Israel, Lebanon, and Gaza

[scaeagles]

While I think the history of Israel is not in dispute, I understand this is a world in which the controlling party of a piece of real estate is based on who wants it at the time, who is the strongest, and who wants to try to take it. The Israelites, upon release from Egypt, walked around a while and then set about conquering. Others conquered them. Settlers of the North American continent displaced indiginous peoples. Examples ad infinitum.

It is for that reason I can't look at who used to have a parcel of land or a claim to something. That gets WAY out of control as a standard. The only thing one can do is look at they way it is now and the current owners of the property can do their best to defend it.

With Kuwait, the invasion by Saddam was repelled. Danger exists when land is simply given up in the interest of appeasement. I think in the context we are in Godwin's law doesn't really apply, so I'll bring up the Sudentenland. After all, that was all Hitler wanted.

[scaeagles]

I personally have no doubt Iran is behind the escalation of actions by Hezbollah. Irans leader Aminadabooboo (or whatever) has said hey have no righ to exist. What better way to escalate it? Hezbollah does get lots of their funding frmo Iran.

I could see Israel doing something similar to their 1981 (was that the year?) bombing of and Iraqi nuke facility.

I think the biggest risk comes from Iran taking action against Israel. They have already said that if Israel does anyhing to Syria hat there will be grave consequences.

[wendybeth]

Whatever the reason and methodology for Irael's existence, the fact remains that they do exist and have the same right and reason to continue as we do. (We didn't exactly take over this country without causing serious harm to the natives). They have demonstrated that they want to live in peace and have been rebuffed too many times to count. They have a right to defend themselves, and Hamas and Hezbellah know perfectly well that their actions are beyond provocative. I believe they are emboldened by their association with Iran, and no doubt are acting up under the direction of Iran's leaders. Personally, I hope they (Israel) kick ass.

[Nephythys]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Whatever the reason and methodology for Irael's existence, the fact remains that they do exist and have the same right and reason to continue as we do. (We didn't exactly take over this country without causing serious harm to the natives). They have demonstrated that they want to live in peace and have been rebuffed too many times to count. They have a right to defend themselves, and Hamas and Hezbellah know perfectly well that their actions are beyond provocative. I believe they are emboldened by their association with Iran, and no doubt are acting up under the direction of Iran's leaders. Personally, I hope they (Israel) kick ass.

Someone hold me- I agree with everything she just said.

[Moonliner]

Oh goodie. Now I read (in the UK Times) that India is pointing a finger of blame at Pakistan for the recent train bombings. It's the same thing as in Lebanon. India suspects Pakistan militants for the bombings and in turn the Pakistan government for not controlling them.

[sleepyjeff]

Originally Posted by wendybeth

Whatever the reason and methodology for Irael's existence, the fact remains that they do exist and have the same right and reason to continue as we do. (We didn't exactly take over this country without causing serious harm to the natives). They have demonstrated that they want to live in peace and have been rebuffed too many times to count. They have a right to defend themselves, and Hamas and Hezbellah know perfectly well that their actions are beyond provocative. I believe they are emboldened by their association with Iran, and no doubt are acting up under the direction of Iran's leaders. Personally, I hope they (Israel) kick ass.

I wanted to add to the discussion; but everything I have to say is summed up nicely by WB.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

I personally have no doubt Iran is behind the escalation of actions by Hezbollah. Irans leader Aminadabooboo (or whatever) has said hey have no righ to exist. What better way to escalate it? Hezbollah does get lots of their funding frmo Iran.

I could see Israel doing something similar to their 1981 (was that the year?) bombing of and Iraqi nuke facility.

I think the biggest risk comes from Iran taking action against Israel. They have already said that if Israel does anything to Syria hat there will be grave consequences.

What matters is not what we think, or what's true. What matters is what they think and from what I'm hearing on news reports they believe Iran is acting against them via Hezbollah. Of course a large part of the issue in this region is the lack of central authority. Lebanon is not launching rockets at Isreal, Iran did not kidnapp soldigers, but a few radical individuals in each country did take sme part in those actions. Do you hold all of Lebanon responsable for the actions of Hezbollah? Apparently so if you are Isreal. I expect the same will hold with them and Iran. If they can show a radical element in Iran gave orders to Hezbollah ((or even just think) then they will condem the entire country.

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by Moonliner

Do you hold all of Lebanon responsable for the actions of Hezbollah?

This comes to the question I posed earlier - who is responsible for the death of civilians when the terrorists who mount attacks take shelter amongst them? I do not subscribe to school of thought that would blame those taking reprisals. The blood lies with the cowardly instigators who utilize such tactics.

ETA: Damn right, WB.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

- who is responsible for the death of civilians when the terrorists who mount attacks take shelter amongst them? I do not subscribe to school of thought that would blame those taking reprisals. The blood lies with the cowardly instigators who utilize such tactics.

Would the same have been true of the American revolutionaries? They "hid" (aka lived) among the civilian population, as do all guerilla fighters. Are you going to absolve the British of all Colonial deaths in their aim to route out the Revolutionary guerillas? Or is it a matter of whose side you're on?

[scaeagles]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Or is it a matter of whose side you're on?

Certainly a fair question, and I will not deny that my perception of right and wrong comes into play, as does yours.

Not being as knowledgable as I should be on the revolutionary war, I don't completely know the tactics of those involved on either side.

I suppose there is a difference between being in the military and having a home, and a hit and run mentality. Should I be in the Continental army, and I head out and find a patrol of Redcoats and ambush them and run away to my home where my children are, and the Redcoats have followed me and I won't come out, then yes, I am responsible for the deaths of my children when they burn my house down. I have chosen to hide where my children are and place them in harms way.

Should I be a soldier and in the Continental army, and I'm out on the battlefield, and the British find out where I live and go and take my children and kill them to discourage others from joining the Continenal army, then I would blame the British for taking the battle to where the innocents are even when they knew who they were looking for was not there.

I could go on and on with situation analogies, but I'll give one more. Let's say I'm growing crops and feeding the Continental army. The British would have every justification for burning my crops. I add this as a pseudo comparison to Israel bombing airstrips in Lebanon to prevent support of terrorist activities from those airstrips.