Will Israel's Strikes Escalate to Full-Scale War?

[kyleb]

I mean where Israel has been controlling and expanding beyond the Green Line for nearly forty years.

 

[kyleb]

What's the "or" sh*t? It's a "tactical necessity" that the Israelis deliberately target the psychopaths; it's an accident, unfortunate side effect, mistake (given lousy language translations) that the UN observers incurred casualties.

Either Israeli did deliberately targeted the location, or they made a mistake. It is one or the other.

 

[Bystander]

Either Israeli did deliberately targeted the location, or they made a mistake. It is one or the other.

There is NO "excluded middle." This is exactly how Arabs and M(o,u)sl(e,i)ms have lost every war they started in the 20th century, and will lose every war they start in the 21st --- no logic skills.

 

[Yonoz]

I mean where Israel has been controlling and expanding beyond the Green Line for nearly forty years.

I was referring to the fact that the British could deal with the IRA on British soil. The IDF was not in Lebanon for 6 years now, hence the dissonance between the two cases, making the example void.

 

[MeJennifer]

There is NO "excluded middle." This is exactly how Arabs and M(o,u)sl(e,i)ms have lost every war they started in the 20th century, and will lose every war they start in the 21st --- no logic skills.

That is just racism, plain and simple.

 

[Bystander]

That is just racism, plain and simple.

No. It's history. Failure to examine the possible consequences of actions before taking them has been a characteristic of SW Asian cultures for quite some time --- it's been particularly pronounced through the 20th century, and there's no indication that it's going to change.

 

[kyleb]

I was referring to the fact that the British could deal with the IRA on British soil. The IDF was not in Lebanon for 6 years now, hence the dissonance between the two cases, making the example void.

You can find dissidence between any two examples, but that is no excuse to overlook the similarities. Regardless, your statement begs the question; how much land should Israel control?

 

[kyleb]

No. It's history. Failure to examine the possible consequences of actions before taking them has been a characteristic of SW Asian cultures for quite some time --- it's been particularly pronounced through the 20th century, and there's no indication that it's going to change.

Western culture has that problem as well, if it didn't we would have seen nothing but flowers in the street in Iraq. But laying such lack of foresight on a whole culture is stereotyping, and Israel's continuing occupation and expiation beyond the Green Line motivates Muslims to conform to the stereotype which you push on them.

 

[Gokul43201]

Israel pulls out of Gaza and suffered retaliation from militants there. Israel pulls out of Lebanon, and gets hit by Hizbullah. But if Israel takes down the settlements in the West Bank, everything will get better?

Yes, the Israeli settlements in the WB are illegal and they should be taken down. But to expect a drastic turn for the better following such a move is illogical. The terrorist groups (funded by Iran and Syria) are not arguing that Israel is occupying their land as much as they are arguing that Israel simply exists.

 

[kyleb]

Taking the settlements down and clearing out to completely behind the Green Line would resolve the most flagrant causes for grievance, and those who contest Israel existence will die off in time. We can't changes those with their minds set to take the land by force on either side, but we can stop supporting such people and work to resolve the conditions which promote their causes.

 

[loseyourname]

Curious6, it is good practice to support an assertion like that with an argument. What you've just done is a hit and run.

Well, I'll provide an argument for him. Hezbollah's initial purpose was to end the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. Similarly, the IRA wanted the UK to cede Northern Ireland back to the rest of Ireland. Their methods were similar in that both used guerilla/terrorist tactics. The UK did not bomb Ireland and Israel did not bomb Lebanon during either of these periods of resistance.

The analogy breaks, however, when we consider what happened post resolution. Although Northern Ireland is still part of the UK, it is so by its own choice and hostilities seem to have ceased. Israel actually one-upped the UK and withdrew from southern Lebanon. However, at this point, there was no peace. Hezbollah continued on despite the fact that its intended aim had been accomplished, and has moved beyond the guerilla tactics to a flat-out assault with surface-to-surface missiles aimed at Israeli targets. As Yonoz pointed out about a hundred times, if, at this point, instead of easing off, the IRA had acquired surface-to-surface missiles and was aiming and firing these at cities within the British mainland, would the UK government continue its cease-fire? Or would it seek to destroy those outposts armed with surface-to-surface missiles by any means necessary before they could destroy all of the major industrial cities along the northwestern coast of Britain?

I'm not necessarily taking a side here, trying to say that the initial Israeli response to the kidnapping was justifiable, as I honestly have not been following this conflict and have no idea what the full reasons are behind each action taken by both parties. I'm only pointing out the flaw in the analogy, since there seem to be so many people vociferously defending the position. It's not as if this analogy needs to hold in order for there to be creedence lent to the claim that what Israel is doing is inappropriate, anyway.

It's worth noting that Gokul is right in his last post as well. It's a lot easier to negotiate with interests that only want you to give over the northern tip of an island. It's a lot harder when they want the complete destruction of your entire nation and the giving up of all of its land. These organizations do not seem to be the least bit interested in peaceful cohabitation.

Edit: Then again, I don't want to make a conflation error and equate the most extreme elements of radical Islamic terrorist groups with the consensus wishes of most regional Arabs. Assuming they are reasonable human beings like any ordinary person tends to be, I'm sure the average Palestinian or Lebanese would be more than happy with peaceful cohabitation. Still, they keep electing extremists that make it clear Israel has no right to exist at all.

 

[Yonoz]

Taking the settlements down and clearing out to completely behind the Green Line would resolve the most flagrant causes for grievance, and those who contest Israel existence will die off in time.

Get real.

We can't changes those with their minds set to take the land by force on either side, but we can stop supporting such people and work to resolve the conditions which promote their causes.

Here's one more thing for you to consider then: if the Israeli public agrees to one withdrawal after another, and all that insures us is a place at the receiving end of daily rocket attacks from those very territories, you will definitely not see a peaceful end to this conflict for a while. That's not a threat, that's a reality check from a left wing Israeli.

 

[kyleb]

So tell me, really; how much land should Israel control?

 

[Office_Shredder]

So tell me, really; how much land should Israel control?

Why don't you tell us? How much land does Israel really need to give away before the attacks stop? And stop giving us this crap about "Well, they've withdrawn from all but one spot, and that's why the attacks have quadrupled in intensity"

 

[clj4]

You don't negotiate with terrorists is a slogan, just like Russ put earlier "Give peace a chance" is. Its something Bushco like to say all the time, as a premesis to do whatever they like. The UK Goverment negotiated with Terrorists in Ireland many times, and ohhh look there is now peace! Regardsless Hezbollah needs it sting taken away, I am all for that. But Israel is going way beyond a terrorist opp Like Putin said, it is now completely destroying Lebanon. A Free Deomcratic mixed race country.

Let me restate : you don't negociate with islamic terrorists.

 

[turbo]

OK, do you negotioate with Isaeli terrorists? The ones that come and bulldoze your little home into the dirt? Israel (with US help) dominates the region, and they are making the South Africans look like pikers. The Zionists are ruining any hope for regional stability in the Middle East.

 

[Anttech]

What's the "or" sh*t? It's a "tactical necessity" that the Israelis deliberately target the psychopaths; it's an accident, unfortunate side effect, mistake (given lousy language translations) that the UN observers incurred casualties.

Believe it or not, this is the kind of thing that happens when some raving maniac starts a war. B*tch out the raving maniac for being so incredibly stupid in the first place, b*tch out the nincompoops who gave the raving maniac sanctuary, b*tch out the people who bankroll the raving maniac, but don't go griping to the people trying to clean up the mess.

hahahahahaha :)

Ohh wait you weren't referring to yourself. Please stop slandering

 

[Bystander]

"Slander?" Nasrallah, the gutless, hide out in Syria, raving maniac? Stupid? The people who let a gutless, raving maniac do their thinking for them?

They wake up and staple him and his ilk to anthills, then we'll talk about a future for the Arab and Islamic worlds.

 

[Anttech]

Are you going to have a intelectual debate? I know its hard but really, try at least to debate about the wrongs and right...

 

[Bystander]

"Right" and "wrong" are emotional and philosophical claptrap, not intellectual discussion. "The Is" of the situation is that the Arab world has picked enough fights with the Israelis to know they get their butts kicked every time out; "the other is" of the situation is that the Arab world prefers listening to raving maniacs and paying enormous material, social, and political costs rather than stapling them to anthills.

 

[kyleb]

Why don't you tell us? How much land does Israel really need to give away before the attacks stop? And stop giving us this crap about "Well, they've withdrawn from all but one spot, and that's why the attacks have quadrupled in intensity"

This isn't a fairy tale so the attacks won't magically disappear regardless of what land Israel holds. Now with that in mind, my question goes again to those defending Israel's continuing occupation and expansion into Palestine over the past four decades; how much land should Israel control?

 

[Bystander]

Everything the Palestinians and other Arab states give them as "spoils of war." If they want to give some of it back (hectare per Hamas or Hezbollah hoodlum hanged from a lamppost, or 10 hectares per diseased holy man staked out on an anthill), make it a win-win situation for the Palestinian "on the street" --- let him get rid of the punks who've been shaking him down for the past sixty years plus gaining lebensraum.

 

[clj4]

OK, do you negotioate with Isaeli terrorists? The ones that come and bulldoze your little home into the dirt? Israel (with US help) dominates the region, and they are making the South Africans look like pikers. The Zionists are ruining any hope for regional stability in the Middle East.

Classical islamic apologist stance.

 

[Hans de Vries]

Classical islamic apologist stance.

Since you're generalizing Islam here...The Hezbollah Shiites are closer to Christianity as the Israeli Jews
since they base their faith partly on Jesus Christ:

http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Why_Dont_Jews_Believe_In_Jesus$.asp

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/10/03/index-e.htm#b1The real message is of course that Israel is not simply a small religious
island in a large hostile Arabic sea. There is a lot of religious diversity in
Israel’s neighborhood. It’s not religion which inhibits a peaceful
coexistence. It’s politics. Regards, Hans

 

[kyleb]

Everything the Palestinians and other Arab states give them as "spoils of war." If they want to give some of it back (hectare per Hamas or Hezbollah hoodlum hanged from a lamppost, or 10 hectares per diseased holy man staked out on an anthill), make it a win-win situation for the Palestinian "on the street" --- let him get rid of the punks who've been shaking him down for the past sixty years plus gaining lebensraum.

So you think Israel should occupy and expand wherever and whenever want?

 

[clj4]

Since you're generalizing Islam here...


The Hezbollah Shiites are closer to Christianity as the Israeli Jews
since they base their faith partly on Jesus Christ:

http://www.aish.com/spirituality/philosophy/Why_Dont_Jews_Believe_In_Jesus$.asp

http://www.president.ir/eng/ahmadinejad/cronicnews/1384/10/03/index-e.htm#b1


The real message is of course that Israel is not simply a small religious
island in a large hostile Arabic sea. There is a lot of religious diversity in
Israel’s neighborhood. It’s not religion which inhibits a peaceful
coexistence. It’s politics.


Regards, Hans

I think that you should look up what an islamic apologist is.

 

[kyleb]

Do you know that there is quite a diversity in Israel's own Jewish population as well, many being non-religious but rather cultrally Jewish?:

http://www.avi-chai.org/Static/Binaries/Publications/EnglishGuttman_0.pdf

And I haven't been able to locate statistics, but there are non-religious Palestinians as well. Beyond that, there are also Jewish communities who contenue to oppose Israel while living in Palestine, such as the Edah Haredit mentioned here:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull&cid=1145961235084

The 'Us vs Them' here is much more complicated than many people care to realize.

 

[Yonoz]

I've been called up.
Hope this is the last war.
Be back soon.

 

[kyleb]

I don't see anything to inspire hope that this will be the last war, but I hope to see you back soon and unscratched.

 

[Hans de Vries]

Good luck, take care and come back soon.

 

[Bystander]

So you think Israel should occupy and expand wherever and whenever want?

Not even close --- there is a real language barrier here --- I'll restate it more clearly --- "When the 'sh*t for brains' militant Arabs and Moslems start a fight and the Israelis finish it, as has been customary, the Israelis are perfectly entitled to do whatever they wish with captured territory as spoils of war."

What that means, or, "So what I think," is that if the "sh*t for brains" militants don't start wars, they won't be losing territory, or, if the Arab "common man" wakes up and takes control of his life, and lynches or locks up the "sh*t for brains" militants, he keeps his land, his money, and his life.

Klar?

 

[clj4]

Not even close --- there is a real language barrier here --- I'll restate it more clearly --- "When the 'sh*t for brains' militant Arabs and Moslems start a fight and the Israelis finish it, as has been customary, the Israelis are perfectly entitled to do whatever they wish with captured territory as spoils of war."

What that means, or, "So what I think," is that if the "sh*t for brains" militants don't start wars, they won't be losing territory, or, if the Arab "common man" wakes up and takes control of his life, and lynches or locks up the "sh*t for brains" militants, he keeps his land, his money, and his life.

Klar?

Well put. The sh*t for brains started all the wars in the hope of "wiping out" the newly created state and lost all of these wars.
After loosing they start screaming for "justice".

 

[kyleb]

Again, the attacks won't disappear regardless of what land Israel holds. Furthermore, the Arab common man can't stop every terrorist attack on Israel just as the Israeli common man can't stop every Palestinian civilian death or Israeli terrorist attack. So with that in mind; should Israel contenue occupy and expand wherever and whenever deemed fit?

 

[Bystander]

Again, the attacks won't disappear regardless of what land Israel holds.

This is a position that will eventually result in Islam going the way of the Thug cult in India --- within the century --- there's not room in the world for religions that refractory and reactionary. It moderates itself or ceases to be.

Furthermore, the Arab common man can't stop every terrorist attack on Israel

The Jordanians have made a very credible, "good faith" effort --- or, the Jordanian govt. has --- it is supposedly acting in the interests of the "common man." This is all the Israelis have asked.

just as the Israeli common man can't stop every Palestinian civilian death or Israeli terrorist attack.

The Israelis have been suicide bombing Arab communities at what rate? Compared to the Palestinian rate of, what, couple a month averaged over nearly sixty years? Doesn't "wash" --- "loose gun on deck" here and there, I'm sure, and I'm equally sure that a rule of law is exercised in Israel --- "Stashu" doesn't speak for the country, and "Stashu" ain't going to start a war for the country, so "Stashu" goes to jail or the looney bin.

So with that in mind; should Israel contenue occupy and expand wherever and whenever deemed fit?

Anytime the "sh*t for brains" militant Arabs and Moslems want 'em to expand, all they have to do is heave a couple rockets at 'em.

Are you getting the picture? Start a fight, get your butts kicked, and lose whatever the Israelis want to take from the table. Don't start fights, and the Israelis leave you alone.

 

[clj4]

I've been called up.
Hope this is the last war.
Be back soon.

Good luck, go kick some ass. Come back soon.