Anyone else never even hear of Nasrallah before this most recent dust up?

[NNN0LHI]

I can say I never have before. Now today I read that Israel has always considered him a worthy opponent. If that is not true I will stand corrected.

Seems to me if some sensible Israelis (and I like Olmert so far) were to sit down and talk turkey with representatives of Nasrallah peace could be worked out in no time. Real lasting peace. I really believe that. Just keep Bush and his thugs out of the discussions and I think everything will be OK.

Nasrallah is not going to allow Hezbollah to be disarmed under any circumstances thats for sure. Nor is Israel. A peaceful middle ground is what Israel and Nasrallah needs to shoot for here.

My $.02 cents.

Don

[Taxloss]

1. I don't think that there is a middle ground between Israel and Nasrallah

as Nasrallah has repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel.

IMHO there cannot be lasting peace in the region until Hezbollah is disarmed. That realy is item #1 on any peace agenda.

[NNN0LHI]

2. You may know a lot more about this stuff than I do?

I was just kind of counting on humans actually being inherently good.

And they have both been calling for the destruction of the other and we know that is not going to work for sure.

Don

[Taxloss]

6. I'm not claiming special knowledge.

But Nasrallah has said this:

'I am against any reconciliation with Israel. I do not even recognize the presence of a state that is called "Israel." I consider its presence both unjust and unlawful. That is why if Lebanon concludes a peace agreement with Israel and brings that accord to the Parliament our deputies will reject it; Hezbollah refuses any conciliation with Israel in principle.'

http://www.library.cornell.edu/colldev/mideast/hzblhnsr.htm

I suppose the key difference is that Hezbollah can be disarmed without the destruction of Lebanon - on the contrary, it would strengthen Lebanese independence and democracy if Hezbollah was disarmed.

[NNN0LHI]

15. I am sure you are more acquainted with the subject

Honestly I am basically ignorant on Hezbollah. Just what I have picked up in news articles and opinion pieces in the past weeks.

Don

[katinmn]

11. Hezbollah is just a by-product. What is really really item #1 is

a sovereign Palestinian state (no walls, checkpoints, refugee camps) and mutual disarmament. Compromise is needed. Many people feel entitled to the same land. care passionately about it, and know that they are right.

The US supplies arms and plays puppet master and big brother to Israel, Israel likewise controls our Congress through effective lobbying and marketing, Iran has a big brother arrangement with Hezbollah and Lebanon (which, thanks to the latest war, has made Hezbollah more acceptable if not heroic among some Lebanese).

We keep killing each other over and over again. Every year there is less talk of diplomacy, more threats and bombings.

Take away Hezbollah's arms and there will be another bigger, stronger more angry group to replace them.

(I usually agree with you, Taxloss, but you're not looking at the bigger picture.)

[cali]

13. The claim that

Israel controls the U.S. Congress is absurd. Does AIPAC have a lot of influence? Undoubtedly, but that hardly indicates that Israel controls any of the branches of our government.

[katinmn]

16. Then why has AIPAC given billions of dollars to our legislators?

Why does a Congresswoman who questions legislation supported by AIPAC get labeled a terrorist sympathizer?

Why has the US set its sights on Iran next?

Why is the US in the Middle East at all?

I know control is a strong word. I will say AIPAC has disproportionate influence.

[cali]

24. Disproportionate

Influence is a lot more accurate than saying that AIPAC controls Congress, but I must add that I could find nothing that backs up your claim that AIPAC has given billions to politicians- and seeing as its yearly budget is apparently 15 million, the suggestion that they've given billions is impossible.

[katinmn]

34. Here ya go

Pro-Israel PAC Contributions to 2006 Congressional Candidates
http://www.washington-report.org/archives/May-June_2006/0605031.html
That's just one year and as we all know campaign support is just one way of influencing US foreign policy. We have a 50 year history of supporting Israel.

These writers describe the influence:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/lobby.html
Reference is often made to the "Jewish lobby" in an effort to describe Jewish political influence in the United States. This term is both vague and inadequate. While it is true that American Jews are sometimes represented by lobbyists, such direct efforts to influence policy-makers are but a small part of the lobby’s ability to shape policy.

Organized groups do attempt to directly affect legislation. One of these, the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is a registered lobby. Other groups do not generally engage in direct lobbying (e.g., B’nai B’rith and Hadassah), but do disseminate information and encourage their members to become involved in the political process. They also sometimes lobby on specific issues. Though they have rarely influenced policy, Christian groups have also frequently weighed in on Israel's behalf and several pro-Israel organizations are comprised entirely of non-Jews. These organizations comprise the formal lobby.

U.S. Middle East policy is further shaped by Jewish voting behavior and American public opinion. These indirect means of influence are the informal lobby.

The formal and informal components tend to intersect at several points so the distinction is not always clear-cut. Together, however, they form the Israeli (or pro-Israel) lobby. This is a more accurate label than "Jewish lobby" because a large proportion of the lobby is made up of non-Jews. This term also reflects the lobby’s objective. The Israeli lobby can then be defined as those formal and informal actors that directly and indirectly influence American policy to support Israel.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060814/aipacs_hold
What the region needs now, according to Brzezinski, is an American leader brave enough to say: "Either I make policy on the Middle East or AIPAC makes policy on the Middle East."

snip
By blindly following AIPAC, Congress reinforces a hard-line consensus: Criticizing Israeli actions, even in the best of faith, is anti-Israel and possibly anti-Semitic; enthusiastically backing whatever military action Israel undertakes is the only acceptable stance.

(And some more history to back up the lobbying marketing claim. My bad for not including it the first time. Assumed it was common knowledge.)

http://www.jewishaz.com/jewishnews/020426/aipac.shtml
WASHINGTON - The American pro-Israel lobby is mounting a new offensive to equate the U.S.-led war on terrorism with Israel's own battle against terror.

Timed to coincide with the annual policy conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, U.S. lawmakers have introduced several pieces of legislation to display support for Israel in Congress and combat what is viewed as increasing pressure on the Bush administration's Middle East policy from Europe, Arab states and the United Nations.

"Israel is on the front lines of the war on terrorism and she must have the resources to continue defending herself," said Howard Kohr, executive director of AIPAC. Kohr touted the proposals in a speech at AIPAC's annual policy conference April 22.

The conference drew 5,000 delegates from around the country - double last year's attendance - a sign that American Jews are revved up in the fight to ensure that the U.S. government stands behind Israel.

The bills, all introduced last week at the urging of AIPAC, seek:

additional aid for Israel to combat its war on terrorism,

sanctions against the Palestinian Authority and its leader, Yasser Arafat, and

the inclusion of Syria in the president's "axis of evil."

AIPAC delegates were scheduled to lobby their members of Congress on the issues April 23.

[Taxloss]

25. Nasrallah is a bit inconsistent on Palestine.

Although a Palestinian state would do one hell of a lot of defuse tension in the region, I have my doubts as to whether it would satisfy Nasrallah. To put it simplistically, Hezbollah putting down its arms could only increase peace in the region, and Israel cannot make that move itself wihout there being no more Israel. Recognition of Israel's right to exist is the issue here; a joint declaration in which Israel recognised the need for an independent Palestinian state (and did something about it) and the other states in the region, ESPECIALLY Iran and Syria, recognised the rigt of Israel to exist is really the key to peace. Without that we're stuck - there will continue to be wars and proxy wars.

[treestar]

31. Just because they say that does not mean they can't talk

It is getting tiresome. Something "thinks Israel has no right to exist" and that's the end of negotiations. You know, the rest of the world is getting tired of hearing that as an excuse for no talking. They are just taking the extreme bargaining position.

[Taxloss]

32. How can Israel negotiate with people who won't even recognise

it's existence? Nasrallah says he won't negotiate with Israel because in his opinion there's no such state as Israel - with the best will in the world it's freaking hard to see how Israel can even start to negotiate with that position!

[Joanne98]

3. I wouldn't let them disarm me either.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Nasrallah Has Called For The Murder of Every Jew on Earth

That makes him way, way worse than, say, Bush.

Doesn't sound like a person that anyone can make a sane deal with.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

Oh, I don't know.

Seems like actually killing hundreds of thousands of people is actually worse than just talking about it.

[katinmn]

12. Bingo! It's even worse when you say you're liberating them while

you're raping, torturing and murdering them.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. Use Your Head

The Nazi gas chambers were better than Bush?

[katinmn]

17. Huh? You've veered off the path there, Manny.

[MannyGoldstein]

23. I Hope I Misunderstood.

You seemed to write that killing people while saying that you're "liberating" them is worse than simply killing people and admitting genocide.

[katinmn]

29. Lying to our victims (the Iraqis) further dishonors them.

[Henny Penny]

7. Do you have a link for that? n/t

[Taxloss]

10. Here:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-dershowitz/hezbollahs-goal-going-_b_26983.html

[katinmn]

22. The comments are good. :-)

[Henny Penny]

27. Thanx. I will check it out.. n/t

[evox]

20. not true

I been doing some research and never found such statement by Nasrallah.

[MannyGoldstein]

36. Which Part of This Are You Having Trouble Interpreting?

"If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide." - Hassan Nasrallah (NY Times, May 23, 2004) -

Perhaps you think Nasrallah wants it to be easier to give medals to the Jews? Think again.

[High Plains]

38. Please show me where and when he said that.

[Mabus]

5. He's been the Hezbollah leader since the early 90's

so I'm sure they have well aware of him for some time.

It's not just a matter of Hezbollah being anti-American or a group that we disagree with. It's a group that has killed dozens of our soldiers and innocent Jews and wants to kill more. In a speech aired February 18, according to the Middle East Media Research Institute, Sheik Nasrallah said, "This American administration is an enemy. Our motto, which we are not afraid to repeat year after year, is: 'Death to America.' " In a speech broadcast the next day, he cited the Iranian Supreme Leader and preached, "We are not interested in our own personal security. On the contrary, each of us lives his days and nights hoping more than anything to be killed for the sake of Allah. The most honorable death is to be killed."

A Hezbollah statement in 1992 vowed, "It is an open war until the elimination of Israel and until the death of the last Jew on earth." In 2002, Sheik Nasrallah was quoted by the Lebanon Daily Star as encouraging Jews to move to Israel. "If they all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide," he was quoted as saying. http://www.nysun.com/article/10439

[NNN0LHI]

9. During WW II Germans, Italians and Japanese killed a lot of Americans too

Sometimes the killing just needs to end.

Don

[Mabus]

19. I don't think Nasrallah has changed his mind

IIRC, you wondered if Nasrallah was some new enemy. He's not. He's been around a while and has evinced more than once an intent to kill all Jewish people.

It would be an absolute miracle if humans stopped killing humans but it doesn't look like it is going to happen anytime soon.

[rockymountaindem]

37. True

But in the case of WWII, the killing didn't end until the Axis side was completely, wholly and utterly crushed and without means to carry on any effective resistance. Well, correct that. Germany was ground into dirt. Japan could have fought on for some time, particularly in mainland China far from the recently-opened front against the Soviets in Manchuria. However, we made it abundantly clear to them that the USA could quickly end their capability for future resistance, and indeed the entire future of Japan. We did that with the most overwhelming and destructive display of force in human history.

I'd say that did the trick. However, it does not set an encouraging precedent for the Israel/Hezbollah conflict. IMHO, this will not end before one side or the other is completely destroyed. The good news is that Hezbollah can be destroyed, or severly weakened, by using peaceful means of undermining their support, such as building a robust Lebanese state which will provide for its citizens in ways that currently handled by Hezbollah. That said, I think there will be more fighting between Hezbollah and Israel in the future. And in that conflict, my heart and my brain both tell me that Israel will eventually win.

[acmejack]

8. Easier said than done.

Under what scenario can you imagine Hezbollah disarming willingly?

[Solo_in_MD]

18. I can think of several but they would all involve various levels

of duress and include things like Pork BBQ, whipped cream, and and live chickens... :o

Seriously, its not going to happen unless Syria and Iran make it happen. They are Nasrallah's sugar daddy. Until they cut off funds and arms, there will be no peace.

[katinmn]

21. I have an idea. It's called diplomacy.

Why don't Jimmy Carter and Jesse Jackson - two real Americans -- go and talk to Iran and Syria and negotiate a new agreement. Bush is a candyass and has been told he is at war with "Islamo-Fascists" so he won't.

Didn't Jesse help broker a peace deal back in the 80s?

[Solo_in_MD]

26. Jesse and Jimmy talk a good game

But their actual effectiveness is marginal at best.

[Taxloss]

30. If they can get concrete recognition of Israel's right to exist,

with no strings attached, then we're getting somewhere

[katinmn]

35. How about we agree that everyone has a right to exist?

No strings attached.

Palestinians require, deserve and have waited too long to live in freedom on land of their own and with self-governance. How would you like to be born, live always with violence and checkpoints, and die surrounded by barbed wire and a 70-foot wall like you are some kind of animal?

Yes, the Jews have suffered and in Israel have always lived under constant fear of attack. But the US backing Israel without even attempting a solution for all is just plain wrong. It doesn't make Israel more safe either.

So many wise people fail to have compassion for an oppressed group of people and have a limited perspective. And the more entrenched the US becomes in the Middle East, the more the indigenous people will resent us, as we would if the roles were reversed.

[acmejack]

28. Some class A diplomacy will be required.

I wonder who in the World has the wherewithal to pull it off? I don't see what we have to offer them to make them even remotely interested in being cooperative after bullying them as we have.

What took you to MD? Your profile makes you sound like a fellow sub contractor or something similar. I spent a while in Sykesville with Westinghouse, now Northrop-Grumman.

[Solo_in_MD]

33. My wife got a fellowship to JHU, and took a sabatical

While we were here, I got fell into contract work that is too well paying to leave right now. The family returned to CA and I am making more than enough money to justify staying here for a while longer. Its mostly going into college funds for our kids and retirement for us.