Terrorist Groups and what to do with them.

[cali]

At least, what to do with groups like H'zbollah. Deal with them. Talk with them. Understand what motivates them and who supports them. Bombing them will never work. You don't have to like what they've done, or condone such actions as the bombing of the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires, but you do have to understand the utter futility of wiping out movements with popular backing.

Yesterday's NYT had an excellent article about how indispensible H'zbollah is to many in Southern Lebanon. As one Lebanese commented: "We are H'zbollah and H'zbollah is us."

I am not suggesting that all groups labeled as terrorist groups are equal, but groups like H'zbollah that have taken root in the communities in which they grew, and which have matured into political and social organizations, as well as organizations dedicated to military or terrorism activity, are groups that must be dealt with politically, not militarily.

What a world of pain and death and suffering could have been avoided if leaders understood this simple reality.

[endarkenment]

1. Hezbollah is not a terrorist group

Define 'terrorist group'.

The light infantry battling the IDF is the militia wing of the Hezbollah political party, which in turn represents the shiite population of Lebanon. It is at this point in time the only functional military organization in Lebanon.

Our government's attempt to lump in Hezbollah with al qaeda has not met wide acceptance. I agree that we need to have a political dialog with Hezbollah. So do the Israelis.

[cali]

4. They have engaged in the past in

terrorist activities, as I pointed out in my OP. In any case, you seem to have willfully missed the point of what I wrote.

[endarkenment]

15. Many political organizations have similar histories.

Look I am not willfully misreading your post. Your opening line categorized Hezbollah as a terrorist group. I reject that categorization because I agree in general with the points you then go on to make regarding the nature of Hezbollah. I reject the use of the term 'terrorist' as an emotion-laden word that does nothing to further understanding. Whatever meaning that word had in the past, largely thanks to the ** administration it has lost all meaning to me. What Hezbollah was or did 20 years ago is not really relevant to today's situation. Hezbollah is the political voice of the shiite population of Lebanon. We can either deal with that reality or pretend that they are al qaeda and need to be exterminated. On that point I believe you and I agree.

[Little Star]

30. No one from Hezbollah has been convicted for

the bombing of the Jewish Community Center in Buenos Aires as you stated. If I am wrong, please feel welcome to correct me and give link showing any one from Hezbollah has been convicted. I actually thought that Nasarella vowed to only fight for Lebanon Land and people. He has denounced so called terrorism by the likes of Bin Laden.

I honestly feel that George might take a lesson from him on how to win hearts and minds. Nasarella is doing a good job of that in Lebanon.

[cali]

31. You're not wrong

but the vast majority of experts as well as Argentinian authorities credit H'zbollah with the act. Simply because they haven't been "arrested" is not exculpatory.

And Nasrallah is someone I find just as despicable and hateful as so many supposed leaders.

[Little Star]

41. I find him no more despicable and hateful than any one

of the three leaders of the countries who wanted no ceasefire at the beginning of this mess. They all equally make my stomach turn. I do find his cause, for the land of Lebanon and the Lebanese people, to be a noble one. In fact much more noble than those other three leaders. Something just smells with their ever changing excuses and their bulling ways. They do not use their mighty power in a constructive way. It always seems they think of themselves as the victims but their words and their actions say different.

[furman]

45. Hezbollah's cause: destruction of Israel and rise of fundamentalist Islam

How could you possibly sympathize with that?

[Little Star]

51. Yep, You've got the memo down pat.

I do not believe that is why Hezbollah exists. Sorry. To each his own.

[furman]

53. Then I think you need to do a little research on Hezbollah. n/t

[mtice]

59. Why Hezbollah exists

"It is an open war until the elimination of Israel and until the death of the last Jew on earth." - Hassan Nasrallah, 1992

"if they all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide." - Hassan Nasrallah, 10/22/2002

Open your eyes. The enemy of your enemy is not your friend.

[Little Star]

62. Links please. n/t

[mtice]

63. references

Through Wiki here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Nasrallah

NY Times:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CEEDB1F3CF930A15756C0A9629C8B63&sec=&pagewanted=print

You can put the full quotes into Google too, they're everywhere. Hezb is not ashamed of what it wants.

[Little Star]

65. NYT link seems to be an opinion piece and

as for Wiki it's accuracy is still being argued there. I would imagine it will be argued a lot more when others see what it says. Not good sources. Also, many times the meaning of an exact statement gets interpreted to reflect what the listener is prone to believe. My point is, we need very good sources before we accept what is said.

[mtice]

66. Hmm

What sources would you consider acceptable?

[cali]

74. Sounds like you admire him.

Might I suggest some further study of his goals?

[furman]

6. Hezbollah IS a terrorist organization

Hezbollah's militia wing is not the legitimate army of Lebanon.
Hezbollah is responsible for many terrorist attacks against US and Israeli targets over the past several years.
Hezbollah basically operates as a "state within a state".

From
http://www.terrorism.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=FAQ&file=index&myfaq=yes&id_cat=1&categories=General+Questions&parent_id=0%231#1

· What is the definition of terrorism?

There is no single, universally accepted definition of terrorism. There are many reasons for this (not the least of which is the cliche "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter"). Even different agencies of the US government have different working definitions. Most definitions usually have common elements, though, oriented around terrorism as the systematic use of physical violence--actual or threatened--against non-combatants but with an audience broader than the immediate victims in mind, to create a general climate of fear in a target population, in order to effect some kind of political and/or social change.

Terrorism by nature is difficult to define. Acts of terrorism conjure emotional responses in the victims (those hurt by the violence and those affected by the fear) as well as in the practioners. Even the U.S. government cannot agree on one single definition. The old adage, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" is still alive and well. Listed below are several definitions of terrorism. For the purposes of the Terrorism Research Center, we have adopted the definition used by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.




Terrorism is the use or threatened use of force designed to bring about political change.


--Brian Jenkins




Terrorism consitutes the illegitimate use of force to achieve a political objective when innocent people are targeted.


--Walter Laqueur




Terrorism is the premeditated, deliberate, systematic murder, mayhem, and threatening of the innocent to create fear and intimidation in order to gain a political or tactical advantage, usually to influence an audience.


--James M. Poland




Terrorism is the unlawful use or threat of violence against persons or property to further political or social objectives. It is usually intended to intimidate or coerce a government, individuals or groups, or to modify their behavior or politics.


--Vice-President's Task Force, 1986




Terrorism is the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

--FBI Definition

[The Stranger]

11. The quotations you post contradict the statements in your post.

Terrorism is simply a term for what "the other side" does.

[furman]

18. No, Hezbollah is not the legitimate armed forces of Lebanon

Hezbollah's militia is not under control of the Lebanese government.

The Lebanese armed forces is basically powerless to stop Hezbollah.

[endarkenment]

21. "The Lebanese armed forces is basically powerless "

That about sums it up. It is also basically nonexistent. Lebanon has a long (and bloody) history of political parties combined with militias. Hezbollah is currently the dominant political party/militia and while yes they are not the de jure armed forces of Lebanon they are these days the de facto armed forces of Lebanon. We and the Israelis can hang our policy on a fiction: that Hezbollah is not the official army of Lebanon, or we can base our policy on reality.

[furman]

33. The reality is that Hezbollah should be disarmed as per UN Resolution 1559

If the UN nor the Lebanese government will not fulfill Resolution 1559,
then Israel must be permitted to eliminate the threat of
rocket attacks against them.

Furthermore, the international community must hold talks with
Syria and Iran who fund and send arms to Hezbollah.

Also,
Hezbollah holds approximately one third of the seats in the Lebanese parliament.
They are not the majority.

[endarkenment]

40. The reality is lots of things as per many UN resolutions.

And treaty obligations and all sorts of stuff. Pulling one UN resolution, like this one, or like the ** cabal did with Iraq, and saying 'see here you have to do what this one says' is nonsense. Has Israel left the occupied territories? Have we fullfilled our obligations under the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty? Do we even bother complying with the Geneva Conventions? Somehow it is only the weak and less powerful who have to comply, the strong always have a free pass.

Hezbollah is not going to disarm. Iran and Syria are going to continue to support Hezbollah. Those are political realities. We are not going to have everything our way, no matter how many people we kill. We are going to have to sit down and be reasonable, sooner or later.

[furman]

43. UN Resolution 1559 was a diplomatic solution

Until the UN grows a spine and enforces Resolution 1559, Israel is on its own to do so.
An armed Hezbollah is a direct threat to the survival of Israel

How do you negotiate with people who call for your destruction?
A simple prisoner swap does nothing to alleviate the threat of Hezbollah rockets
and terror attacks.

[endarkenment]

46. And again, why just this resolution?

Hezbollah and the rest of the noncomplaint muslim states are just going to ask the same question. Implement all of the UN resolutions including returning Israel to its 1967 boundaries and I am sure that peace is possible. Use a heavy hand and selective enforcement of resolutions and war will continue.

"How do you negotiate with people who call for your destruction?" the Iranians are probably wondering the same thing.

[furman]

52. Withdrawal to 1967 borders would not satisfy the terrorist organizations

Islamic militant organizations are committed to the destruction of Israel.
They will not tolerate a Jewish state in their region of the world.

As for the Lebanese border with Israel,
there is no dispute as far as the UN is concerned.
Israel had completely withdrew from Lebanon in 2000.

Israel has already withdrawn from Gaza.
Israel has already withdrawn from approximately 94% of the West Bank.

Palestinians turned down a generous offer in 2000 for almost all of the West Bank.
They responded not with a counteroffer, but with suicide bombers.

[endarkenment]

55. Well we don't know that do we?

It isn't as if this has been tried. What we do know is that 40 years of occupation and belligerence including now two invasions and occupations of Lebanon have not brought peace at all.

[furman]

57. We do know that overtures of peace to Israel have led to peace

Examples are Egypt and Jordan.

Israel took a chance with Arafat but that has not worked out as hoped.

If Hezbollah wants peace, why have they not disarmed?
Why do they call for the destruction of Israel?

[endarkenment]

58. We also know that returning occupied territories works.

Example: Egypt. So there we are. Peace can happen. Both sides have to make concessions. Both sides have to be willing to sit down and negotiate in good faith.

[furman]

61. "In good faith" is a problem

Yasser Arafat was proven to be untrustworthy as a peace partner.
Hamas has so far been untrustworthy as a peace partner.
These facts have led to the eventual unilateral withdrawal of Gaza.
I believe there are also plans to unilaterally withdraw from most of the West Bank
if negotiations do not come to fruition.

Israel has made painful concessions in efforts to attain peace, for example in late 2000
with Barak and Clinton. Arafat rejected them and resorted once again to terrorism.

Hezbollah has no legitimate claim against Israel for borders with Lebanon.
There is no legitimate reason for Hezbollah to be armed.

[pelsar]

64. returning territories doesnt always work..

ever hear of gaza?...the withdrawl that left the palestenains not just work places in terms of greenhouses but an export market, exit to egypt via its own border....and of course the "freedom to launch missles over the border from day one.....

it takes a strong govt to insure the "freedom fighters" learn a new profession....thats not the case in gaza.


and i forget, why was hizballa attacking israel across the intl border?....what was their excuse?
(let me save you post: the sheba farms still belong to syria. Syria never bothered to fill out the paper work that formalizes the transaction to lebanon)

[endarkenment]

68. I didn't say it always works and Gaza is a joke.

An open border with Egypt? Not really and you know that. The IDF controls the border. One crossing at Rafah is operated by the PA but closely monitored and subject to closure at any time by the IDF. Gaza is a feral internment camp.

A strong government in Gaza is of course not possible if Israel and its allies reject the democratic will of the residents of Gaza. Israel has done everything it can to insure that Gaza remains the opposite of a region with a strong government.

[pelsar]

71. no you dont know....

the IDF didnt control the PA/Egytian border..there was a camera whos video arrived 8 minutes late so the israelis abandonded the station and that was the end of it.

The europeans had closure rights but only if the Egyptians and PA listened to them.
_____

right now i dont know whats going on, but the PA had 10 months of no israeli interference....before the kidnapping

[sabbat hunter]

73. un resolutions

go both ways you know. resolution 242 does NOT call for israel to return to 1967 borders. it calls for a withdrawl from occuppied lands to "safe and defensible" borders.


hizbollah wants nothing less than the destruction of israel, mainly so one of its patrons, syria, can fulfill its goal of greater syria, which includes lebanon.

[MrPrax]

60. Look I posted

a clarification on this a couple of days ago...I know a lot of people don't really read much...

But again:
________
Hezbollah has only 23 seats of the 128 in the Lebanese Parliament.

Technically they couldn't get 25% because the seats are allocated among the various denominations. They use a ratio of 6:5 when generally allocating between Christian and Muslim religions and then within that, the various demoninations (Shi'ia, Maronite, Armenian Catholic, Druze, Sunni, etc) are alloted a set number of districts they can run for office in.

It's all in the wiki about the Lebanese Parliament.

It's interesting...
________

This guy, who also demands to be taken seriously, was saying a quarter of the seats...you say a third.

Come on...this type of information is easily available...

As for all those definitions of Terrorism...so what? Once you have stated bluntly that Hez are terrorists and they are all in a plot to 'get' Israel...why would any one rebut and why is it necessary to re-state this over and over again.

We got it, and in the words of a certain German Foreign minister to Rumsfeld, who concocted the same type of 'kill'em all strategy' in Iraq, I am "simply not convinced".

Quite simple, dear boy --

[Waya]

70. Absolutely........

..as soon as Israel complies with UN Resolution 242.

[eyl]

75. Is Hizbullah responsible

to the Lebanese government? Does it follow its orders?

[endarkenment]

12. I like this one the best:

"Terrorism is the use or threatened use of force designed to bring about political change"

On that basis perhaps every nation on earth could be labelled terrorist.

[Little Star]

39. You just made me laugh.

Guess GWB's regime is a tarriest org by that definition.

[sabbat hunter]

72. hizbollah

is indeed a terrorist group. they continually fire (and have done so since 2000) rockets into purely civilian targets.

[Virginia Dare]

2. We are creating enemies faster than we can kill them....

it is utterly absurd to think that we can stamp out terrorism by making war.

[Cleita]

3. Let's look into history back to those same countries in

the Middle East. At the time Jesus was supposed to have lived, Palestine was a province of Rome. There were terrorist groups of nationalists who wanted to get rid of the Romans. Jesus could have been said to be a terrorist because he was a rabble rouser. His cousin, John the Baptist was beheaded by Herod for being a rabble rouser.

The streets of Rome were full of underground groups, of conquered people, of slaves who acted covertly to upset the status quo of the Roman overlords. Their purpose was to make them fearful of what might be lurking behind the shadows in empty streets or in caves and groves in the wilderness.

The problem is being a conquered people. If those people become emancipated with a say in how their government is to be ruled. If they can partake in the economy of a country as a citizen, there will be no more terrorists. Now Lebanon was in the process of absorbing the political part of Hezbollah into the new Lebanese government and now it's all effed up.

Ireland is a perfect example of terrorism. When Ireland gained independence from Britain, it incorporated the Sein Fein or political branch of the Irish Republican Army (terrorists) into a participatory role in the new government. Voila, the terrorists have become bureaucrats and politicians. As for Northern Ireland still under British rule, the troubles continue on, the terrorists and the bombings.

Of course you never hear about Ireland on the MSM media. You'd think it was peaceful as a church there. It's not.

[Igel]

5. Your example about the messianic Jews under Rome is

dead-on accurate.

Not all were rabble rousers, but all were perceived as rabble rousers by the Romans who were ill-disposed to consider what the messianic preachers were actually saying. It was much, much easier to put them all into one category, one that fit Roman expectations and preconceptions--instead of listening to what the people themselves were saying.

In this case, it's crystal clear what both sides are saying; one side is hedging on responsibility, and it's not always clear if the people speaking are speaking on their own or as mouthpieces, or because they believe what they say or feel they are required to say certain things. But, in either event, people insist on not believing them, because it's easier--and thought safer--to view them in a pre-established theoretical framework.

A political situation is needed, but I don't see one ready made on the horizon, either in Lebanon, or in Gaza/West Bank, for the next generation. Any political solution would have to take into account the religious and cultural prerequisites of both sides, and each side (for each 'front') has to be able to impose the settlement on the entirety of their populations.

I believe that recently Israel found the will and determination to handle its fanatics, but that this was mirrored in reverse in their opponents.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. Ah, yes.

I recall well those bible lessons about Jesus calling for the beheadings of Romans.

[Cleita]

10. If your Bible lessons are historically as accurate as they

can be with the present information available, you will of course know that there were many Messiahs wandering around the Holy Land and preaching salvation from the oppressors. Jesus never called himself a Messiah but his followers did. This got the Romans upset as well as the establishment Jewish pharisees. Jesus was a rabble rouser because he broke the laws of Leviticus by working on the sabbath, (performing miracles) and criticizing how the Temple was operated while acquiring a large following or a rabble. In the eyes of the Romans, anyone who could command a following that was in direct conflict with their interests were rabble rousers.

I might as well expound on John the Baptist here since I am being challenged. We know that the Bible story says that Herodias, Herod's wife, hated John the Baptist because he called her an adulteress. He had a large following who believed this and you know in those times she could have been stoned for this, so she plotted to get John killed because he had a rabble who could have done her harm.

The Romans did not want any civilian unrest whether toward them or their puppet kings. They knew a terrorist when they saw one.

[sg_]

28. Hmm.

"As for Northern Ireland still under British rule, the troubles continue on, the terrorists and the bombings.

Of course you never hear about Ireland on the MSM media. You'd think it was peaceful as a church there. It's not. "


I guess I must be living in some other part of the world by the same name.


The last mainly noteworthy bomb was in 1998 (Omagh bombing by the real ira (RIRA) which killed ~29 people). A few have been found and defused since then, but other than that there hasnt really been much. The last bombing I can remember off the top of my head was in 2001 in London outside some postoffice (IIRC). The last bomb, I think was found in April. It was a 250lb car bomb found by the Police in Lurgan and was linked to dissident republicans.

The paramilitaries are mainly into their usual activities such as fuel smuggling and drugs (and robbing banks), but they tend to be fueding between themselves as much as anything rather than bombing. Some people have of course been killed the paramilitaries. ~64 or so since 2000. Its no worse than what is going on in other countries these days in the grand scale of things, IMHO.

Small things still rumble on in a much more 'minor' scale, some people being harrased out of their homes. ie: Protestants in some Catholic areas getting harrased out, and Catholics in some Protestant areas getting harrased out. Orange halls being petrol bombed/arsoned and then schools getting petrol bombed. It all seemed to be retaliatory/tit for tat attacks during the 'marching season' though by youngsters/teenagers most likely, who seem to have a chip on their shoulder for one reason or another.

IMO, your depiction of here as still some sort of highly violent place is wrong. Of course, it still wouldnt be wise to walk around in certian areas (heavily loyalist/republican areas) with "innapropriate" clothing on to identify yourself as being from the other side. ie: Wearing Celtic or Rangers shirts.



Speaking from my own experiances of course, things are looking quite good for the future.



edited for an extra paragraph**

[cali]

29. Thank you for this

I was just looking up the state of violence in Northern Ireland when you posted. I was pretty sure, the author of the post you responded to, had it wrong.

[Cleita]

34. If you are truly interested in this, here's a blog

that has lots of information.

http://www.everythingulster.com/blogs/index.php/everythingulster?disp=comments

There is a fellow DUer here who follows this very closely and if you a really interested I will ask her to PM you all her links.

[cali]

37. I'll check it out. Thanks. n/t

[Cleita]

32. Your Orange men still march through Catholic neighborhoods

to provoke them. The fact that you can't go into certain areas doesn't make it sound peaceful to me and petro bombing going on as tit for tat? That sounds pretty terrorist to me just because it isn't on a large scale at this particular time. You just have gotten used to something as status quo that shouldn't be. I suppose the Protestants still treat the Catholics as an underclass, ergo the same way the Israelis treat the Palestinians, or how we Americans treat the Mexican immigrants.

Even with gang activity where I live here in So. California, we have nothing like you just described.

[sg_]

38. I didnt intend..

to make it sound like here is completely peaceful and like some sort of 'utopia'. But things are nowhere as bad as you seem to think it is. I feel much safer here than I would in many cities in the US.

I dont deny the fact that letting Orangemen march through Catholic areas is a stupid thing to do (Im a Protestant and I havent been to the 12th parades in many years). My parents still go however and there has been no trouble any time they have been. They, like many others simply see it as a day out.


"The fact that you can't go into certain areas doesn't make it sound peaceful to me and petro bombing going on as tit for tat?"

You misunderstood my comment. One could walk down the falls but aslong as you wear nothing that could identify you as being from the "other community" you would be fine.

Also, I dont really consider the actions of a group of teenagers to be 'terrorism'. Just pure vandilism.

"I suppose the Protestants still treat the Catholics as an underclass"

Ive no problem with Catholics whatsoever, and the same goes for many many people. Infact the majority of my neighbours are Catholic and they are all grand people. Perhaps, in some peoples wild version of things I still live in a big house and eat caviar while they all live in straw huts and cut my grass?.
Im not going to deny the fact however that some people still have huge chips on their shoulders. I could easily hate all catholics for the IRA bombing my village and shooting dead my friends grandfather and coming close to killing my father, but I dont. Some people hold these grudges however.


http://www.ireland-fun-facts.com/ireland-travel-tips.html
http://www.discovernorthernireland.com/info_FAQs.aspx
http://www.phoblacht.net/dangerousplace.html
http://www.visitbritain.com/VB3-en/destinationguides/Northern_Ireland/northern_ireland.aspx

"According to statistics from the U.N. International Crime Victimization Survey, Northern Ireland has one of the lowest crime rates in Europe (lower, in fact, than the crime rate in the US!). "

"And according to a UN report, Northern Ireland has the second lowest crime rate in the developed world, only Japan is safer for tourist to visit."

[bdamomma]

8. easy to say but get ourselves out of the Middle East

and let these people run their own countries, our noses cannot stay clean.

[cali]

9. Actually it's the absence of

an administration that can forcefully address the Israeli bombing and bring it to a halt, that's missing. The right kind of engagement is a good thing.

[LSK]

13. poke them with a hot iron stick and see if they strike back

Or at least thats what the Bush admin is doing....

[porphyrian]

14. Criminal acts should be prosecuted in a court of law. - n/t

[breakaleg]

16. I agree. If history has taught us anything is that violence begets

more violence.

The example cited of Ireland is a good one.

Hezbollah has a political goal underlying the violence. That has to be dealt with. While many in Lebanon and outside disagree with many of Hezbollah's methods, they agree with some of their goals - mainly to keep Israel out of Lebanon and the return of the Shebaa Farms.

The best way to deal with hezbollah is to absorb them into the government, let them have a voice in a democratic way, and then they will be held up to the laws of the land.

[furman]

35. Shebaa Farms is part of Syria as per the UN

Shebaa Farms is internationally recognized as part of Syria.

If Hezbollah/Lebanon feels otherwise, they should petition with the UN,
not launch terrorist attacks against Israel.

As far as the UN is concerned, Israel had
completely withdrawn from Lebanon in 2000.

Hezbollah continues to insist that is part of Lebanon in order
to give them pretext for terror attacks against Israel.

[treestar]

17. Al Qaeda too

It is still hard to tell just exactly what Al Qaeda wants. It is an odd thing that they do not come out and say so. There was no point to 911 if they don't at least say what they want. As it is, we are left sort of guessing. The US out of the mideast seems most logical, but has anyone from Al Qaeda ever just said so?

As to Hezbollah, one can't tell what they want. Saying they are the aggressor, have they ever said just what they want? If they just want Israel gone, do they really think their rocket attacks could work? That seems inconsistent with their having sense enough to even try to negotiate with them.

[cali]

20. I don't think I agree about Al-Qaeda

and I think there are some distinct and important differences between it and H'zbollah. Al-Q is not an "organic organization", or one that has roots in a specific community or country. It is more, the meglomaniacla fantasy of one man. Having read quite a bit about ben-laden, I feel it's fair to say that his goals have very little to do with issues such as the Occupation of Palestine or the oppression of people- though he certainly mouths stuff to that effect.

[Posteritatis]

23. one could go to the man's words

There's a book out that I noticed a few weeks ago to that effect; it's basically a collection of bin Laden's statements to the West with commentary added. I don't have it - my knowledge of it's limited to reading a couple sections at random at a Chapter's the other day - but I don't really think we can reasonably say we don't know what bin Laden wants.

[breakaleg]

26. I don't know that I'd go so far as to legitimize Al Qaeda as they

don't have a country they are fighting for or any real political goals. They are truly terrorists hiding out in whatever countries they can with the intent to damage the US.

[Clarkie1]

19. ABSOLUTELY NOT.

Non-state actors such as Hezbollah must never be deatly with politically. If we accept their legitimacy, the sovereignty of nations means nothing.

[Posteritatis]

22. Maybe things are moving in that direction anyway?

(For the record, I think Hezbollah sucks like a Microsoft blowdrier to say the very least, and think they should be dealt with harshly at best.)

Non-state actors, for good or bad, are here, right now, and are going to be staying despite the best efforts of things like the Russian government. Some of them carry more political and diplomatic weight than many sovereign nations do. These facts are not going away, and ignoring them won't help.

Personally I'd like to see a few holes punched in the concept of absolute sovereignty here and there. I like the idea of Responsibility to Protect (Google it, one of the neater, primarily-Canadian, inventions of the last five years) that's started floating around NGO and international circles the past few years, and I do not think that sovereignty should ever be an absolute excuse to do whatever the hell you want.

[endarkenment]

24. Lebanon is a sovereign nation?

Doesn't seem that way. But sure go ahead and hold that firm line in the sand there. Don't bother with the reality of the situation, the facts on the ground, the plain facts that Hezbollah is the de fact government force for much of Lebanon.

I wonder, were you also so adamantly opposed to the British/Irish peace settlement with the IRA? Was that also a violation of your edict?

[Clarkie1]

49. I would not be opposed to Israel talking to Hezbollah.

However, I do not think other foreign powers...such as the U.S., Europe, etc. should be talking to Hezbollah. To do so would undermine the Lebanese government.

[cali]

25. That's neither realistic

nor historically accurate, and for the record I am not a fan of H'zbollah, but they are part of the Lebanese government, and they are deeply and irrevocably interwoven in the fabric of life in Southern Lebanon. And what about such groups as Irgun, which were undoubtedly terrorist organizations, prior to Israel's being recognized as a state?

[Clarkie1]

50. Members of Hezbollah have indeed been elected to the Lebanese parliment

However, an important distinction needs to be made between a political movement and an armed terrorist militia. If Hezbollah wishes to be a legitimate political actor in Lebanon, their militia must be disarmed and they must submit to the will of the Lebanese government of which they wish to be a part.

[eyl]

76. And you'll recall

that the Irgun was stripped of its miltary power (with some force) when Israel was established.

[TahitiNut]

27. Like the IRA? The ANC? Solidarity? Students in Tienamin Square?

It's the People who are sovereign, not the governments.

[Malikshah]

36. I've said it before: Terrorism is a symptom. It must be properly

diagnosed to treat the root cause. Thus far, folks have completely misdiagnosed various terrorist activities and thus have only "treated" the symptom. If that's all you do, it returns.

[Clarkie1]

42. Exactly.

The root causes of terrorism...poverty and disenfranchisment, must be addressed. The only solution for Lebanon is for the Lebanese governement to be given the assistance and resources it needs so that terrorist hate-based organizatins like Hezbollah cannot undermine the state.

[Malikshah]

69. One also needs to add that one should not give fodder for their

cause. Outside powers always forget that little bit.

[cali]

44. Ok,

usually I have no particular objection to how mods do things, but why this post was moved, is beyond me. It's not about Israel or Palestine. It's an observation about dealing with non-state actors. It will inevitably get locked here as it doesn't flow from an article. Meanwhile there is a longrunning thread in GD entitled "Support for Israel". I'm sorry about this because I believe it's an important topic.

[furman]

48. I agree, I'm surprised it ended up here

especially since its not based on a recent news article or op-ed.

[pelsar]

47. Hizballa the milita...

it did control s. lebanon, tax the residents, pick up the garbage, run the hospitals, schools...receives money and weapons from iran..so what is it?....a very sophisticated militia/terrorist theocratic organization. I would say even worse than al quida in that it has sophisticated organization, a community that it serves etc

Can a fanatically religious group "mature"..sure and it may look like iran. They too pick up the garbage, have taxes, hang homosexuals etc. I would say unlike the IRA the addition of fanatical islam is an extremely dangerous element within Hizballa....and in there lies the problem.

Unlike secular terrorists, whom i do believe can mature in time and "join the world" i'm less inclined to believe the same of fanatical religious ones.....

[endarkenment]

54. Unless you intend to exterminate a lot of people

it really doesn't matter much what label you think ought to be applied to Hezbollah or what you think the prospects for religious fanatics are. We seem to have no problem dealing with the Saudis who regularly lop the tops off their gays.

[pelsar]

56. the saudis .....

unlike the iranians, they are just a bit 'quieter" in their fanaticism....eventually it will also come to a head with them. Their wahhabims (sp?) is just as bad as the iranian version........of course the saudis and iranians also fear each other as well (just love arab politics....). They too have learned to "pick up the garbage"...but they are garbage as well (and thats my tolerent liberal point of view)

the people dont have to be exterminated....but i admit i believe that dictatorships etc have no right to exist (but yes such govt systems have to be exterminated)

[Meshuga]

67. Hezbollah reminds me of the...

...drug lords in the slums of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo, Brazil.

Drug gangs make life in both cities very difficult for normal citizens who live in fear because these groups impose their power over Brazilian authorities by showing force. A huge city like São Paulo had to close their business for a couple of days because of this display of power. And Rio had to deal with this shit too.

But there are those in the FAR left in Brazil who rationalize this crap with the same BS, "Oh, but these gangs provide books, medicine, protection, etc. for the poor in the slums... They are so good!". Well, these groups also provide the bullets that wound innocent people who live in those slums almost every day. Including children!

[eyl]

77. Let me ask you this

Hizbullah has effectively cerated a state-within-a-state in southern Lebanon. Effectively, it's usurped Lebanon's sovereignity in that area - but since it isn't a state, it accepts no responsibility for what it does there, and its actions inevitably effect Lebanon as a whole. Wouldn't accepting it - and thus the situation - as a legitimate entity means that it can continue in its current role where it can drag Lebanon into a war whenever it feels like it but is not responsible to anyone?

[cali]

78. H'zbollah should be

negotiated with, and part of those negotiations should be, at a minimum, that their militia be removed from South Lebanon. Preferably, H'zbollah's military arm should be dissolved or incorporated into the Lebanese army.

[pelsar]

79. except that

its whole identity is based on the "resistance"..take aways its military arm and it no longer has a "reason to be"....why would they negotiate their own disappearance ...at least if its not the lesser of two bad choices? (meaning be destroyed or quiety go away to come back another day?)

[eyl]

80. Why should they agree to that?

You're asking them to voluntarily give up most of their power, in return for what?

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[Phx_Dem]

82. I think your either/or argument is simplistic.

Hizbullah may very well develop into a political entity, but their current iteration as a terrorist org cannot be ignored. Using military force against a foe like Hizbullah may not represent an effective long term solution, but it certainly can work in the short term.

[Lithos]

83. Locking per I/P guidelines

Not based on a recent news or op-ed article.

Lithos
DU Moderator