The New Catastrophe in Gaza

Remove all ads!

Israel's response has not exactly been proportionate. (Not that Israel is known for making "proportionate" responses....) Israel launched a full military assault against the nation of Lebanon because Hezbollah (a minority party, albeit a substantial one) has taken 2 hostages. There are now over 350 (mostly civilian) deaths in Lebanon due to Israel's indiscriminate targeting. This display of force will accomplish nothing productive unless Israel's goal you is to increase Lebanese support for Hezbollah. If that's the goal, I'm sure things are going swimmingly.

 

The problem, BTA, is that the past has shown that this strategy has never brought the desirable result. The 1982 invasion has had as result the creation of Hezbollah. The violent israeli reactions against PLO and the palestinian popolation has had as result the creation of Hamas and Al-Aksaa Brigades, groups that have been proved more ruthless and extreme than PLO. The same thing will happen now, Hezbollah will be replaced by more ruthless and extreme groups. The thing that have stuck in my mind from the news reports from Lebanon are the words of a Lebaneze mother: "I'm not leaving because I'm afraid but because I want to save my sons, raise them and then send them back to fight Israelis". Israel will win this war, probably it will win the wars that will follow but it will never gain peace.

 

The withdrawal from Lebanon was not a gesture of peace, Israel was forced to withdraw because the occupation had not achieved its goals and the cost in both soldier's lives, and money was too high. Also, the withdrawal was not viewed as complete by the lebaneze side since Israel continues to occupy the Seba Farms (or is it Serba? I can't remember now), a disputed area no bigger than 25 square kilometers, which Lebanon claims as its own territoty, while Israel supports that it's a part of Golan Heights and therefore it belongs to Syria (yes, I know this could be the definition of the theatre of the obscene) and this has given the Hezbollah the right to claim that it's still fighting the israeli occupation.

Now what must be done? The first step must be the creation of a palestinian state, which will not be consisted of isolated pockets and which can survive without depending on Israel's good will. Palestinians must recognize the right of Israel to exist (IIRC Fatah has already done this and almost one month before the current events even Hamas had indirectly recognized it).
As for the big thorn, Jerusalem, let it be a city-state under UN protection or control.

I know that all these are very optimistic and that they are not going to happen in the near future, since the extremists of both sides have gain too much strength and influence but I think that this is the only possible solution. The history of my nation has shown me that the "all or nothing" policies always lead to the worst disasters.

 

BTA, the withdrawal has not been without provocations on both sides. Just like in Gaza, where the week before the kidnappings there were over 10 civilian deaths caused by Israeli military operations (remember that family of seven that died from a shell), there have been periodical strikes in southern Lebanon for quite a while now.

To some degree, that is unavoidable. When there have been decades of hostility, it is possible that a hothead on either side gets too impatient if not outright trigger-happy. The problem is, should this be allowed to become a new casus belli or should it be taken as the last dying breaths of an old war.

 

Like Syria and Iran have not been penalised ever for such accusations. I think that there are numerous sanctions of UN that does the trick, not to mention the economical blockade that West has put this countries in, de facto and not de yure. I don't see the same happening with Israel. Sorry i don't think that Israel gets the same treatment the other countries do IMHO. And as i have mentioned Israel has disregarded numerous sanctions of UN for various subjects (Gollan Heights, the Wall etc)

No they are not, but at the same time Israel is not the sheep among the wolves nation. So what you are telling is pointless. There are extremists on both sides and sane people exist too. So why don't we promote sane people ideas for once instead?

Hamas is the elected goverment due the inability of Fataj to controll the members accused of corruption. So like it or not it is the legal goverment of Palestine. And what you say about rockets firing, i am pretty sure that you missed the first one that was fired by Israel on a beach killing 7 civilians.

As for the Hamas, Hejbolah Islamic Jihad and so on ( i am talking only about the organizations that dwell in the area and have the freedom of Palestine as a goal) are groups with a not accepted by me tactic. But on the other hand they are being terrorized by Israel for way too many years now and instead of you, me us who sit in our couch and enjoy our TV and oblivion these people live in the constant fear of getting shot, killed by a missile, arrested and dissapperaed for ever. So before we point our finger to them blaiming them as terrorists, plz think that people during the World War II and before have fought against Nazis that occupied their countries and were called Terrrorists (Rebels since the term was not widely used that days) by the occupying force.
Do u think they were terrorists? I think not.

Hamas is a group not the entire nation. But the way Israel is acting i think they try to make them equal.
Palestinians have sworn nothing and in fact most of them just want a viable state and peace. And guess what they don't get their chance to have either.

Israel as a state has a right to be and that is sure. But on the other hand Israel as a state can't and should not be allowed to live on the expense of the other states in the area.

You did not read the

Israel must sit on the table with someone. So many years they avoided and tried to discredit Arafat, now they got Hamas and they are reaping what they sow.
And to clear that Israel (i mean mainly the radical elements) goal is one and one only. To get their Holy lands back. And they are working towards that goal continuisly. And we are backing it either by doing nothing, or by slapping only the one side.

And please the withdrawal from Gaza strip was followed by the increasment of settlement in the west bank (nothern side) so it was not a goodwill gesture so much as it seemed.

Furthermore this is Wests problem because we send Israel there with our blessings and did nothing to ensure that it would be a peacefull coexistence.

Now we sit on our hands and gasp at the horrors that are unleashed in this area so many years, wondering how did that happen.

Before the founding of Israel Jews, Muslims and Christians coexisted peacefully there. Is it so difficult to understand that certain actions have stirred up the hate emotions there?

Are we supposed to believe that Hamas and all these groups have such a big support, because they all live in a perfect life except the fact that there are Jews around? And why the Christians are not touched by the Muslims? The Greek Orthodox Patriarch office owns about a quarter of Jerusalem and more land throughout Israel and Palestine. Why is it that Hamas never even thought of uttering a word against it?

If Israel was thought of as a weak entity it would not had under its occupation the Golan Heights (Syria would have made sure of this, after all it is their territory). And thinking of this, i would like to point out that according to AP, the score so far has been more than 372 confirmed Libaneze civilians killed and Israel has suffered the loss of 34 people from which 19 were military personell.

Well the possibility of Palestinians living in a peacefull and viable state, would cut down a lot of the arguments that the recruiters of Hejbollah use to recruit their army. Don't you think?
It would also help the Israel to gain some good image in the eyes of the Muslims since it must give in some too.
In this messed up situation noone is innocent, but in my eyes Israel is just asking for it. They provoke the hatred against them and then they say that everyone in the area wants them out.

What BOC proposed would be a fantastic solution and to add to that Jerusalem should be forever a UN city and in the disputed place of Solomons Temple/Al Aksa Mosque, a Memorial for all the fallen people of this insanity should be build. And by the way this is not a religion issue (Jews versus Muslims), these two religions can coexist peacefully as it has been proven during the past. The problem lies within the people and the actions they take. And to accuse of one sides action while disregarding the actions of the other side is a little biased IMHO.

 

Excuse me, but comparing the resistance cells in WW2 with groups like Hamas and Hezbollah is by far the dumbest thing i've ever heard. If you don't see the difference between a race of people that were more or less forced to live in a region, from which they originate in the first place, and a foreign army that invades, conquers, and occupies your nation, it's of no use to continue this conversation. Not just that, it's also an insult to the veterans of said resistance cells to be compared with scumbags who prefer to blow up busses and restaurants with women and children inside.

 

You're completely right, Pac Man. Until there is a "allo 'allo" series (well, obviously something similar) made about the Hezbollah, I strongly disagree that they are the same thing!

But your reasoning though... that doesn't make complete sense. The nation of palastine originated in the (former) country by the same name. An army (admittidly from the inside) invaded, conquered and currently occupies their 'nation'.

 

The Jews have a history in that region, just as well as the palestinians. The Palestinians however chose not to share their land with the Jews but rather attempt to drive them away or kill them. Wrong choice.

The state of Israel has only met hostility from day one of it's existance. They have been attacked by every single neighbouring country, be it one at a time or in a coalition. The Jews didn't bring an army to drive the Palestinians from their land, heck...they didn't even have an army at first. Good thing they got organised so fast, otherwise there wouldn't have been a Jew left in that region by now, of that i'm pretty certain.

 

Yes and I am sure the illegal settlements (notice the term 'settler' - you cannot be a settler on your own land) and Jew only roads (inside West Bank) help matters.

 

Er, Hezbollah is not a foreign army for Lebanon. It is a militia formed in the myriad of conflicts surrounding the Lebanese Civil War, officially in 1982, and is composed of Lebanese Shi'ites, to the best of my knowledge. It was started with some financial support from Iran, and as Shi'ites they have some respect for the Iranian religious leaders, but they are perseived, at least in Lebanon, as a Lebanese militia. It may have ties to other groups and organizations, but that does not make it any less Lebanese. During the period in which that region was occupied by Israel (South Lebanon I mean) they were a resistance group. That doesn't make them good, automatically, but does bestow some moral legitimacy for that period. As for their tactics - are you honestly saying that an organized resistance, of WWII or any other period, has never employed assassinations or bombings? That is simply not true.

As for their preferences, there is a difference between accepting some civilian casualties (the infamous "collateral damage"), being indifferent to them, and actively preferring to target civilians even if targetting soldiers is equally feasible. You insinuate the third, and I seriously doubt that there are only complete lunatics in Hezbollah. They are fanatics, but insane... I doubt even the Israelis think so. In attacking targets inside Israel, they have performed an act of terrorism. Just as Israel performs a de facto act of terrorism every time it hits a civilian target (or one of predominantly civilian use, like a bridge or a power plant) inside Lebanon. Whether you call it exerting pressure or demonstration of force, or "strategic bombing" is your business, but none of my friends talked about "a show of force" or "pressure" on 9/11, I can tell you that.

The Jews do have a history in Israel, but for most of them it used to be something almost two millenia ago. In the meantime, the Arabs moved in, and lived there. If there is a state of Israel, and they are not full-fledged members with just as many political and social rights, this state will have a serious legitimacy problem for generations to come. Case in point: the spanish Basques. I heard they recently demilitarized, but it took decades - and comparing their state with that of the Palestinians in Israel is cynical at best.

[ July 24, 2006, 16:16: Message edited by: The Shaman ]

 

@BTA

The fact that Hezbollah looks at it this way doesn't mean that it isn't true. According to your logic the american withdrawal from Vietman or every german retreat after 1943 must be viewed as a gesture of good will. That disputed area gives to Hezbollah the reason they need to justify their existance as a military group. I'm not saying that they will disband their military wing if Israel withdraws from this area, I'm just saying that in this case they could not justify the continuation of their war against Israel.

Almost everything that happens in the middle east is connected with the palestinian issue. Don't forget that the 1982 invasion took place because PLO had found shelter in Lebanon. Also there are thousands palestinians refugees in Lebanon, who are willing to join or help Hezbollah and who feed the negative (for Israel) emotions of the locals. If the Palestine becomes a state and the majority of these refugees return to their homes, things will surely calm down. Furthermore think who are the only ones who benefit from this situation. The regimes of the muslim states use Israel as a scapegoat and boogieman and blame it for everything. The founding of a palestinian state will disappear the israeli boogieman and these regimes will have to explain to their citizens why they are livng in the middle ages while a privileged elite eats with golden spoons.

 

is that it exists.

I keep going back and forth with this. On one side, I see that many of those killed are not terrorists, and many of those places destroyed were not solely used for the purposes of of aiding terrorism. On the other side, I don't know if that really matters. If Hezbollah gets it arms through airports and seaports, then it seems logical that you've got to destroy/blockade those to prevent additional weapons from entering.

I guess what I'm saying is I don't know where we should draw the line between proportionate and disproportionate. I think there is a distinct difference between deliberately targeting civilians and targeting and killing terrorists with civilians being killed in the process. And I don't think the numbers of civilians killed are all that relavant either. I don't think it's possible to take an attitude that it is OK to kill X number of terrorists as long as we don't kill more than Y number of civilians in the process. Once a decision is made that you want to kill the terrorists and are willing to accept civilian casualties, I don't think it ultimately matters if the number of civilians killed are 10, 100, or 1,000.

With this region it is ALWAYS a religious issue. That's why people have been fighting here for over 3,000 years. It hasn't always been the Jews versus the Muslims, as sometimes it's the Jews versus the Christians, or the Christians versus the Muslims. But to say there isn't a distinct aspect of religion about it is insane. When you have three major world religions that all view the same area as holy ground, it's always going to be about religion.

While you can't be a settler in an area where you already live, it is certainly possible to be a settler on land owned by your nation. The reason why we no longer have a fronteir in the U.S. is that Americans settlers occupied the territory.

 

Then we'll have to agree that we disagree .

However I have one question. For the sake of the argument, let's say that Israel's actions in Lebanon and in Gaza Strip are fully justified because it has the right to defend itself. Can somebody explain to me why the Serbs didn't have the same right in Kossovo (just put UCK in the place of Hamas)and they were bombed by NATO and why the Turks do not have the right to defend theirselves against PPK in Northern Iraq (in case you don't know the answer of the american administration to Erdogan's statement that Turkey will invade Northern Iraq in order to exterminate PPK was "Don't even dare to think this")?

 

Targeting schools, hospitals and power-plants can hardly be considered as actions against terrorism.

They could've managed a military operation without massive bombings and artillery fire. Israel's ground forces are quite capable of efficient commando-operations.

This would've quite probably meant more casualties on Israel's side, but bombing everything intentionally to smithereens, including targets that will in effect bring more civilian casualties than is necessary and cause a major humanitarian crisis will not bring good fortune, but will in fact increase the hostility the muslim population feels toward Israel.

 

As far as i'm concerned the Serbs had every right to intervene in the Kosovo and Bosnia Herzegovina regions. Any nation would sent in the army if one of it's provinces decided they no longer wish to be a part of the motherland. The only problem here, is that there were also a significant amount of Serbs living in those provinces, and they felt little or nothing for living under muslim or Albanian authority. It could only go in one direction, a bloody one. If it wasn't for those ravenous bands of murderers like the militia of Arkan, and the concentrationcamps they set up all over the place, NATO would have probaly looked the other way and regarded it as Yugoslavian internal affairs. But ethnic cleansing cannot go unanswered, so i suppose the Serbs shot themselves in the foot by thinking the international community would sit this one out.

The Turks can pretty much do to the Kurds whatever they see fit, as long as it's on their own soil. The international community condemns their actions towards the Kurds, but it doesn't actually try to put a stop to it. The leniency stops at the Turkish borders however, should they attempt to root out Kurds on Iraqi soil, the Americans will most likely put the hammer on them.

 

Are the Israeli actions so different from what the Serbs did? Just put the full of palestinians israeli prisons in the place of concentration camps and Jenin in the place of Serajevo. The only thing that Israelis have never done are the rapes. Also, as far as Kossovo is concerned, Serbs never bomb albanian cities or villages and the serbian army never went there, only special units of the serb police and armed serb citizens were operating in the area.

Why? The situation is exactly the same. Hezbollah is based on Lebanon and attacks from there, PPK is based on Nothern Iraq and attacks from there. Furthemore, the Turks have more casualties (they lost 15 soldiers the last two weeks) than Israel (two kidnapped soldiers). Why in the first case Israel is allowed to level down Lebanon, while in the second case Turks are not allowed to send even a platoon in Northern Iraq?