[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

O.T. War in the middle East...
Author Thread
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/18/2006  1:46 PM
WHY ISRAEL SHOULD BOMB SYRIA.

by Michael B. Oren Post date: 07.17.06

Early 40 years ago, Israel and the Arab world fought a war that altered the course of Middle Eastern history. Now, as the region teeters on the brink of a new and potentially more violent cataclysm, it is important to revisit the lessons of the Six Day War, a conflict that few Middle Eastern countries wanted and none foresaw.

By 1967, ten years after the Sinai Campaign, the Arab-Israeli dispute had settled into an uneasy status quo. The radical Egyptian regime of Gamal Abdel Nasser still proclaimed its commitment to liberating Palestine and throwing the Jews into the sea, as did its conservative rivals in Jordan and Saudi Arabia, but none of these states made any attempt to renew hostilities. On the contrary, Egypt remained quiescent behind the U.N. peacekeeping forces deployed in Sinai, Gaza, and the Straits of Tiran since 1957. Jordan maintained secret contacts with the Israelis. Israel, for its part, had long learned to ignore bellicose Arab rhetoric and to seek backdoor channels to even the most vituperative Arab rulers. As late as April 1967, officials at Israel's foreign ministry were speculating whether Nasser might be a viable partner for a peace process.

But one Arab state did not want peace. Syria, then as now under the rule of the belligerent Baath Party, wanted war. Having tried and failed in 1964 to divert the Jordan River before it crossed the Israeli border--IDF jets and artillery blasted the dams--the Syrians began supporting a little-known Palestinian guerrilla group called Al Fatah under the leadership of Yasir Arafat. Using Lebanon as its principal base, Al Fatah commenced operations against Israel in 1965 and rapidly escalated its attacks. Finally, at the end of 1966, Israeli officials felt compelled to retaliate. But, fearing the repercussions of attacking Soviet-backed Syria, they decided to strike at an Al Fatah stronghold in the Jordanian-controlled West Bank.

The raid unfortunately led to a firefight between IDF and Jordanian troops, and to Jordanian claims that Nasser had not done enough to protect the West Bank Palestinians. Desperate to restore his reputation, Nasser exploited a spurious Soviet report of Israeli war plans to evict U.N. peacekeepers. He closed the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping, concentrated 100,000 of his troops along the Israeli border, and forged anti-Israeli pacts with Syria and Jordan. The Arab world rejoiced at the prospect of annihilating Israel, and even the Soviets, eager to find some means of distracting American attention from Vietnam, were pleased. Israeli leaders had no choice but to determine when and where to strike preemptively.

And so, suddenly and unexpectedly, a regional war erupted that the principal combatants--Israel, Egypt, and Jordan--neither desired nor anticipated. The lesson: Local conflicts in the Middle East can quickly spin out of control and spiral into a regional conflagration.

The lesson is especially pertinent to the current crisis. Then, as now, the Syrians have goaded a terrorist organization, Hezbollah, to launch raids against Israel from Lebanon. Then, as now, the rapid rise of terrorist attacks has forced Israel to mount reprisals. If the Soviets in 1967 wanted to divert America's attention from Vietnam, the Iranians--Syria's current sponsors--want to divert American attention from their nuclear-arms program. And once again Israel must decide when to strike back and against whom.

Back in 1966, Israel recoiled from attacking Syria and instead raided Jordan, inadvertently setting off a concatenation of events culminating in war. Israel is once again refraining from an entanglement with Hezbollah's Syrian sponsors, perhaps because it fears a clash with Iran. And just as Israel's failure to punish the patron of terror in 1967 ultimately triggered a far greater crisis, so too today, by hesitating to retaliate against Syria, Israel risks turning what began as a border skirmish into a potentially more devastating confrontation. Israel may hammer Lebanon into submission and it may deal Hezbollah a crushing blow, but as long as Syria remains hors de combat there is no way that Israel can effect a permanent change in Lebanon's political labyrinth and ensure an enduring ceasefire in the north. On the contrary, convinced that Israel is unwilling to confront them, the Syrians may continue to escalate tensions, pressing them toward the crisis point. The result could be an all-out war with Syria as well as Iran and severe political upheaval in Jordan, Egypt, and the Gulf.

The answer lies in delivering an unequivocal blow to Syrian ground forces deployed near the Lebanese border. By eliminating 500 Syrian tanks--tanks that Syrian President Bashar Al Assad needs to preserve his regime--Israel could signal its refusal to return to the status quo in Lebanon. Supporting Hezbollah carries a prohibitive price, the action would say. Of course, Syria could respond with missile attacks against Israeli cities, but given the dilapidated state of Syria's army, the chances are greater that Assad will simply internalize the message. Presented with a choice between saving Hezbollah and staying alive, Syria's dictator will probably choose the latter. And the message of Israel's determination will also be received in Tehran.

Any course of military action carries risks, especially in the unpredictable Middle East. But if the past is any guide, and if the Six Day War presents a paradigm of an unwanted war that might have been averted with an early, well-placed strike at Syria, then Israel's current strategy in Lebanon deserves to be rethought. If Syria escapes unscathed and Iran undeterred, Israel will remain insecure.

Michael B. Oren is the author of Six Days of War: June 1967 and the Making of the Modern Middle East (Oxford University Press).

------------
I don't know why this expert is not concerned with Syria's military defence pact with Iran that they announced 3 weeks ago... it seems to me that bombing Syria would pull Iran into direct conflict.
AUTOADVERT
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/18/2006  6:53 PM
Iran to Hizbullah: Curb attacks on Israel

Arabic language newspaper reports Iran was warned by European country that Israel is ready to attack targets in Syria in campaign to liquidate Hizbullah; Tehran sends foreign minister to Damascus to demand Hizbullah curtail attacks against Israel
Roee Nahmias

Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was sent to Damascus to urge Hizbullah to curb rocket attacks against Israel and to release two Israel Defense Forces soldiers captured a week ago in order to avoid further escalations, a London-based Arabic daily reported.

Al-Sharq al-Awsat reported that a European country warned Iran that Israel is ready for a confrontation with Syria, which recently signed a defense alliance with Iran.

The alliance stipulates that Iran would send arms and troops to back Syria should Damascus be attacked.

Iran was also warned that Israel is determined to crush Hizbullah's infrastructure and liquidate its leadership.

Lebanese criticism

The report, which was based on leaks by an Iranian presidential aide, said Iran is worried by criticism waged against Hizbullah by an array of Lebanese politicians like Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, Druze leader Walid Jumblatt and Saad Hariri, son of slain former prime minister Rafik Hariri.


The trio outspokenly attacked Hizbullah for being Iran's proxy and condemned as "irresponsible" the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers.

The official said: "Iran enjoyed a good reputation among the Lebanese for supporting Hizbullah. Today, many of our allies have turned their backs on us."

In a letter to his Syrian counterpart Bashar Assad, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Iran is ready to defend Syria against Israeli attacks.

[Edited by - colorfl1 on 07-18-2006 7:43 PM]
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/18/2006  8:36 PM
who is putting civilian's at risk???J('');

"...At the briefing, IAF Commander Brig. Gen. Amir Eshel presented footage of an army aircraft scoring a direct hit on a truck laden with rockets, and noted that the truck was disguised as a civilian vehicle in order not to be identified.

“We are faced with very complex operations here, which demand excellent intelligence information. To thwart this, we are blocking the Lebanon-Syria border, and warplanes are constantly flying over the area,” he said. He noted that as time passes, the air force was becoming familiar with the enemy and its operations were therefore becoming more sophisticated and efficient."
Killa4luv
Posts: 27768
Alba Posts: 51
Joined: 6/23/2002
Member: #261
USA
7/18/2006  8:48 PM
Posted by simrud:

Liberals are not "leftists". As a matter of fact what they call a "liberal" in the US is a moderate everywhere else in the world.

While mainsream liberals try to enact reform which is its nature socialist, and has worked in many European countries, most of whom btw have pretty much Socialist systems of government at this point, especially in Scandinavia, these morons are doing the same thing their buddies on the righ extreme are doing. They concentrating on bs issues such as gay merraige, abortion, prayer in school etc.

These are all moral issues that should be left up to the individual. The only federal responsiblity when it comes down to such things is to make sure State does not interfere with the citizens rights by passing State laws that do exaclty that. There is no reason, or need for federal legislation on the issue, other then the enforcment of the laws already in place.

We have major issues such us the undderdevelopment of large parts of the nation, in rural South and the predominantly black-hispnic inner city ghettos, looming job loss by factory wokers, a giant decifit, a tax system that does not perform, trust and monopoly violations by huge inernational corps, the fact that the army is undersaffed, etc.

These are the real issues at hand. But I'm willing to bet those who scream the loudest, and those are the crazys on both sides of political and idelological spectrum, will not even metnion any of those anytime soon.

This is the the most sense you have made on this thread.

I have never made an apology for terrorism. But those who give blind support for Israel do. I understand yours and Jews' allegiance to Israel in general, but this should not blind you from obvious realities and make you numb to injustice. The main difference between me and you, is I care about all people, not just ones who look like me, or share my culture.

I'll be back to the rest of you in a minute.
simrud
Posts: 23392
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/13/2003
Member: #474
USA
7/18/2006  9:12 PM
Man you just don't get it. You think I'm happy innocent people die in Lebanon?

I just see no other way for Israel to exist, as simple as that.

You are operating on two assumptions with which I simply do not agree.

1)Israel does not legitimatley belong to the Jews.
2 Arabs do not have equal rights to Jews in the state of Israel.

There are Arabs in the Israeli government, if I'm not mistaken 25% of the country's population is not Jewish, both Christian and Muslim, not sure if they are all Arabs or not. An Arab who accepts Israel as a state, was borun on its territory, and is willing to do is has the Israeli citizenshiop. And has the same rights as any Jew.

Now are there tensions? Like hell there are, because of the overall situation.

As for your main belief, the agrument is complicated, and we can argue it for a very very long time, and still not come to a resolution, because it is a matter of opinoin. There are facts that support both sides. However you will call my facts lies, and I will call your facts lies, and that will be the end of it.

The reality is, however, that Israel is here, with millions of people living there. They can't just go anywhere else. Half of the Arab/Muslim world refuses to recognize that fact. So they fund and support the likes of Hizbollah and Hamas.

Now that we are talkin about Hizbollah, let me tell you their origins. You will prolly not beleive me, but why not, I have a few mintutes to spare. They originated in Jordan, as an Iranin/Syrian sponsored movement looking to overthrow the Jordanian king, much in the same way as the Iranian revolution. Which they tried to do. The Jordanian kind then called on Israel to help him, which Israel was ofcousre happy to do. Israeli army went into Jorand, crushed the rebillion, and the king exiles a bunch of Jordanians out of his country. They settled in the south of Lebanon. This is the situation as it stands today.

Now on another idea of yours, that Israel was a bad idea to begin with, I agree, I would have rather Jews got a state somewhere else, not in the middle of hostile territory. But that was the only place the Europeans were willing to give them. So we took what we were offered. If Israel was in the middle of the Sahara desert, I bet it would be a much better situation, and Jews would just as well there, considering there are no natural resources in Israel at all. It might as have been the desert, and much of it was such indeed.
A glimmer of hope maybe?!?
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
7/18/2006  10:22 PM
Which countries or organizations have an official policy to eliminate another country?

Hint: Not Israel.

'Nuff said.
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/19/2006  10:53 AM
MYTH

“Modern Arab nations are only anti-Israel and have never been anti-Jewish.”

FACT

Arab leaders have repeatedly made clear their animosity toward Jews and Judaism. For example, on November 23, 1937, Saudi Arabia's King Ibn Saud told British Colonel H.R.P. Dickson: "Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus) and their subsequent rejection of His chosen Prophet." He added "that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew ensures him an immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of God Almighty."3

When Hitler introduced the Nuremberg racial laws in 1935, he received telegrams of congratulation from all corners of the Arab world.4 Later, during the war, one of his most ardent supporters was the Mufti of Jerusalem.

Jews were never permitted to live in Jordan. Civil Law No. 6, which governed the Jordanian-occupied West Bank, states explicitly: "Any man will be a Jordanian subject if he is not Jewish."5

The Arab countries see to it that even young schoolchildren are taught to hate Jews. The Syrian Minister of Education wrote in 1968: "The hatred which we indoctrinate into the minds of our children from their birth is sacred."6

After the Six-Day War in 1967, the Israelis found public school textbooks that had been used to educate Arab children in the West Bank. They were replete with racist and hateful portrayals of Jews:

"The Jews are scattered to the ends of the earth, where they live exiled and despised, since by their nature they are vile, greedy and enemies of mankind, by their nature they were tempted to steal a land as asylum for their disgrace."7

"Analyze the following sentences:

1. The merchant himself traveled to the African continent.

2. We shall expel all the Jews from the Arab countries."8

"The Jews of our time are the descendants of the Jews who harmed the Prophet Muhammad. They betrayed him, they broke the treaty with him and joined sides with his enemies to fight him..."9

"The Jews in Europe were persecuted and despised because of their corruption, meanness and treachery."10

A 1977 Jordanian teachers' manual for first-graders used on the West Bank instructs educators to "implant in the soul of the pupil the rule of Islam that if the enemies occupy even one inch of the Islamic lands, jihad (holy war) becomes imperative for every Muslim." It also says the Jews plotted to assassinate Muhammad when he was a child. Another Jordanian text, a 1982 social studies book, claims Israel ordered the massacre of Palestinians in Sabra and Shatila during the Lebanon war, but does not mention the Christian Arabs who were the perpetrators.

According to a study of Syrian textbooks, "the Syrian educational system expands hatred of Israel and Zionism to anti-Semitism directed at all Jews. That anti-Semitism evokes ancient Islamic motifs to describe the unchangeable and treacherous nature of the Jews. Its inevitable conclusion is that all Jews must be annihilated." To cite one example, an eleventh grade textbook claims that Jews hated Muslims and were driven by envy to incite hostility against them:

The Jews spare no effort to deceive us, deny our Prophet, incite against us, and distort the holy scriptures.

The Jews cooperate with the Polytheist and the infidels against the Muslims because they know Islam reveals their crafty ways and abject characteristics.

An Arabic translation of Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf has been distributed in East Jerusalem and territories controlled by the Palestinian Authority (PA) and became a bestseller.

Occasionally, Arab anti-Semitism surfaces at the United Nations. In March 1991, for example, a Syrian delegate to the UN Human Rights Commission read a statement recommending that commission members read "a valuable book" called The Matzoh of Zion, written by Syrian Defense Minister Mustafa Tlas. The book justifies ritual murder charges brought against the Jews in the Damascus blood libel of 1840. (The phrase "blood libel" refers to accusations that Jews kill Christian children to use their blood for the ritual of making matzoh at Passover.)

King Faisal of Saudi Arabia uttered a similar slander in a 1972 interview:

Israel has had malicious intentions since ancient times. Its objective is the destruction of all other religions....They regard the other religions as lower than their own and other peoples as inferior to their level. And on the subject of vengeance — they have a certain day on which they mix the blood of non-Jews into their bread and eat it. It happened that two years ago, while I was in Paris on a visit, that the police discovered five murdered children. Their blood had been drained, and it turned out that some Jews had murdered them in order to take their blood and mix it with the bread that they eat on this day. This shows you what is the extent of their hatred and malice toward non-Jewish peoples.

On November 11, 1999, during a Gaza appearance with First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton, Suha Arafat, wife of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat stated: "Our people have been subjected to the daily and extensive use of poisonous gas by the Israeli forces, which has led to an increase in cancer cases among women and children." Similar specious allegations have been made by other Palestinian officials.

The Arab/Muslim press, which is almost exclusively controlled by the governments in each Middle Eastern nation, regularly publish anti-Semitic articles and cartoons. Today, it remains common to find anti-Semitic publications in Egypt. For example, the establishment Al-Ahram newspaper published an article giving the "historical" background of the blood libel tradition while accusing Israel of using the blood of Palestinian children to bake matzohs up to the present time.18 Anti-Semitic articles also regularly appear in the press in Jordan and Syria. Many of the attacks deal with denial of the Holocaust, its "exploitation" by Zionism, and a comparison of Zionism and Israel to Nazism.



MYTH

“Jews who lived in Islamic countries were well-treated by the Arabs.”

FACT

While Jewish communities in Islamic countries fared better overall than those in Christian lands in Europe, Jews were no strangers to persecution and humiliation among the Arabs. As Princeton University historian Bernard Lewis has written: "The Golden Age of equal rights was a myth, and belief in it was a result, more than a cause, of Jewish sympathy for Islam."22

Muhammad, the founder of Islam, traveled to Medina in 622 A.D. to attract followers to his new faith. When the Jews of Medina refused to recognize Muhammad as their Prophet, two of the major Jewish tribes were expelled. In 627, Muhammad's followers killed between 600 and 900 of the men, and divided the surviving Jewish women and children amongst themselves.

The Muslim attitude toward Jews is reflected in various verses throughout the Koran, the holy book of the Islamic faith. "They [the Children of Israel] were consigned to humiliation and wretchedness. They brought the wrath of God upon themselves, and this because they used to deny God's signs and kill His Prophets unjustly and because they disobeyed and were transgressors" (Sura 2:61). According to the Koran, the Jews try to introduce corruption (5:64), have always been disobedient (5:78), and are enemies of Allah, the Prophet and the angels (2:97-98).

Jews were generally viewed with contempt by their Muslim neighbors; peaceful coexistence between the two groups involved the subordination and degradation of the Jews. In the ninth century, Baghdad's Caliph al-Mutawakkil designated a yellow badge for Jews, setting a precedent that would be followed centuries later in Nazi Germany.24

At various times, Jews in Muslim lands lived in relative peace and thrived culturally and economically. The position of the Jews was never secure, however, and changes in the political or social climate would often lead to persecution, violence and death.

When Jews were perceived as having achieved too comfortable a position in Islamic society, anti-Semitism would surface, often with devastating results. On December 30, 1066, Joseph HaNagid, the Jewish vizier of Granada, Spain, was crucified by an Arab mob that proceeded to raze the Jewish quarter of the city and slaughter its 5,000 inhabitants. The riot was incited by Muslim preachers who had angrily objected to what they saw as inordinate Jewish political power.

Similarly, in 1465, Arab mobs in Fez slaughtered thousands of Jews, leaving only 11 alive, after a Jewish deputy vizier treated a Muslim woman in "an offensive manner." The killings touched off a wave of similar massacres throughout Morocco.25

Other mass murders of Jews in Arab lands occurred in Morocco in the 8th century, where whole communities were wiped out by the Muslim ruler Idris I; North Africa in the 12th century, where the Almohads either forcibly converted or decimated several communities; Libya in 1785, where Ali Burzi Pasha murdered hundreds of Jews; Algiers, where Jews were massacred in 1805, 1815 and 1830; and Marrakesh, Morocco, where more than 300 Jews were murdered between 1864 and 1880.26

Decrees ordering the destruction of synagogues were enacted in Egypt and Syria (1014, 1293-4, 1301-2), Iraq (854-859, 1344) and Yemen (1676). Despite the Koran's prohibition, Jews were forced to convert to Islam or face death in Yemen (1165 and 1678), Morocco (1275, 1465 and 1790-92) and Baghdad (1333 and 1344).27

The situation of Jews in Arab lands reached a low point in the 19th century. Jews in most of North Africa (including Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Morocco) were forced to live in ghettos. In Morocco, which contained the largest Jewish community in the Islamic Diaspora, Jews were made to walk barefoot or wear shoes of straw when outside the ghetto. Even Muslim children participated in the degradation of Jews, by throwing stones at them or harassing them in other ways. The frequency of anti-Jewish violence increased, and many Jews were executed on charges of apostasy. Ritual murder accusations against the Jews became commonplace in the Ottoman Empire.28

As distinguished Orientalist G.E. von Grunebaum has written:

It would not be difficult to put together the names of a very sizeable number Jewish subjects or citizens of the Islamic area who have attained to high rank, to power, to great financial influence, to significant and recognized intellectual attainment; and the same could be done for Christians. But it would again not be difficult to compile a lengthy list of persecutions, arbitrary confiscations, attempted forced conversions, or pogroms.29

The danger for Jews became even greater as a showdown approached in the UN. The Syrian delegate, Faris el-Khouri, warned: "Unless the Palestine problem is settled, we shall have difficulty in protecting and safeguarding the Jews in the Arab world."30

More than a thousand Jews were killed in anti-Jewish rioting during the 1940's in Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Syria and Yemen.31 This helped trigger the mass exodus of Jews from Arab countries.

Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/19/2006  7:46 PM
Killa, check out this picture and link so that you can understand who consistently involves civilians and children and puts their lives at risk!! You cannot fight these guys with rules from the Geneva convention!


"Those are children packed in close around Hamas gunmen as they engage Israeli forces. Children being used as human shields. You want
to try someone for war crimes? There are your defendants."

http://yaakov.newsvine.com/_news/2006/07/19/292808-why-israel-kills-so-many-civilians
This link has excellent resources that prove Hamas recruits children and comments from some, very well versed on the subject.

[Edited by - Silverfuel on 07-19-2006 7:48 PM]
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
firefly
Posts: 23223
Alba Posts: 17
Joined: 7/26/2004
Member: #721
United Kingdom
7/20/2006  11:25 AM
http://www.break.com/movies/startswiththekids.html
Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask why not?
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/20/2006  8:51 PM
AMERICA'S PROXY WAR.
Other Means
by Lawrence F. Kaplan
Post date: 07.20.06
Issue date: 07.31.06

qWhen the elephants fight, the grass suffers." Or so went a variation of the Third World lament during the cold war. The lament clearly applies today in Lebanon. But it also applies in Washington, where the administration views the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah as a classic case of great-power brinkmanship--in this case, pitting the United States against Iran. The paradigm that the Bush team has drawn on in its response to the Lebanon crisis isn't the war on terrorism. It's the proxy battles of the cold war.

Proxy wars have rules, too--the first being that they should never reach the point of drawing their great-power backers into a wider one. To prevent this from happening during the proxy conflicts of the cold war--whether in Afghanistan, Nicaragua, or the Middle East--the Americans and the Soviets always established red lines beyond which their clients were not to venture. Hence, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger prevailed upon Israel to stop short of destroying Egypt's Third Army during the Yom Kippur War, thereby averting a direct conflict with the Soviet Union. Even in a war with much lower stakes, Washington repeatedly checked Israel's freedom to maneuver during its 1982 invasion of Lebanon. But, apparently, not this time. Pressed about the conflict, White House spokesman Tony Snow declared, "The president is not going to make military decisions for Israel."

Perhaps not exactly. But red lines have been drawn, whether the White House chooses to acknowledge them or not. With its own timetable for contesting Iran's nuclear ambitions--not to mention 130,000 U.S. troops fighting next door in Iraq--the administration has no appetite for a wider war. "If this escalates into open conflict between Iran and Israel," says Ray Takeyh, an Iran expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, "America's goals in Iraq and its nuclear diplomacy at the U.N. will both go up in flames." If administration officials haven't needed to sketch out a series of explicit red lines for the Jewish state, it's largely because Israel has done it for them: Israeli officials have offered assurances to their American counterparts that, absent direct provocation, they have no intention of striking either Iran or Syria.

Within Lebanon, meanwhile, the Bush team has drawn one red line--namely, the preservation of the Lebanese government. On the ground in Israel, Deputy National Security Adviser Elliot Abrams and Assistant Secretary of State David Welch have pressed Israel, with mixed results, to spare the country's infrastructure. For his part, President Bush has made a point of emphasizing "the fragile democracy in Lebanon," while Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice insists it is "extremely important that Israel exercise her restraint in its activities of self-defense." That insistence derives from something more than solidarity with the government in Beirut or even a humanitarian impulse. The administration has given Israel the green light to "hit Hezbollah hard," in the words of a senior Israeli official. But, with one eye to the aftermath, the Bush team fears civilian casualties will amplify the chorus of international criticism, forcing a premature halt to the campaign and poisoning a post-conflict settlement. "Israel knows it can't dismantle Hezbollah from the air, and it knows the [Lebanese] government can't rein [Hezbollah] in," says a Pentagon official. "Everything you're seeing is about leverage for the end game." That end game, both the United States and Israel hope, will include European--and particularly French--political support for an effort to neutralize Hezbollah.

Overall, however, the Bush team has spent many more hours encouraging Israel than constraining it. The administration, after all, has no more use for Hezbollah than Israel does. And, while the organization may not pose the existential threat to the United States that it does to Israel, the administration views it as a crucial proxy for Iran. Critics delight in faulting the Bush administration for viewing the international scene through a "state-centric" lens. But, when it comes to Hezbollah--which boasts verifiable return addresses in Tehran and Damascus--what other lens is there? The terrorist group, a State Department official says, counts as one of many clients that Iran has used to extend its "hegemony" through the Middle East. "There's a lot of people who believe that the Iranians are trying to exert more and more influence over the entire region, and the use of Hezbollah is to create more chaos to advance their strategy," President Bush told Newsweek's Richard Wolffe last week, adding that this was "a theory that's got some legs to it as far as I'm concerned." In this telling, Hezbollah's provocation actually amounts to an opportunity to roll back Iranian influence. In fending off calls for a cease-fire, then, administration officials see themselves furthering not only Israel's interests, but also America's. Were the status quo left in place, explains one member of the Bush team, it would amount to a tremendous victory for Tehran. Conversely, any settlement that confirms a crushing defeat of Hezbollah would cut short Iran's reach and humiliate it for the entire region to see.

Even more so, because administration officials believe that Hezbollah's provocation relates, more than anything else, to the coming confrontation at the United Nations over Iran's nuclear program. Citing a catalogue of past examples in which Iran "turned on and turned off" Hezbollah activity at the Israeli border, a Pentagon official says, "This is [Iran's] way of saying, 'Make life hard for us, and we'll make it hard for you.'" Specifically, the White House sees the crisis as Iran's attempt to conflate its nuclear program with the Arab-Israeli conflict. In this, the Iranians already may have been dealt a setback, as most Arab governments have either remained silent or, as in the case of Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia, condemned Hezbollah outright. (As one Lebanon-watcher notes, Hezbollah's actions have left a good chunk of the Saudi royal family stranded at Lebanese resorts.)



Proxy wars are complicated undertakings, however. As tended to be the pattern during the cold war, while senior administration officials see the meddling hand of a larger power, the foreign policy bureaucracy over which they preside sees a local conflict--the product of indigenous forces, with nearby consequences. In particular, area specialists at the State Department and the Pentagon fear the consequences in Lebanon and Iraq.

Having encouraged and taken pride in Lebanon's Cedar Revolution--in which a combination of popular outrage and Western pressure forced Syrian troops from Lebanon last year--State Department officials, particularly those in the Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, lament the country's unraveling. Last year, Lebanese American University Professor Habib Malik told me, "The overwhelming majority in Lebanon realize that what's happening is the result of U.S. benevolence--Bush is even being called 'St. George.'" According to the White House's logic, U.S. support for the Israeli bombing campaign won't necessarily deplete this goodwill. But the government's Middle East specialists argue that the air campaign may be erasing last year's gains in one fell swoop. "In Lebanon, you may already be seeing diminishing returns," says David Schenker, until recently a Lebanon analyst at the Defense Department and now a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "The longer this goes on, the greater the danger that Lebanese anger could move away from Hezbollah and toward Israel, and there is a risk that the United States could be held responsible."

Nor is this the greatest risk the United States faces. While the State Department bureaucracy fears for Lebanon's future, senior officers at the Pentagon fear the effect on America's own war a few hundred miles to the east. Taken aback at the scope of the air campaign, a Pentagon planner explains the concern of his colleagues this way: "Iran has three strategic assets: Hezbollah, missiles, and its people in Iraq. If Hezbollah's existence is genuinely threatened, there's no question Iran will ratchet up the pressure and the Badr Brigades and [Moqtada Al] Sadr will start to attack us [in Iraq]." Thus far, Sadr has contented himself with menacing rhetoric, warning: "[W]e in Iraq will not sit by with folded hands before the creep of Zionism." But senior American officers fear worse to come if the bombing campaign extends into next week. And none of this compares with the steep price they say could be exacted upon U.S. forces in the event of a direct confrontation between Israel and Iran or Syria.

Such a conflict seems unlikely. But what of Lebanon? Asked whether the country deserves its fate, an administration official shrugs: "Yeah, pity Lebanon."
Lawrence F. Kaplan is a senior editor at The New Republic.
colorfl1
Posts: 20781
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 8/6/2004
Member: #731
Canada
7/20/2006  9:00 PM
Hizbullah operatives arrested in West Bank

Several of those arrested Wednesday in the Mukata in Nablus were found to be linked to Hizbullah, it was released for publication Thursday night.

Members belonging to different terrorist organizations were arrested during a joint IDF and Shin Bet operation.

Suspects included Palestinians responsible for the planning and initiation of terrorist attacks, including those belonging to Hizbullah, who were involved in the murders of Israeli citizens.
martin
Posts: 75063
Alba Posts: 108
Joined: 7/24/2001
Member: #2
USA
7/21/2006  3:37 AM
colorfl1, you're good. Keep those articles coming.
Official sponsor of the PURE KNICKS LOVE Program
Rich
Posts: 27410
Alba Posts: 6
Joined: 12/30/2003
Member: #511
USA
7/21/2006  3:57 AM
Posted by martin:

colorfl1, you're good. Keep those articles coming.

But could you please provide links so that I can use them to strengthen my arguments elsewhere, particularly that myth/fact one.
firefly
Posts: 23223
Alba Posts: 17
Joined: 7/26/2004
Member: #721
United Kingdom
7/21/2006  4:44 AM
Posted by Rich:
Posted by martin:

colorfl1, you're good. Keep those articles coming.

But could you please provide links so that I can use them to strengthen my arguments elsewhere, particularly that myth/fact one.

Out of interest, (and this is prolly something i really shouldnt know for my own good) where else are you argueing online Rich? I got your back bro!
Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask why not?
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/21/2006  6:18 AM
Posted by Rich:
Posted by martin:

colorfl1, you're good. Keep those articles coming.
But could you please provide links so that I can use them to strengthen my arguments elsewhere, particularly that myth/fact one.
You really are a treasure chest on this subject colorfl1 and I congratulate you. I also want links.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
Silverfuel
Posts: 31750
Alba Posts: 3
Joined: 6/27/2002
Member: #268
USA
7/21/2006  6:27 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/20/nasrallah.interview/index.html
Hezbollah leader apologizes for attack's child victims
Nasrallah: Militant group not harmed by Israeli attacks

Thursday, July 20, 2006; Posted: 10:28 p.m. EDT (02:28 GMT)

(CNN) -- Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah apologized for an attack that killed two Israeli Arab children in northern Israel, saying the youngsters were "martyrs for Palestine."

In a Thursday interview with Arabic-language news network Al-Jazeera, Nasrallah accepted responsibility for the Wednesday attack, while conceding that an apology to the family was not sufficient.

"To the family that was hit in Nazareth -- on my behalf and my brothers', I apologize to this family," he said.

"Some events like that happen. At any event, those who were killed in Nazareth, we consider them martyrs for Palestine and martyrs for the nation. I pay my condolences to them."
When are you going to apologize for the kids you killed in:
# Mumbai 7/11
# New York 9/11
# London 7/7
# Bali
# Beslan
# Madrid 3/11
These guys have some ****ing nerve! I still cannot get over Arafat having a $1 billion portfolio which included stocks in Coca Cola.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
7/21/2006  8:07 AM
Umm...Hezbollah is not responsible for the killing of those other people at all.

Some of the posts of late in this thread are filled with propaganda and misinformation, in my view. Hezbollah is primarily interested in destroying the state of Israel. Do I think that this is likely or that they are doing the "right thing?" No, but the story here is more complicated than some seem to be portraying the so-called "war against terror".

[Edited by - PresIke on 07-21-2006 08:12 AM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
PresIke
Posts: 27671
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/26/2001
Member: #33
USA
7/21/2006  8:10 AM
Posted by Silverfuel:

Killa, check out this picture and link so that you can understand who consistently involves civilians and children and puts their lives at risk!! You cannot fight these guys with rules from the Geneva convention!


"Those are children packed in close around Hamas gunmen as they engage Israeli forces. Children being used as human shields. You want
to try someone for war crimes? There are your defendants."

http://yaakov.newsvine.com/_news/2006/07/19/292808-why-israel-kills-so-many-civilians
This link has excellent resources that prove Hamas recruits children and comments from some, very well versed on the subject.

[Edited by - Silverfuel on 07-19-2006 7:48 PM]


While I don't approve of such action (although I can't quite tell from that photo if that is true) that "revolutionary" groups have been known to be willing to sacrafice women and children for their cause. One group formerlly from China called the Hmong had some of their warriors sacrafice their wives and children so that they would feel as if they had nothing to loose while fighting against the Chinese attempt to assimilate them. In their mind they were fighting to keep their culture and way of life intact. Sounds familiar, right?

Justification for killing and sacrafice into "rational" cases for "the greater good" can be translated into various forms...as was previously mentioned with the "justification" for the dropping of the atom bomb in WW II.


[Edited by - PresIke on 07-21-2006 08:12 AM]
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
firefly
Posts: 23223
Alba Posts: 17
Joined: 7/26/2004
Member: #721
United Kingdom
7/21/2006  9:35 AM
Posted by PresIke:
Posted by Silverfuel:

Killa, check out this picture and link so that you can understand who consistently involves civilians and children and puts their lives at risk!! You cannot fight these guys with rules from the Geneva convention!


"Those are children packed in close around Hamas gunmen as they engage Israeli forces. Children being used as human shields. You want
to try someone for war crimes? There are your defendants."

http://yaakov.newsvine.com/_news/2006/07/19/292808-why-israel-kills-so-many-civilians
This link has excellent resources that prove Hamas recruits children and comments from some, very well versed on the subject.

[Edited by - Silverfuel on 07-19-2006 7:48 PM]


While I don't approve of such action (although I can't quite tell from that photo if that is true) that "revolutionary" groups have been known to be willing to sacrafice women and children for their cause. One group formerlly from China called the Hmong had some of their warriors sacrafice their wives and children so that they would feel as if they had nothing to loose while fighting against the Chinese attempt to assimilate them. In their mind they were fighting to keep their culture and way of life intact. Sounds familiar, right?

Justification for killing and sacrafice into "rational" cases for "the greater good" can be translated into various forms...as was previously mentioned with the "justification" for the dropping of the atom bomb in WW II.


[Edited by - PresIke on 07-21-2006 08:12 AM]

What the hell are you talking about? 'Cuz if you're saying its ok to hide behind children and then say "look, you killed a child", you really have come to the wrong place. Someone who allows their own children to be hurt for the causes they believe in deserves to be tied up, served to the dogs, hung, drawn, quartered and then cloned so we can kill all their clones too. Do you also believe that psychotic child kidnappers should be more understood in the courts? Perhaps we should see things from their perspective? They think children like it!? Lets try and help the poor misguided peadophiles in our midst, not just try and persecute them! Why are the american courts persecuting the poor misunderstood serial killers and child molesters. Lets see things from their perspective. I seriously hope i misunderstood you, cuz if I didnt, you need to be locked up.
Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask why not?
firefly
Posts: 23223
Alba Posts: 17
Joined: 7/26/2004
Member: #721
United Kingdom
7/21/2006  9:36 AM
I assume you approved of the video I posted earlier as well?
Some men see things as they are and ask why. I dream things that never were and ask why not?
O.T. War in the middle East...

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy