Hezbollah Balks At Withdrawal From the South

[cali]

By Edward Cody and Doug Struck
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, August 16, 2006; Page A01

BEIRUT, Aug. 15 -- Hezbollah refused to disarm and withdraw its fighters from the battle-scarred hills along the border with Israel on Tuesday, threatening to delay deployment of the Lebanese army and endangering a fragile cease-fire.

The makings of a compromise emerged from all-day meetings in Beirut, according to senior officials involved in the negotiations, and Prime Minister Fouad Siniora scheduled a cabinet session Wednesday for what he hoped would be formal approval of the deal. Hezbollah indicated it would be willing to pull back its fighters and weapons in exchange for a promise from the army not to probe too carefully for underground bunkers and weapons caches, the officials said.


Hasan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, had insisted that any disarmament of his militia -- even in the border area -- should be handled in longer-term discussions within the Lebanese government, according to government ministers. But the Lebanese army, backed by key political leaders, refused to send troops into the just-becalmed battle zone until Hezbollah's missiles, rockets and other weapons were taken north of the Litani River, the ministers said.

At stake in the standoff was implementation of a crucial provision of the U.N. Security Council cease-fire that went into effect Monday. The accord called for quick deployment of 15,000 Lebanese army troops south of the Litani River along the border with Israel. They were to take up positions under the aegis of a reinforced contingent of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, or UNIFIL, to form a peacekeeping corps with a total strength of about 30,000.

<snip>

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/15/AR2006081500322.html

[Sherman A1]

1. Well, Gosh.....

There is a HUGE surprise. Hezbollah doesn't want to disarm? Who would have thought that???

[Lerkfish]

4. well, considering Israel has not pulled out, either, no, not surprising.

[Behind the Aegis]

6. Why should they?

Otherwise, it will be a repeat of what we have just seen!

[acmavm]

8. I think you're right. Israel would again start dropping bombs on

innocent civilians.

[Behind the Aegis]

9. Yeah, that's it.

:eyes:

Despite your delusions, Israel is not out to kill everyone in the ME.

[acmavm]

15. It would only be a delusion if past actions didn't show that

that's what the IDF does. But it's not a delusion and that's exactly what they do. They figure killing innocents indescrimately will get them their way and terrify everyone them come up against into submission.

[jgmiller]

51. I really don't understand

Why do people have such a hard time accepting that Israel did not start this. If Mexico kidnapped one our border patrol and then started firing rockets into El Paso would you think the US would be in the wrong to go into Mexico and try to stop it?

Look I hate it when innocent civilians are killed but guess what, that happens in war. Maybe we should concentrate on preventing people from starting wars in the first place. Unless the IDF was rounding up civilians and killing them en masse then I don't see how what they did was anything other than what happens during a war.

[breakaleg]

52. If Mexico kidnapped 2 US soldiers, would the US bomb Mexico City?

No. It's that simple.

[hoboken123]

60. But that's not what the cowards did

They lobbed bombs at civilians, crossed the border, killed eight soldiers, AND kidnapped two soldiers.

What an awful analogy.

[Lerkfish]

66. no, it goes further than that: Would they completely destroy Mexico's

infrastructure and aiport?

besides which, mexico (a nation) kidnapping soldiers would be different from an extremist group in mexico (not a nation)

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

64. Which has NOTHING to do with Lebanon.

[acmavm]

67. Exactly, so why did Israel feel compelled to go in and kill

a bunch of civilians who had no fight with Israel. Did they think it was going to scare all the other Middle Eastern countries to death? Did they think that after they kicked ass that they'd just have to say 'boo' and everyone would start shaking in their boots?

If so, that's a disgusting, immoral, and criminal reason to start dropping bombs on people.

[Lerkfish]

68. They were doing the work for the neocons, according to Hersh

They were trying to eliminate the hezbollah rockets BEFORE Bush invades Iran, knowing that those rockets would be aimed at Israel in retaliation.
Israel was supposed to knock them out by now, but they haven't. That's why Bush and Condi adopted a "wait and see" attitude in the beginning. They were hoping the IDF could accomplish it in two weeks.
Now the attack on Iran and Syria is beind delayed, which is making the neocons impatient.

I'm thinking Hersh may be correct: it certainly make sense on why the IDF would completely destroy infrastructure of a soveriegn nation, making sure they would be no retaliatory threat once Bush attacks Iran and Syria.

[coalition_unwilling]

81. "Israel did not start this" -- Wow, how about the scores of

Lebanese kidnapped by Israel over the past four years, since the IDF was driven out of Lebanon? Not to mention the 9,000+ Palestinians held in "administrative detention" by Israel.

[cali]

88. Oddly enough

I've searched and searched on the web for some indication that Israel has kidnapped scores of Lebanese over the past few years. They haven't. They hold literally a handful of Lebanese, and none evidently have been kidnapped over the past few years. OTH, the number of Palestinians held without trial, is disgraceful. Nevertheless, for the sake of accuracy, it's important not to make claims that aren't true.

[coalition_unwilling]

114. I haven't attempted to verify my claims on the Internet. However,

the large number of Lebanese (some members of Hezbollah) abducted by Israel between years 2000 and 2006 have been reported on Pacifica Radio, Democracy Now with Amy Goodman, and other alternative media sites. (I don't have sources readily available as of this writing, but think I saw references recently on Counterpunch.org and maybe DU also.)

The larger point I was trying to make (certainly not original to me) is that claims that "Hezbollah started this" depend on picking an arbitrary time to start the clock ticking. Note, for comparison's sake, that similar claims about Hamas kidnapping IDF soldiers neglect to mention the large number of Palestinians "kidnapped" by the IDF in years previous.

Furthermore, Israeli claims that they would not negotiate a prisoner exchange with Hezbollah in this latest episode conveniently elide the fact that many such prisoner exchanges have previously occurred between Israel and Hezbollah.

[The Magistrate]

115. In Other Words, Sir, You Are Citing Rumors

And the propagada of one side in a conflict. You have no idea whether the claim is true or not. There are a fabulous number of things that one can hear said in a variety of quarters that have no basis in fact whatever; mere wide circulation does not constitute proof. It is possble the origin lies in persons taken prisoner during the fighting while Israel was present in southern Lebanon in the closing years of the last century, but those would hardly be persons having been taken in recent years.

The fact remains that but for the Hezbolah raid across the border recognized by the United Nations several weeks ago, the Israeli onslaught would not have taken place. Even if that raid was simply taken as a pretext, the action contemplated required a pretext, could not have taken place without that pretextt, and Hezbollah supplied it. There is simply no blinking that.

There have not been "many" prisoner exchanges: there has been at least one exchange of two dead bodies and a businessman for a number of Arab captives. Many have held that to have been a mistake, since it could be taken as simply encouraging future captures by demonstrating there is a market for them once they are in hand, and the present episode could be seen as bearing out the wisdom of that view.

[coalition_unwilling]

116. Note, sir, that your "facts" are equally as unsourced as my "facts" and

therefore equally as susceptible to charges of rumor-mongering, by the very standards you apply to me. I checked with several members of my Thursday peace vigil last night and all confirmed they had heard the same stories on Democracy Now and on KPFK 90.7 (the local Pacifica network). So, at this point, I can say that I was not auditorially hallucinating when I heard said information on media outlets which I trust at least as much as I trust you.

Beware of the "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" fallacy. (Because something came afterwards, it had to happen that way.) In other words, you claim as "fact" that the action contemplated required a pretext and that without the Hezbollah raid, the action contemplated could not have taken place. That statement is belied by reporting from various quarters, most recently Seymour Hersh's reportage in "The New Yorker." To wit, Israel was bound and determined to smash Hezbollah, pretext or no.

[TankLV]

95. But the TERRORISTS Hezhbollah - who ONLY targets civilians ON PURPOSE

EXCLUSIVELY, repeatedly, gets a pass from you, again...

[lumpy]

43. Israel has a toehold in Lebanon

and they want to keep it apparently. Isn't that what they have done in Palestine. Assuming that Hezbollah are Lebanese citizens, why should they have to disarm on THEIR own land, Israel should get the hell out of Lebanon, take their goddamn tanks, and stay the hell out. They have been fooling around in lebanon since their invasion of Lebanon in 1982.

[Behind the Aegis]

65. Then Hizb'allah should stay the hell out of Israel! n/t

[JackORoses]

70. actually,

the Shabaa farms where those Israeli soldiers were captured is not part of Israel.
Though you would like us to believe that it is.

[Behind the Aegis]

71. Actually...no they weren't.

The soldiers were not in the Shebaa Farms. The Shebaa Farms are in Western Israel, not Eastern Israel, where the soldiers were kidnapped in a cross-border raid.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[brentspeak]

75. "According to Lebanese police"

Whose names, of course, remain unknown.

[Behind the Aegis]

76. Your mistake indeed..

Crappy Source

And...

"In addition, links to sites featuring bigoted material, such as "what really happened", are not permitted." source

[JackORoses]

78. whatever,

That page isn't an opinion piece.
It is a collection of real quotes from real news outlets.

[Behind the Aegis]

80. I didn't say it was an opinion piece...

...I said it was a crappy source and it is a bigoted site to boot!

[JackORoses]

84. irrelevant

what does the site have to do with the sources it quotes?

Are you saying all those news agencies are bigots too?

I guess anyone who displays info that doesn't support your view of reality must be a bigot.

[Behind the Aegis]

85. read the link I gave you...

...it explains and/or deconstructs most the sources they used.

"Are you saying all those news agencies are bigots too?" I didn't say or even imply that.

"I guess anyone who displays info that doesn't support your view of reality must be a bigot." I guess you don't know me very well; otherwise such ad hominem attacks and strawmen wouldn't be needed.

[JackORoses]

87. ad hominem

you mean like calling people bigots??

your deconstruction went nowhere.

[Behind the Aegis]

89. I called no one a bigot.

At least be honest, when insulting me. I said the website was bigoted...get it right!

[lumpy]

90. Read a similar article saying essentially

the same thing, that the Israeli soldiers were captured on Lebanon soil. I believe it was an article from England. I'll try to locate it again.

[lumpy]

91. The ownership of Shebba farms

is still in dispute.

[brentspeak]

69. Basically, you have zip idea what you're talking about

Israel already withdrew from Lebanon a few years ago. More to the point: Israel wouldn't have stayed so long in Lebanon had it not been for the existence of Hezbollah in the first place.

Once Israel withdrew, Hezbollah was supposed to disband, as per the U.N. and several of the other ME states. But of course Hezbollah didn't disband. It just planted itself more firmly -- and more illegally -- in S.Lebanon than ever before.

Hezbollah being comprised of Lebanese citizens means zilch. Would it be legal for a giant militia group to march in and take over your town simply because the militia members are American citizens?

[JackORoses]

72. how about this , BS

More to the point: Israel wouldn't have stayed so long in Lebanon had it not been for the existence of Hezbollah in the first place.

Even more to the point: Hezbollah would not even exist if Israel hadn't invaded Lebanon the first time.

[brentspeak]

73. So for what reason does Hezbollah still exist?

Israel already exited Lebanon years ago.

[JackORoses]

77. last time I checked

Israel is parked in S. Lebanon right now.

This affirms the existence of Hezbollah.

[brentspeak]

79. Great example of a shamelessly disingenuous circular logic

If I was as intellectually dishonest as you, I guess I would also conveniently neglect to mention that Israel went back into Lebanon due solely to Hezbollah's actions.

[JackORoses]

82. speaking of circular logic

You say Israel is there because of Hezbollah.
But then you admit that Hezbollah only exists because of Israel's actions.

Who is it that really needs to change the way they act??
Those who started the problem in the first place, and who seemingly have learned nothing.

As long as Israel's actions are aggressive and uncompromising, they will affirm the existence of Hezbollah and beget adversaries whose actions are a reflection of Israel's own.

If ever Israel begins to act with empathy and compassion, there will be no reason for the existence of Hezbollah and it will disappear in time.

Instead of dropping bombs from the sky,
why not drop Bread??

Instead of building walls,
why not build bridges?

[hedgehog]

113. Even I have to admit that's naive.

We're left trying to fix a problem left over from the Roman Empire. The Jewish state was destroyed by the Romans and people were driven from their homeland but had a culture that sustained an identity as a people for almost two millennia. The victors of World War II, for a variety of reasons including guilt, supported the creation of a nation state for the Jews in the original homeland. (After all, after World War I these powers had cut up the old Ottoman Empire to tidy things up.) The only problem was, those lands had not been left empty.The Jews returning to Israel ran smack dab into people who called the place Palestine and insisted that it was their home. So now we have a group on one hand who views the existence of the nation of Israel as vital for their existence. Remember, the Jews who were killed in the Holocaust lived where they lived because those were the only places that had not expelled them. On the other hand, we have the rest of the Middle East enraged that Arabs were displaced from Israel. Complicating matters further is that Israel has been attacked by Arab armies and in return, Israel kept hold of Arab lands that were used in launching those attacks. I don't even want to touch Jerusalem and access to holy sites before and after the 1973 War.

Two groups of people with competing interests and dueling horror stories. Neither one ready at this point to share the land in any way. Both justifying crimes committed against the other as necessary to ensure their own continuing existence. It's a mess that won't be resolved until there is a change of heart on both sides.

[lumpy]

93. Because Israel has it's greedy eyes

on the disputed land called Shebba Farms perhaps? Land that might legally belong to Lebanon? And it is no secret that Israel has been stepping into Lebanon territory since their 'exit' from Lebanon in 2000.

[coalition_unwilling]

83. Thank you for some historical accuracy. (n/t)

[lumpy]

92. I don't give a zip how Lebanon handles

its citizens who want to defend their country from Israel's continual intervention in their affairs. Your statement that Israel wouldn't have stayed in Lebanon so long because of the existence of Hezbollah sure shouts a lot. Who in their right mind would believe that Israel has the right to police another country? It is non of Israel's business what Lebanese citizens decide to do. As for UN decisions, Israel has thumbed it's arrogant nose at the UN as well as the US on so many occasions, one loses count. What the US does and what Lebanon does has no relevence here as far as legalities. That is one lousy argument. Lebanon has the right to make their own decisions and Israel should go back to their borders and take care of the quagmire in Palestine.

[hedgehog]

111. I think Lebanon gave up some of its rights to police its own

territory when it failed to police its own territory. From all I've heard, the Lebanese government handed over the south to Hezbollah.

[hogwyld]

55. No, not everyone

Just Arabs and Palestinians...

[Behind the Aegis]

58. .

Yeah, that's it.

:eyes:

[hoboken123]

59. Missed the start of the war?

You know, 300+ missles from Hezbollah at Israeli civilians.

Of course it was only a diversion so they could cross the border, kill Israeli soldiers and kidnap two of them.

Sure, let them stay armed, that sounds smart.

[bornskeptic]

99. Did you miss it?

New hostilities on the Israeli-Lebanese border started on 12 July 2006 when Hizbollah launched several rockets from Lebanese territory across the Blue Line towards IDF positions near the coast and in the area of the Israeli town of Zarit. In parallel, Hizbollah fighters crossed the Blue Line into Israel, attacked an Israeli patrol and captured two Israeli soldiers, killed three others and wounded two more. The captured soldiers were taken into Lebanon.

Subsequent to the attack on the patrol, a heavy exchange of fire ensued across the Blue Line between Hizbollah and the IDF. While the exchange of fire stretched over the entire length of the Line, it was heaviest in the areas west of Bint Jubayl and in the Shabaa farms area. Hizbollah targeted IDF positions and Israeli towns south of the Blue Line. Israel retaliated by ground, air and sea attacks. In addition to air strikes on Hizbollah positions, the IDF targeted numerous roads and bridges in southern Lebanon, within and outside the UNIFIL area of operations

http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/background.html

"several rockets from Lebanese territory across the Blue Line towards IDF positions near the coast and in the area of the Israeli town of Zarit"

is considerably different from

"300+ missles from Hezbollah at Israeli civilians"

[hoboken123]

100. Just so your reasoning is clear...

Killing multiple soldiers, kidnapping two on a cross-board attack, while lobbing missiles at civilians is something you're fine with, but you dispute the number of missiles?

Wow.

[The Stranger]

23. Because they are in SOMEONE ELSE'S COUNTRY.

[Lerkfish]

30. yeah, pesky things, borders. Sovereign nations foolishly seem to think

they define where one country ends and another begins.

silly Lebanon.

[Behind the Aegis]

57. Silly Israel...

...thinking their borders were sovereign.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. What a sick thing to say!

I am not at all surprised. I bet it is the same thing the said about Vietnam Vets!

[saigon68]

33. Don't get upset big guy

Nothing to fret over

[Igel]

20. But unilateral pull-out wasn't the deal.

Now was it?

[Lerkfish]

22. perhaps you mean "bilateral" pullout. Unilateral IS the deal.

However, as I said, its not surprising if Israel is allowed to stay, that Hezbollah would stay as well, regardless of the "deal".

I'm stating what is not surprising, not saying anything about the deal, capiche?

[Solo_in_MD]

41. The deal is clearly a milita free southern Lebanon with the IDF turning

over to a mix of UNIFIL and Lebanese Army. However
- The UN can't delvier what it promised in terms of a bigger and better peacekeeping force
- Hezbollah is refusing to disarm
- The Lebanese army is going no where until the prior two are achomlished
- The IDF is not going anywhere until the prior three are achomplished.

Israel believes it was promised a militia free zone where only UNIFIL and the Lebanese army were armed. It thats not going to happen, its not over yet.

[The Stranger]

24. Lebanon is supposed to withdraw from Lebanon?

Yeah, right.

[papau]

16. Is this the first proof that Hez lies and "arab" word can not be trusted?

Didn't anyone notice that the old agreed upon by Lebanon UN Res 1559 was broken by Hez?

I'm glad the bombs have stopped falling - but no one should have expected a terrorist organization to keep its leaders word - terrorist leaders lie as they sell on TV how they are truth tellers.

The incomptence of Bush is amazing.

[enigma000]

18. I'm not sure what Bush has to do with this

anymore than the French, Russians, Chinese etc. who approved this plan. More than enough incompetence to go around................

[The Stranger]

25. All "arab" word is the same, right?

Disgusting.

[plasticsundance]

29. Israel is violation of 66 UN Resolutions

Hezbollah is in their country, not Israel. And what of the Golan Heights, which the international community and the UN recognize as belonging to Syria?

[lumpy]

45. They lie just like Livni, foreign minister

from Israel lies. Israel doesn't bomb infrastructure and innocent people, she says. Israel should get its troops and tanks out of Lebanon and then maybe we can have confidence that Israel will do the right thing by Lebanon for once.

[hoboken123]

61. Israel will do the right thing by Lebanon

Constant missile attacks, cross-border killing and kidnappings...what else do you think they should they ignore?

If Hezbollah is Lebanese and fighting for their country, as many posts indicate, what would you have Israel do? Not respond to attacks from a neighboring country?

[lumpy]

96. The facts:

Israel invasions of Lebanon started in 1978 and 1982. Offensives against Lebanon in 1993 and 1996.In 2000 Israel exited Lebanon after 18 years of occupation. Guess Lebanon wants to be a nation of independence free of Israel's continual interference since the year 1978. Israel is still fooling around in the area ,Shebba Farms, especially (land still in dispute).

[hoboken123]

101. Land in dispute?

Jesus this is tired.

The UN says it's Syrian land.
All previous maps say it's Syrian land.
Syria will not demarcate their land.

Please show me your 'dispute'.

[lumpy]

104. Syria supports Lebanon's claim that it belongs

to Lebanon, unless things have changed. Guess that still is in dispute with the UN decision.

[hoboken123]

110. All facts to the contrary, Syria supports the claim

That's it? All the evidence says it isn't, but you call it 'disputed'.

What kind of reasoning is this? With your logic, if I claimed the land was mine, it'd be 'disputed land'.

[lumpy]

118. Israel is occupying Part of Shebba farms

http://www.shebaafarms.org/briefhistory.html

It is still indispute

[breakaleg]

53. You on dangerous ground to start quoting UN Resolutions..

Israel is also not abiding by a few of their own and they can't have it both ways. They can't insist on some being enforced and ignore others.

[TankLV]

94. Gee - TERRORISTS not keeping their word - I'm SHOCKED I tell you!

[Eugene]

2. Reuters: Israel sends mixed signals on pullout

Israel sends mixed signals on pullout

Aug 16, 2006 — By Alistair Lyon, Special Correspondent

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Israeli forces prepared to make way for U.N. peacekeepers
in parts of south Lebanon on Wednesday, but their commander said troops could
stay for months if it takes that long for a bigger U.N. force to deploy.

Hizbollah, which fought an Israeli onslaught for 34 days until a U.N. truce
took hold on Monday, has said it has the right to attack Israeli forces remaining
on Lebanese soil.

"Israel will leave forces in Lebanon until the multinational force arrives, even
if it takes months," army chief Dan Halutz told a parliamentary committee, Israel
Radio reported.

Halutz had said on Tuesday the Israeli withdrawal could be completed within 7
to 10 days.

-snip-

Full article: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2318319

[Solo_in_MD]

19. Actually its the UN that is sending the mixed signals

- The IDF has said it will move out, within a week, once the Lebanese Army and the expanded UNIFIL troops are there to replace them

- The Lebanese army is not going to move in unless Hezbollah disarms or at least stands down

- Its going to take the UN several months to get its act together and get troops in there. Right none of the nations that have said they might take part have committed a specific number of bodies. France, even though it will be leading them, is balking at the lack of clarity in the mandate. It is also refusing to disarm Hezbollah, saying that is a Lebanese problem.

- Hezbollah has stated it will not be disarmed at this time, that it is a subject for future secret negotiations.


I don't blame the French for the delaying tactics. This is going to blow up, and they do not want to be there and in charge when it does.

[The Stranger]

26. Get out of their country.

What part of that is not understood?

[Solo_in_MD]

38. What part of quit attacking Israel is not understood, especially now

While not an excuse for the damage and loss of life, Syria and Iran through their surrogate Hezbollah have been poking at the lion for some time. The lion poked back. Unfortunately the externally supported illegal militia was in Lebanon and not in the territory of their external supporters. In other words. Iran and Syria are getting away with attacking Israel through Hezbollah and Lebanon is paying the price.

Hezbollah is not the national army of Lebanon. It has been told repeatedly to disarm. If it had not repeatedly harassed Israel at the direction of its Syrian and Iranian master this would not have happened.

Take a look at the Sinai. No externally supported illegal militias,rockets, not missiles, no distruction. There is a clue there

[The Stranger]

50. Okay, let's take the Sinai. Well, hmmm, Israel vacated the Sinai.

There is your clue -- and you did it all by yourself!

[Behind the Aegis]

3. Why is this surprising? n/t

[ConcernedCanuk]

5. Saddam disarmed and look at what happened to him, right?????

.
.
.

Unlike the USA,

other countries/groups DO learn from History

[wakeme2008]

11. Bingo we have a winner...

To disarm is to invite your downfall.

[Behind the Aegis]

12. And yet so many here want Israel to disarm.

Funny, huh?!

[ConcernedCanuk]

14. "not the same thing" - Israel has nukes - NOT funny . . . .

.
.

Lebanon, and or Hizbolla, don't have nukes.

As far as I know, no-one in the ME EXCEPT Israel has nukes.

No-one here wants Israel to completely disarm IMO

Just get rid of the nukes

[Zynx]

31. If Israel faced a new war with Syria and Egypt in the future given the

technology Syria and Egypt have, Israel will damn well want those nukes.

[saigon68]

32. "Israel will damn well want those nukes"

Are they going to nuke the Islamofascists?

I guess according to you they need them

FOR WHAT?

[Zynx]

34. If a fundementalist regime came into power in Egypt, they would want

the destruction of Israel and because of our military aid to Egypt, they might well achieve that. As such, Israel would want to use them to win the conventional war.

[saigon68]

35. And if they do that what will Pakistan do?

[Zynx]

107. Pakistan has no ability to hit Israel.

[plasticsundance]

36. What are you talking about?

Egypt doesn't want to confront Israel. They're under a peace agreement. Egypt is a client state of the US. The US gives almost as much money to Egypt as to Israel. And Saudi Arabia has more of a chance of falling into the power grab of Islamists. In addition, Bashar Assad is no friend of the Muslim Brotherhood. I guess all dem Arabs look alike to you, aye?

[Solo_in_MD]

39. Egypt and the Sinai are an object lesson here

...don't launch attacks against Israel, and there is peace and prosperity. A good thing IMO

Assad is not a democratic leader, neither is Mubarak, they are effectively dictators not unlike Saddam, but they are in control of their own territory and are considerably more benevolent. Such seems to be the curse of the ME Arab nations, Islamic rule or strongman rule. The only true democracy in the immediate area...wait for it... is Israel. They are dominantly secular, have independent media, not to mention liberal, green, and peace parties. Sort of looks like Europe only with better weather. An oh yes, neighboring nations whose stated goal is to eliminate them.

[plasticsundance]

47. So ... tell me.

Is Israel ready to negotiate its annexing of Golan Heights with Syria, as both the international community and the UN recognize to this day as belonging to Syria? And don't give me that bladerdash about Israel and democracy. Iran was moving towards democracy until the Dulles brother serving under Eisenhower overthrew that democratic movement and installed the Shah.

The Western powers have been meddling in the ME for a century, if not more, and they have reaped the rewards :sarcasm: of their meddling, and so has Israel. I guess this time around, Israel wasn't prepared for all those RPG-29s that Hezbollah appears to have. I guess the Merkava tank isn't as robust as claimed, aye?

The neighboring states that Israel doesn't trust don't have to invade Israel, they can do it by proxy and sit back and watch Israel snap its own neck. When you're in a hole the first thing to do is to stop digging.

[BushOut06]

40. Try reading the post again

It said IF a fundamentalist regime came to power in Egypt. Just because Egypt is peaceful now, doesn't mean that it will always be that way. Hell, Egypt has been an active particpant in several wars against Israel in the past. You don't know what the future holds.

Israel is surrounded by hostile neighbors, EVERY SINGLE ONE OF WHICH has attacked Israel at some point during her existence.

[plasticsundance]

44. Huh? If!? What are you going to do?

Preemptive strike Egypt? They're under a peace agreement; therefore, that is one country that is not hostile to Israel. Egypt has a record of torturing and executing the Muslim Brotherhood. However, the US and Israel do appear to be a driving impetus for the increase in these rising Islamist factions.

It was Israel's incursion into Gaza that brought the rise of Hamas. It was Israel's 1982 invasion of Lebanon that brought about Hezbollah. It was Israel's latest invasion that has brought even more support of Hezbollah. What don't you get? You don't accuse a neighbor that you have a peace agreement with that they're a big IF as invaders. You prepare for that eventuality, but you don't use it as a rhetorical reference to flaunt before the international community and UN. You just feed the flames of your enemies.

The enemies of Israel will argue that the destruction of Israel is valid by pointing to the heavy handiness of Israel. Get it?

[BushOut06]

46. Why do you insist on twisting words around?

I bring up the fact that Egypt has been an agressor before, and could someday be an agreesor again, and you think I'm suggesting a preemptive strike?

As far as Israel goes, it was attacked by practically every Arab nation in the Middle East as soon as it became a nation. It has been repeatedly attacked since then. Not once has Israel invaded another nation without provocation.

[plasticsundance]

54. Yeah ... and your point?

Many nations have been aggressors towards one another throughout history, and they've signed peace treaties that ended that confrontation. When I post on DU and point out past Israeli aggressions, including the bombing of the King David Hotel targeting British personnel, or the Lavon affair, the Deir Yassin massacre, or the question of the Golan Heights, the Israeli supporters at DU immediately jump in with the argument, but that's been years ago. I guess everything is okay if we only follow Israel's timeline of events, aye? Not a good diplomacy tool to start the peace process.

And no, Israel has not been attacked ever since then. There is a claim about the return of refugees, the occupied Palestinian lands, the Golan Heights, the Shebaa farmlands, and the fact that Israel has not complied with 66 UN Resolutions.

Israel bulldozes down Palestinian homes. Cuts the water supply from the Palestinians. Fires into civilian populations indiscriminately. Does not allow the Palstinians to compete in the free market. Does not treat the Arab citizens of Israel equally as their Jewish counterparts. During the recent skirmish in the Northern Israel, the Arab citizens did not have access to bomb shelters, nor did they receive sirens until almost ten days into the conflict. Isn't it ironic that one of Israel's hopes in invading Lebanon was to alienate Hezbollah from the rest of the Lebanese community, but Israel might have achieved the opposite effect by further alienating the Arab citizens of Israel.

So spare me the propaganda. Instead of accusing me of twisting words around, address what I actually wrote in response. These nations that you deem Israel's enemies will not have a full scale invasion of Israel, because, as I said, they can do it by proxy, and Israel's over heated reactions only strengthen these proxies.

[Zynx]

108. Did you read my post at all?

I said "IF" a fundamentalist regime came to power. They could rip up the agreement of 1978 and invade. Egypt has been an agressor in three wars against Israel in the past and has only been kept in check by a U.S. backed dictatorship.

[hoboken123]

62. FOR WHAT?

They've been repeatedly attacked by multiple countries and have never used nukes, even with the cowardly sneak attack in '73.

So yeah, of course they're just dying to nuke Islamofascists( your word).

[saigon68]

97. Islamofascist = Chimps word for muslims

The chimp supporter of sharon

[hoboken123]

102. And?

Merely quoted the OP.

[papau]

17. Good point - trusting Hez/Hamas terrorist leaders in any agreement is

nuts.

But I am glad the bombs have stopped falling.

[lumpy]

48. No, Aegis, Israel should get the hell out

of Lebanon. The ceasefire, inspite of it's poor design and legal mumbojumbo, is supposed to indicate the 'war' is over. Israel should show their intent for peace with Lebanon by doing what is right by getting out of Lebanon's territory. Their excuse that Lebanon will continue to harras them doesn't fly. If Syria and Iran are the culprits in this assault against Lebanon, let them get it over with those countries. Seemss unfair that Lebanon can't be supported by their neighbors, but no problem the US sending arms and diplomatic support to Israel. No one is asking Israel to disarm.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

63. Check your attitude and the DU board!

Before you call someone a liar and delusional, you might want to be able to back it up. People on this board have called for Israel to be disarmed!

[saigon68]

103. Their Nuke toys must be taken away

They are a rogue regime

[cali]

106. I am so tired of that

rogue regime meme whether it's from the far right or far left, whether it's directed toward Iran and N. Korea or the U.S. and Israel. It's friggin pointless, and btw how do you suggest we take nukes away from Israel, or Pakistan or India, or the U.S. or any other country?

[saigon68]

109. The same way as they are going top get them from Iran

You drop a few of your own in a shock and awe campaign

</sarcasm>

Or maybe you just invade like D Day

[Igel]

21. I thought we were against

Islamist religious militias that were co-opting sovereign territory for their own goals, and those of those countries funding and training them. Esp. when they have kiddie-killers as their role models and heroes.

Progressive thought. Who can keep up with it?

[Lerkfish]

27. what's this "we" crap? who are you to speak for "we"?

well, here's the funny thing: not all of us are citizens of Israel
therefore its not unpatriotic to disagree with another country's actions.
Not all of us automatically view arabs as evil cockroaches. Why you think that would be "progressive" is beyond me. If anything, its the opposite.

the bizarre thing is people like you keep acting like we can't be democrats if we don't support Israel.

I think you're confused: Israel does not equal America. I'm an American, I don't have to agree with Israel.

hell, I don't support the current American administration, I'm even further away from supporting another country, whether it be Israel, Sudan, Haiti, Lebanon, whatever.

[BushOut06]

42. christalmighty, where did that come from?

Viewing arabs as cockroaches? Where the hell did you get that from the post? The post was talking about Islamic militia groups - how do you twist that to mean he was referring to ALL Arabs?

[The Stranger]

28. No, we're against bombing innocent civilians based on more lies

when the innocent civilians (1/3 of which were children) never had anything to do with "terrorists" or terrorists.

THAT's Progressive.

[hedgehog]

112. But where does Hezbollah's responsibility lie in all this?

The civilians may be innocent, but Hezbollah insists on using them as cover. I don't like it, but I can understand the Israeli who decides that if children must die, it's going to be someone else's child, not his. (Again - understanding is not approval.)

[Behind the Aegis]

13. Not the same thing...

...but don't that let mess up your "analogy." :eyes:

[Mr_Spock]

37. I can see why folks would not want to roll over for us

The US/Israel will steamroll them in a heartbeat.

[stepnw1f]

98. No Shit

Just look at the last few years. No need to get historical, the proof is already there. We (US and Israel) cannot be trusted. These right wing fuck-ups are seriously fucking up our country and endangering us all. I say we start dealing with them, before somebody else starts dealing with us. Let's win in November... the sooner the better.

"Is it just ideology, or a deep seeded hell within?"

[hughee99]

86. What a great deal...

"Hezbollah indicated it would be willing to pull back its fighters and weapons in exchange for a promise from the army not to probe too carefully for underground bunkers and weapons caches, the officials said."

So they're willing to pull back fighters and weapons, provided the army promises not to go looking for the fighters and weapons that they hide.

"We'll pull out, but only if no one tries to verify that we're actually pulling out" is certainly a convincing argument, and all the better, it relieves the Lebanese army of the burden of verification, so there's one less potential issue we have to worry about. If this isn't the road to peace, I don't know what is. :sarcasm:

[Algorem]

105. Hezzbollah won,Olmert looks French;pass it on to all right wingers.

[Snivi Yllom]

117. Fuck Nasrallah

"Hasan Nasrallah, the Hezbollah leader, had insisted that any disarmament of his militia -- even in the border area -- should be handled in longer-term discussions within the Lebanese government, according to government ministers. "

fuck him to hell

[lumpy]

119. It is Lebanon's business what they are

going to do with Hezbollah; not yours and certainly not Israels'. Last time I heard Lebanon is a sovereign country although Israel would sure like to make decisions for the Lebanese as they did for 18 years in controlling a portion of Lebanese territory. Fuck Israel's warmongering'leadership'.