Do you support the actions of Israel or Hezbollah?

I gladdly would. Heck I would be glad to buy you and many other Clutchfans a beer even without getting paid for being frustrated over this situation.

 

Unfortunately a good ass-kicking would mean the destruction of Israel. Israel has taken losses and been forced to withdraw before. Unfortunately the short sightedness of Israel politics often lead it back down roads that haven't worked before. Something Israel is far from being alone at.

IMO I think if Israel's military was only strong enough to defend its own borders rather than occupy or invade other territory things would be better for them in the long run. In this regard I do blame US policy. The amount of economic and military aid we give them is what allows a small country to control so much hostile territory.

 

I don't think Hezbelloh would follow retreating IDF forces back into Israel. Their aim is to gain a symbolic victory. Actually, both sides are fighting a symbolic war. Israel is destroying Lebanon in order to punish them for holding hezbelloh. The truth is Israel knows it won't dent Hezbelloh for long. On the Contrary - Hezbelloh will likely learn a great deal from what's happening now and become even craftiers and more capable of inflicting damage on Israeli troops and cities.

The wise course for Israel would be settle it's conflict with the Palestinians as quickly as possible and support the Lebanese Army's effort to rein in Hezbelloh. But Israel still thinks the sword is mightier then the pen.

 

Which agreement was that?

There were a number of maps (including one from the Lebanese military) in '66 and after that showed Shebaa as part of Syria, and thus it was not a condition as part of the UN resolution to end the Six Day War.

 

I agree with this analysis but this still follows with why I think a good ass-kicking of Israel isn't going to be helpful. An Israeli retreat from Lebanon in the face of Hezbollah resistance will not dissuade future Israeli incursions into Lebanon since this happened already. Further on the flip side while I don't support Israel I certainly don't support Hezbollah and Hezbollah militarily forcing them back will only embolden them to further provacative and flat out stupid acts like kidnapping Israeli soldiers and launching missiles into Haifa. The only reasonable course I can see is a voluntary stalement and recognition that neither side can win. Once again though reasonableness in the Middle East these days is rarer than a strip bar serving whiskey with an all pork buffet in Saudi Arabia.

Totally agree and to go further they should look to help rebuild Lebanon's economic infrastructure to improve the longterm prospects of the moderate pro-western forces in Lebanon.

 

Blow it up, then the Lebanese bust their asses fixing the destruction. Blow it up again, and then the US pays to fix it. How in the hell can any sane person make the argument that destroying Lebanon's infrastructure, after all the sweat, money, and blood they poured into repairing it after the long period of conflict, is OK because, "We'll pay to fix it all!" (insert silly Bush grin)

I know you aren't saying that, Sishir, but I keep reading how we are going to, "make it all better!" Tell that to the Lebanese. If all this had happened to Texas, under the same historical circumstances, and it was our bridges being bombed, our highways being cratered, our infrastructure being turned into rubble, our innocent Texans blown to bits, how would we feel? Would Texans sing kumbaya, and proclaim that it's all been made better?? Hell no! Texans would be plotting their revenge, if it took a hundred years.

Christ, how blind can people be?



Keep D&D Civil.

 

At the same time, the land deeds for Shebaa Farms were stamped by Lebanon.

 

Also, I do not believe Hezbollah cares whether Shebaa Farms belongs to Lebanon. The occupation shows that Israel hasn't followed Resolution 242 in withdrawing from occupied lands. Regardless of whether it belongs to Syria or Lebanon, Hezbollah uses the breach of 242 as their excuse.

 

I view it as case by case basis. For starters it depends on whether the terrorist's ideology is secular or religious. Some terror groups operate as unofficial political parties in oppressive states, but if their core is attracted by a fundamentalist ideology, there's not much negotiation to work with from an observer's perspective.

There are many who choose to look at Hezbolah as some kind of unofficial community service program with its acts of feeding the poor and opening up orphanages. You still have to look at its stated ideology and how it affects the other side.

I also think, given the nature of terror groups and it's premium on loyalty, that only battle hardened leaders can speak out without immediate danger. As my manager would say, these groups aren't condusive environments for consensus making....

I agree. It's the long term solution for workable peace. You still have those extremists to deal with. The hardest trial will be when one side's extremist breaks the ceasefire and how everyone reacts. The negotiated settlement is only there to begin a currency of trust. We've seen it time and time again. Both sides want and negotiate peace. I've stayed ignorant of Lebanon's current events because of this.

So I think your post was excellent and I don't support Israel. I just don't think there's many Israeli's outraged enough to protest the streets. In their mind, they voted their leaders and they want to see Hezbollah removed. The public is very shortsighted yet just as pragmatic when it comes to their lives. There's a job to finish. There's always the peacetable with some uneasy compromise to salt the wounds. Who's wounds depend on the victor.

 

I do not understand how people can agree with any side in this conflict. It is tragic, that the innocent people of Libanon and Israel have to suffer.

The problem is that with these type of conflicts the hatred toward the other sides only grows. I do not see a solution here. I have no idea how this can be solved.

 

I am sure all those pictures I see on MSNBC are made by Photoshop.

 

Yes, I agree with that. It definitely is case-by-case...

There is no easy answer, but endless conflicts will create an endless flood of extremists and will only serve to frther marginalize the moderates in a given society, not to mention turn some moderates into extremists.

It's a common trend in prolonged conflicts that every successive generation proves to be even more extreme and violent than their predecessors. The Palestinians are a prime example of just that...

 

Shebaa appears to be their main raison d'etre, at least from the purely Lebanese viewpoint, but Sheeba is not a breach of 242.

As for other breachs of 242, it's another chicken-and-egg story.

 

I'm not saying there wasn't controversy about them. There was an earlier map that showed the land in Lebanon. And looks like the landowners were Lebanese (and the land was Syrian at the time?). Syria also claimed the land.

Regradless, some here have made mention of Israel's occupation of Shebaa as if it was a given that it was some transgression wrt Lebanon. According to many inquiring minds, it's not.

 

Shebaa farms is a complicated issue. It is recognized by the UN and the rest of the world community as belonging to Syria. There are a few exceptions to this.

Syria claims that Shebaa farms doesn't belong to them, but that it belongs to Lebanon. They do this mainly for the purpose of keeping Hezbollah alive and supported by giving them a reason to continue 'resisting' Israel. Lebanon also is willing to claim ownership of Shebaa farms.

One thing is clear, and that is that the land doesn't belong to Israel who still maintains settlements there. Israel could solve a lot of problems by dismantling those settlements and pulling back from them. Then it doesn't really matter if the land belongs to Syria, or to Lebanon, at least in regards to this conflict.

 

And it sounds like their willing to discuss this now, right?

 

yes, hopefully. That would be great.

 

There is a clear distinction between Lebanon and Hezbollah. I don't think Hezbollah cares as long as Israel has illegal settlements.

Here's my point, if Israel has illegal settlements, middle eastern people will consider Hez to be freedom fighters. If they abandon settlements and Hez continues the attack, Hez is nothing more than common terrorists trying to push Israel out into the sea.

 

But many of the Lebanese probably do.

Once the Lebanese 'border dispute' is resolved, it is possible that some/a lot(?) of the Lebanese support for conflict with Israel will erode. Hezbollah is financially supported by Syria/Iran, but they are in Lebanon and at the mercy of the Lebanese people.

But I was also asking about why you don't think the buffer will work from a physical perspective...you think that hezbollah can still come into contact w/ the Israelis?

 

Cohen,

The Lebanese do NOT support a war with Israel, the current support for Hezbollah is nothing more than the nation 'rallying' behind the group defending them from Israeli attacks. You saw what happened when Lebanon started entering a period of peace and prosperity, Hezbollah started to lose support.

I think the Israelis might have lost a potential partner in the region. The Lebanese wanted to turn their country once more into the Paris of the M.E. and wanted nothing to do with war anymore, they honestly thought it was behind them and they could finally move forward with a pluralistic democracy, free from Syrian hegemony, and starting a new life. There was excitement in the country, foreign investments were pouring in, Lebanon was on the right track...all that is gone in a few weeks of heavy bombardment of their country.

Now, the best the two nations can hope for is a 'cold peace', instead of a partnership for regional prosperity, and we don't need any more 'cold peace' in the region, we need some reciprocal trust and partnership. It will take time for both countries to get over this latest episode, and much longer for the Lebanese to try and rebuild their devastated country once again.