now been scuttled by incompetence on the part of Israeli leadership and the U.S.

[yodermon]

121. Wrong. You cannot trust terrorists.

You cannot negiotiate with terrorists.
Such a statement by Hezbollah would by definition be a trap.
Hezbollah must be wiped off the face of the earth and pushed into the sea, no matter how painful.
Once and for all, Israel must send a strong message to all who would wish her harm:
YOU DO NOT FUCK WITH US. PERIOD. OR YOU WILL BE OBLITERATED.

Understand?

[cigsandcoffee]

122. How can Hezbollah hope to win against that sentiment?

You make my point that the best route toward them making peace in the region is to renoince terrorism and adopt non-violent protest tactics. Israel would have no choice but to end the hostilities or face becoming fully isolated on the world stage. If Hamas and Hezbollah layed down their arms and offered peace in a very public manner, even the United States would pressure Israel to the negotiating table.

[yodermon]

124. because Hamas/Hezbollah would CEASE TO EXIST.

if they made such statements.

Their entire DNA is based on terrorism. ("DNA" of the movement, I'm using a metaphor, please don't misread me).

H/H has become so intertwined with the culture of the region that you are basically asking for an entire social movement to reverse itself en masse.

It would be like asking that bottom 33% who love Bush to just up and renounce Bush. We'd love to see it but it is physically impossible.

*Of course* non-violent protest tactics are more effective, reasonable people like us understand that. But when terrorism becomes enculturated you may as well wish for water to flow uphill than to wish for H/H to stage a "Peace protest".

At a certain point, Israel has to say "enough" and put and End to these thugs. And it appears that they are now in the process of doing so.

[cigsandcoffee]

125. Well, if those groups are incapable of seeking a peaceful solution...

...then you are right, IMO. But I'd sure like to see a lot of pressure put on them to try it before we give up hope.

[The Stranger]

129. Oh nonsense.

Israel, Hezbollah swap prisoners

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

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

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

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

Israel, Hezbollah move on possible POW exchanges

AFP AND NY TIMES NEWS SERVICE , JERUSALEM
Thursday, Sep 25, 2003,Page 7

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said on Wednesday any prisoner exchange with the Lebanese Hezbollah militia would need Cabinet approval and ruled out West Bank Fatah leader Marwan Barghuti's release.

"I intend to put approval of the prisoner exchange deal, if we reach an agreement, before the entire Cabinet plenum for it to decide," Sharon said in an interview, which were published Wednesday.

"This is a complex problem of the first order, an issue that is not simple, and a very difficult decision on a moral level. Therefore, in my opinion it should be brought before the entire Cabinet ... Let there not be one minister who is not part of the discussion," Sharon told Maariv newspaper.

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2003/09/25/2003069190

Israel and Hezbollah set date for swap

By Mariam Karouny, Corinne Heller
Jerusalem
January 27, 2004

Two of the most bitter enemies in the Middle East, Israel and Hezbollah, will carry out the first stage of a German-mediated prisoner swap later this week, according to the leader of the Lebanese guerilla group.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, defending the exchange against claims that it would strengthen Hezbollah and Palestinian militants, called the agreement a "correct, moral and responsible decision".

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/01/26/1075087956180.html

Israel OKs prisoner swap with Hezbollah

Israel's Cabinet narrowly approved a prisoner swap with Hezbollah after eight hours of anguished debate Sunday, overriding warnings that the deal could signal weakness and encourage more kidnappings of Israelis.

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon lobbied hard for the swap, which excludes Israel's most famous missing serviceman, Air Force navigator Ron Arad, shot down over Lebanon 17 years ago. The vote was one of Sharon's toughest leadership tests in three years.

http://english.people.com.cn/200311/10/eng20031110_127971.shtml

[leftofthedial]

127. couldn't Israel bring peace in an instant...

...if they immediately ceased to exist, folded up all the trappings of nationhood and moved the whole caboodle to Florida? Hexbollah and Hamas would have no choice but to stop shooting.

[cigsandcoffee]

131. I can't see peace coming at a giving up of the right to exist...

...Hezbollah would not lose territory if it made a Gandhiesque movement towrd peace. To compare that to Israel leaving the Middle East altogether doesn't seem to be a fair comparison.

[leftofthedial]

132. how about leaving the West Bank

and the Golan Heights

and now southern Lebanon?

what if Israel immediately withdrew all Israelis to the 1948 boundaries?

on edit: repaired typo

[oberliner]

133. 1947 boundaries?

Israel did not become a country until 1948.

What are you suggesting?

[cigsandcoffee]

135. I assumed he meant 1967 boundaries.

I hope I was right in that assumption.

[leftofthedial]

138. sorry, typo

1948 boundaries--the original boundaries of Israel

[cigsandcoffee]

134. Indeed, that may bring peace...

...but perhaps Israel is too unreasonable to make such an effort all at once. But if Hezbollah renounced violence and offered a plan for peace, wouldn't that shame Israel in to negotiating fairly with them?

Hezbollah's violence only gives Israel in excuse. If they used a peaceful approach, it would be so much more effective. I think we should all call on Hezbollah to lay down their arms and thus pressure Israel in to withdrawing.

[leftofthedial]

139. Hezbollah's constituency was there before Israel

I think the onus is on Israel to de-escalate the violence

Israel's imperialism only gives Hezbollah an excuse. I think we should all call on Israel to withdraw to its original borders. While we're at it, we should call on Israel to disarm and destroy all its weapons.

(of course Israel would never do it. it is not their intent to achieve peace)

[cigsandcoffee]

141. Let's assume they won't.

Why not pressure Hezbollah to take the lead in this struggle and shame Israel in to fairly negotiating?

If Hezbollah renounced violence in a public way tomorrow and vowed to end terrorism against Israel, there would be peace within days or weeks. If Israel violated that good faith, they would be international pariahs of the highest order, and suffer all sorts of trade penalties in much the same way that the old South African regime did.

[treestar]

146. The Israelis would not believe it

or would affect not to believe it.

I've seen some supporters of Israel argue that Arafat didn't mean it when he recognized their right to exist.

[cigsandcoffee]

148. Why would that matter?

Without violence coming from Hamas and Hezbollah, they would have no choice but to lay down their own arms and negotiate for peace. If they didn't, the world would completely shun them much like they did the old South Africans.

[leftofthedial]

152. The evil Israelis have proven they can't be trusted

even when the Palestinians take the first step

No. The Israelis must take the first step. It must be significant. 1948 boundaries and disarmament would do it.

If Hamas and Hezbollah stopped resistance, Israel would just expand the colonization of Palestinian territory like they have done on the West Bank.

[cigsandcoffee]

156. You appear to be saying that Hamas and Hezbollah should continue....

...their end of the violence, instead of calling for peace. Is that accurate?

[leftofthedial]

166. no. Regardless of what Hezbollah and Hamas do,

I'm calling for Israel to take a proactive role in bringing peace to the region.

You're calling for Israel to continue the violence without opposition from Hezbollah and Hamas. Is that accurate?

[cigsandcoffee]

172. I call on Israel to stop the violence.

Will you also join me in calling for Hamas and Hezbollah to lay down their weapons, adopt Gandhi's method of peaceful resistence, and thus force Israel to the negotiating table?

It is, without question, the very fastest route to a lasting peace. Even faster than Israel withdrawing from this conflict.

[leftofthedial]

175. I call on ALL parties to the violence to immediately lay down arms

to demand immediate peace and to stop killing.

That is the only position I've ever had.*

There. Now we've both called for peace from all involved. Now what?

(* I mean other than when I advocated that the US arm both sides with thousands of short-range nukes, which I think is the only path to lasting peace.)

[cigsandcoffee]

183. Then I guess we're on the same page.

If we agree that regardless of what Israel does, Hamas and Hezbollah should adopt a Gandhi-style method of resistence, then we're thinking alike.

And indeed, if we are also hoping that Israel will do its part to end the violence, then I can't see where we have anything to disagree about.

[leftofthedial]

214. hoping for unilateral disarmament by either side at this point

is, well, pointless. Alas!

[cigsandcoffee]

221. I wouldn't look for unilateral disarmament at all...

I'd look for Hezbollah and Hamas to swear off rocket attacks and terrorism (is this too much to ask?) and resist Israel with a nonviolent strategy like Gandhi's.

[treestar]

159. That could work

If the US would be the first to shame them.

Though in the discussions, they would continue to take the position that they are the victims - I've been on a board where we've debated this for years. It always starts with "Israel is surrounded by enemies who don't recognize its right to exist." That is used to justify anything they do to the enemies.

When you point out the inroads made when Sadat and Arafat made the big concession, i.e., that Israel could exist, you get answers to the effect that they didn't mean it, and if they did, they would "control" the terrorists.

The Israelis will continue to see themselves this way so long as one single Arab anywhere says Israel has no right to exist. No government, leader of a group, or body of any kind will be enough so long as there is the smallest terrorist cell out there claiming Israel has no right to exist.

The precarious peace is wrecked for the surrounding countries every time there is a terrorist attack in Israel. The surrounding governments and all the individual people are seen as "allowing" it and "encouraging" it and thus deserving of whatever Israel does to them in return.

Nobody ever seems to approach it from the angle of - what do the Palestinians get out of this? They have no hope of destroying Israel completely with suicide bomb attacks. But from the Israeli view of it, they potentially could destroy the country itself. Like the way the US viewed 911. We avenge those deaths. We can't seriously have a fear that Al Qaeda could destroy the US as a country. We have reached the point where each American/Israeli life is worth the equivalent of being able to threaten the existence of the country, or we treat it that way. Both the US and Israel avenge individual deaths as if they could threaten the existence of the nation.

[leftofthedial]

167. Much of what Israel has done in the last decade has violated

the spirit, if not the letter, of agreements reached through negotiation

there has been little effect on international (that is, US) support for Israel.

[oberliner]

143. 1948 boundaries?

Even the UN is only calling for a return form the 1967 boundaries.

What are the 1948 boundaries?

[leftofthedial]

155. Israel should completely abandon the West Bank

and the Golan Heights

and disarm unilaterally.

[cigsandcoffee]

157. Well, let's say they don't.

How does that prevent Hamas and Hezbollah from taking a leadership role for peace in this conflict? They could take the moral high ground and put Israel to shame.

[treestar]

161. It worked for Gandhi, didn't it?

But I'm remembering the movie. To the extent the movie is accurate. It was a horrible sight where the British troops kept attacking the nonresisting Indians. They got to where they just couldn't do it.

Though the chances of getting Hezbollah to try this may well be pretty slim.

[leftofthedial]

165. Well, let's say they don't.

How does that prevent Israel from taking a leadership role for peace in this conflict? They could take the moral high ground and put Hezbollah to shame.

[Codeine]

164. Disarm unilaterally!?

What the heck do you think happens then? Bye-bye Israel.

Yours is a ridiculous suggestion.

[leftofthedial]

168. you think if Hezbollah stopped fighting tomorrow

that they'd fare any better?

Ha!

I say both sides have proven a fanatical desire to destroy the other in a conflict that has raged in one form or another virtually unabated for thousands of years. The only way to end the conflict is to arm both sides with the means to destroy the other completely, say several thousand short-range nukes. They want to destroy one another? Fine. Help them to do it efficiently. So far, all anyone has been able to accomplish with war is to keep the hatred alive for generations to come. All anyone has been able to do with diplomacy is to ensure that enough people survive to act on the hatred for generations to come. I say let's act constructively to end the cycle.

[cigsandcoffee]

176. I agree. And what could be more constructive than...

...Hamas and Hezbollah going the route of Gandhi? If Israel is indeed an oppressor along the lines of the British Colinals, then there is no better way to bring the violence and aggression to an end. It's right in the palms of their hands.

[leftofthedial]

180. and what could possibly be more constructive than Israel laying down arms

and showing that they are willing to live in peace by immediately withdrawing to the 1948 borders?

It would stop the violence.

[cigsandcoffee]

189. Indeed, but Hamas and Hezbollah have far more to gain...

...by adopting the tactics of Gandhi. If Israel is indeed the oppressor, then Gandhi's formula calls for the oppressed to resist them with nonviolent tactics. I presume you see Israel as the oppressor in this situation?

For Israel to withdraw and adopt a nonviolent approach would be tantamount to the British Colonials having taken the same tact with India's resistance. That just wasn't going to happen then, and isn't going to happen in this instance either.

A true peace is the onus of Hamas and Hezbollah, with Israel there only to be shamed in to succumbing to the calls for harmony by the people who had formerly taken up arms against them.

[cracksquirrel]

137. Shhh!

That's no good, for you see this is entirely Israel's fault!

[cigsandcoffee]

140. The beauty of Hezbollah doing this...

...is that they don't have to admit fault. They would be "the bigger man," and shame Israel in to negotiating for a lasting peace. Their leader would probably win a peace prize and a huge flow of newfound support in terms of financial aid.

[cracksquirrel]

163. See that's the thing...

They don't want a peace prize. The goal of Hezbollah is not prestige or a seat at the table of world governance, it's simply to establish an Islamic state in the ME under Islamic law, and in the process kill or drive out all of the jews living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.

[treestar]

145. Arafat recognized the right of Israel to exist

So did Sadat, no?

There will always be some terrorist group saying it does not and trying to destroy it and drive it into the sea, and so long as there is one single person saying that, the Israelis will attack and occupy.

[Guy Fawkes]

149. That would be nice, but it isn't realistic.

Hezbollah and Hamas both hate Israel completely. And neither Israel nor Hezbollah/Hamas have the intelligence to step down and begin talks.

[yurbud]

151. problem: when Palestinians pursue non-violent protest they are ignored

the farmer who wakes up with a wall between him and his olive trees didn't launch a katyusha, but he still got the wall. The kid who gets shot by a sniper while walking to school didn't set off a car bomb.

Rachel Corrie didn't do anything but stand in front of a bulldozer--and she got ran over and killed.

You assume that the Israeli government is the victim here acting solely to protect their people. Like our own government, they have a long term strategy and to accomplish it, they need to keep Palestine an open wound as long as possible. Most Israelis and Palestinians (something like 80%) would be happy with a two state solution. But the conservative strategic thinkers in Israel have an idea of a 'Greater Israel' that extends to the banks of the River Jordan and the Mediterranean with no pesky Palestinians in the way. Short of that, they want to claim as much of the West Bank as they can with settlements before the dust settles. That requires keeping the dust from settling.

[cigsandcoffee]

154. But Hamas and Hezbollah have never made.....

....public overtures for peace, and promises to lay down their weapons. That would massively change the dynamics, and put Israeli aggression in a much brighter spotlight. The violence from those organizations, despite any singular acts of peaceful resistence, gives Israel and excuse to continue persecuting all of them.

What's to be gained by Hamas and Hezbollah continuing to call for violence and bloodhed? Not peace - that much is clear.

[yurbud]

160. yep, violence doesn't help--but how much have all the UN Resolutions that

we don't allow to be enforced? Until now, Israel has vetoed international peacekeepers to separate the Palestinians and Israelis, a solution that worked extremely well in Cyprus.

Violence doesn't work, but frustrated people do stupid things.

[RSMS9999]

170. geez

some of you will never understand

Hamas and Hezbollah are NOT and will NEVER be about living in peace. THey are both dedicated to teh complete destrution of Israel no more no less. Why do you think they both attacked AFTER Israel withdrew from the disputed territory.

How some people have the illusion that they will ever stop violence is baffling to me.

[PA Democrat]

171. I must have missed when Israel withdrew from the West Bank.

You mean all of those settlements on the West Bank are gone?

[yurbud]

187. yeah, you're right. Genocide is the only solution. It worked for

those ungrateful American Indians after we gave them their nice little reservations and they got upset because we wanted to trim a little land off the edges.

Or do you think we can kill enough of them to scare the rest into never attacking Israel again?

When Israel invaded Lebanon to get rid of the PLO, they succeeded at their goal, but at the same time, pissed off Lebanese to the point that they joined Hezbollah.

When you kill someone, you make a new enemy, unless there's a third party the potential new enemy fears more, as was the case with us and Germany in World War II. They were happily occupied by us because they were afraid of the Russians taking revenge on them. There is no worse boogey man to Middle East countries than us and Israel though.

[yurbud]

194. Israel nurtured Hamas initially to undercut the secular PLO

in essence, for all the PLO's faults, Israel destroyed them and created a vacuum that the more radical Hamas could fill.

[LWolf]

177. Really? What a novel concept.

Let's see how it worked. From a year ago:

<snip>

Hamas: We are Committed to Ceasefire
Published Saturday, July 16th, 2005

Khalid Amayreh

The Palestinian Islamic Resistance group, Hamas, says it remains committed to observing the ceasefire, despite the assassination by Israel of at least eight of its resistance cadres. Israeli warplanes on Friday carried out two pinpoint missile attacks on two Palestinian vehicles in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, killing at least eight Hamas resistance activists.

“We are still committed to the ceasefire. We are not interested in any escalation. However, if Israel continues these acts of extrajudicial executions of our people, then we will most certainly defend ourselves,” said Hasan Yousuf, Hamas’s spokesman in the West Bank. Yousuf accused Israel of waging “state terror” on the Palestinian people in order to appease Jewish settlers opposed to the planned Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s withdrawal from the Gaza Strip.

Earlier, Khalid Mashaal, chief of Hamas’s politburo, told an Arab satellite television station that the resistance group was not seeking to end the truce. “Despite this nefarious crime, the Islamic resistance group remains committed to the calm because it serves our national interests.”

However, according to some Palestinian observers, Hamas is likely to come under intense pressure from its rank-and-file supporters if the assassinations persist. “Hamas is likely to absorb this latest hit, but things could get out of hand if Israel kept up the killings,” says Ghazi Hamed.

More:

http://www.world-crisis.com/news/1157_0_1_0_C/

Now you tell me how to convince Israel to end hostilities and show some commitment to harmony and peace in the region.

[cigsandcoffee]

178. That's not quite the same as saying they will end....

...the rocket attacks and terrorism within Israel, and adopt a nonviolent approach to the struggle. That Hezbollah wants Israel to back off right now is not very shocking. What would be shocking (and put Israel on the spot) is if they renounced violence and committed themselves to a peaceful path of resistence.

Here's what Nasrallah is saying today:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/03812DD0-F18E-4015-AD5E-381ABD3EAD7C.htm

Nasrallah: Invasion will not stop rockets
Monday 24 July 2006, 8:41 Makka Time, 5:41 GMT

Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, has said that an Israeli ground invasion would not prevent Hezbollah from firing rockets into northern Israel.

"Any Israeli incursion will have no political results if it does not achieve its declared goals, primarily an end to the rocketing of Zionist settlements in northern occupied Palestine," Nasrallah said in remarks published on Monday.

"I assure you that this goal will not be achieved, God willing, by an Israeli incursion," he told As-Safir newspaper.

His remarks came after Hezbollah fired dozens of rockets at Israel on Sunday

And here's what he said the day before the date of that article in your post:

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/AF23D116-9B23-4857-AA1A-9EA595F2D4B1.htm

Hezbollah declares war on Israel
Saturday 15 July 2006, 4:32 Makka Time, 1:32 GMT

Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, the chief of Hezbollah group, has pledged open war on Israel after it bombed his Beirut home on Friday in a dramatic expansion of the latest Israeli assault.

"You wanted an open war. You will get an open war," Nasrallah said in a telephone message broadcast live on Hezbollah television after the attack.

He said an Israeli navy ship was ablaze off the coast of Beirut. The Israeli military confirmed that the vessel had been badly damaged and that four Israeli troops were missing at sea.

Israeli media reported that the ship was hit by an unmanned airborne drone packed with explosives.

That isn't the path that Gandhi had in mind, and such a path is probably the only one that would lead to both peace and a worthwile settlement between the factions. Violence will only keep the wars going.

[LWolf]

196. Actually, that was said in July of '05,

a full year ago. A full year ago Hamas was agreeing to maintain a ceasefire in the face of continued Israeli aggression, and warning that it would not do so indefinitely.

I don't think you can leave the history of the conflict out of the equation when looking at what is happening today. How did it get to where it is? Not because Israel's opponents weren't willing to meet them part way. Not because Israel is an innocent non-aggressor targeted by "terrorists."

[cigsandcoffee]

197. Well, let's say that Israel is an evil oppressor....

...isn't Gandhi's course of action still the very best one for Hezbollah? Or do you think it makes more sense for them to continue on a course of armed resistance?

[LWolf]

201. I think that both sides would benefit

from Ghandi's perspective. Do I want Hamas/Hezbolla to engage in peaceful resistance? Sure, if there is something to resist. I feel the same way about Israel. Some peaceful resistance on their part is just as important.

In other words, I don't think either side is "clean," or "innocently defending themselves." I don't think either side can claim the high ground, and they ought to both go home and clean up their own house. Then come back to the table with some humility.

Edited to add: I feel even more strongly that the U.S. should do the same.

[cigsandcoffee]

202. Gandhi's tactics wouldn't really help Israel, IMO

They are designed for resistance to state-sponsored aggression and occupation. There is no state oppressing Israel, if they are indeed the ones oppressing their neghbors.

Israel might well lay down their arms, but doing so wouldn't be a template for Gandhi's resistance.

[LWolf]

204. You're right.

It doesn't have to be a template for Ghandi's resistance.

They don't need to lay down their arms. They just need to stop using them on neighbors, and go back to the negotiation table with an attitude of diplomacy.

[Rokketmania]

179. Makes Too Much Sense ...

But, it seems that ending the hostilities is not high on their agenda.

[Odin2005]

181. It's a variation of the "prisoner's dilemma"

Both sides would benifit if both disarmed, but neither will disarm because neither side trusts the other side to hold up it's side of the bargin.

[cigsandcoffee]

182. I doubt Gandhi trusted the British.

Instead, he trusted that his nonviolent path would lead to the realization of his goals, by shaming them in to withdrawing. He was right.

In today's 24-hour news cycle, sizable Hamas and Hezbollah peace demonstrations would put massive pressure on the Israelis, especially if they were to react with any aggression toward them.

Hezbollah doesn't need to trust Israel to use the nonviolent approach. They only need to trust that the eyes and ears of the world will be watching and listening, and there is ample evidence that this is the case.

[killbotfactory]

198. They don't want peace

They want war with Israel.

And the way Israel is acting, I don't think they really want peace either.

[cigsandcoffee]

199. They must have goals beyond eternal war.

Let's assume Hezbollah's only goal is to destroy Israel. What's Israel's goal? To wipe out its neighbors and take their land?

If it really is that simple, then there can never be peace until one side concedes in utter defeat. Nonviolent resistance from Hezbollah might gain peace, but it won't wipe out Israel. A cease-fire imposed on the Israelis may bring a temporary peace, but it won't give them any new land or subjects. That means war is the only answer.

[Zhade]

200. I doubt it, honestly.

Israel's wildly disproportionate response doesn't convince me they'd stop if Hezbollah did.

Only one way to know, though, and I've wondered why Hezbollah doesn't stop throwing their rockets into Israel and reveal the IDF for the murderous brutalizers they are.

[hopeisaplace]

213. I was thinking the same thing

...a big unexpected curve ball.

But I would bet that the media would twist it, and say they
aren't really doing it, etc...whatever...so as to continue
with the war. For me, I'm convinced they (all parties involved)
WANT war. I'm actually resigned to the fact that War is what
"they" want, and war is the Entree of the decade.

[T Town Jake]

215. Yes, they could.

Excellent post. :thumbsup:

[cynatnite]

218. Fastest recipe would be ceasing attacks and retuning the soldiers...

It would only be for the short term, though. It certainly wouldn't mean Israel would withdraw.

In the long term, they'd have to recognize Israel and stop all violence. Period. Israel would eventually withdraw and have to step back enough for Palestine to become a state, plus recognize it as a soveriegn country.

That's not to mention they'd have to hammer out deals with Lebanon, Syria and Iran in order for there to be a real peace in the region.

Even then, none of it is a guarantee. If one asshole gets pissed because it even appears their leader is compromising...bang! they're dead.

Rabin is a prime example. He was the best chance for peace in the Middle East. An Israeli was enraged by his willingness to compromise with Arafat, that he was killed over it. It's been downhill since :(

[anewdeal]

223. Yes they could

Too bad Hamas and Hizbollah don't want peace. They're organization depends on war to survive.