What we need to do is get America to get Israel to stop doing this shit, and it's over.

[sylvar]

According to a radio news story I just heard, the World Health Organization is estimating that there will be 900,000 Lebanese people displaced by the end of the day due to Israel's dirty little war.

Israel is considering an invasion by massive ground forces, and refuses to stop until Hezbollah is completely disarmed.

I grew up learning about the history of the people of Israel (Am Yisrael) and the country of Israel (Eretz Yisrael), and I was led to believe that they were one and the same. But groups like Neturei Karta (Orthodox Jews United Against Zionism) seem to offer a different view -- that there should be no country of Israel until the Messiah shall establish it.

Perhaps Jews do deserve a country after the Holocaust. But I think Germany would have been a more appropriate choice than Palestine. And I think that Israel has lost any claim on the world's sympathy.

I don't have any solutions. I don't know what I want. But I think that GWB's advice to others would be a pretty good idea for the Israeli government and military: Stop doing that shit. And maybe we shouldn't have sold them all those weapons.

Comments

[cadrys.livejournal.com]

Why, you're so right. Isreal should just 'man up' and ignore cross-border kidnappings, random acts of homicide bombing in delis, discos, and buses, and overlook the deliberate targeting of civilians by Hamas and Hezbollah.

Yep. Just ignore them. Just 'boys being boys' after all, no harm done, right? All that 'push them into the sea' and 'total destruction' stuff is just overblown rhetoric, after all. Why, such feelings are unprecedented in this world's history! </G'kar>

Israel started no war. It's long past time to have it finished, though, and by rhetoric, history, and actions, the only way it's going to happen is for both Hamas and Hizbollah to be neutralized as fighting forces. [disarmed, scattered, or dead.] Then Lebanon can hopefully assert control over their own territory instead of an independant group owning that border. [Take wild guess what two nations will probably foot reconstruction costs in Lebanon. No, really, go ahead. Hint: "Syria" and "Iran" are wrong answers, despite their creation, arming & funding of H&H in the first place.]

[sylvar.livejournal.com]

Oh, I don't think Israel ought to ignore blood-drenched organized crime. I know that there are networks of criminal organizations larger and more violent than all the Prohibition mobs put together.

I think fighting the terrorist groups is probably Israel's best option if it wants to continue to exist as a nation. I just don't see why that has to involve blowing up gas stations, grain silos, roads, and so on. And I don't think it gives Israel a right to launch the "massive ground assault" that they've refused to rule out.

With a precedent like that, would the Arab nations not be justified in destroying grain silos and interstate highways in the United States because we fund and supply the people (the Israeli military) who are launching missiles into their countries?

[cadrys.livejournal.com]

Infrastructure in the area that would support Hez, including running away (esp to Syria or Iran), interdicting supplies, etc. Standard playbook in modern warfare. (See Gulf War I & II) It's also necessary to prevent the majority of Hez. troops from simply hiding their weapons and disappearing into the civilians they routinely hide behind.

"their countries" That would be Lebanon, and sure, they have the option of declaring war and striking legitmate targets on Israel's allies. Amazingly stupid idea, but they'd have a "legitimate" ground to increase the scope of the fighting, destruction and dying.

Note that pretty much every Arab country is publically stating "this is Hezbollah's fault" [a serious flying pig moment!] and that, well, they hope Israel doesn't escalate things _too_ far.

The problem you're having here is looking at it as a factor of 'organized crime.' Hez/Hamas are proxy actors for Syria/Iran, and under the auspices of a state, have committed numerous _causus belli_. Israel is actually making a serious effort to not destroy _Lebanon_ itself, but that armed militia operating within its borders that Lebanon itself cannot control, and refuses to negotiate in good faith.

To take your 'precedent' in the correct direction, presuming the Militant Montana Men crossed the border and committed atrocites against Canada, AND the US was unable to stop them, THEN Canada would have a perfect right to respond. Interstate highways that were being used to supply the MMM, food and weapons under their control, etc, would be 'fair game' targets.

None of that, btw, obviates the fact that you're proposing a strawman argument.