Let it begin. Screw all of the Islamist and the countries who support them.

Long live Isreal & the U.S.

This is not good. Olmert squandered the initiative and now Hamas and Hezballah have managed to coordinate and doubtlessly organized to deal with the incursion. Olmert is not long for his position imo. Israel should have kept the pressure on in Gaza, launching essentially a daily thunderrun and picking up Hamas members (or killing them) as they went, relentlessly, until the prisoner was found or returned. The lull has allowed the terrorist ample time to coordinate and plan.

Blaming the Lebanese government is a mistake as well. The Lebanese have no control of Hezballah and if you have to go across the border it makes no sense to rankle a people who conceivably would have given you a wink and a nod to go after Hezballah.

Now things have complicated immeasurably. Israel cant occupy Lebanon for any length of time like they can Gaza. At best they should be launching similar Thunder Runs with armored forced to keep the enemy on their heels and maybe catch a break. And more importantly make them pay a price.

The whole point of disengagement was not to be a kinder gentler Israel. It was to give the terrorists enough rope to hang themselves with, which they have obligingly put around their necks. But now Israel isnt yanking.

On Gaza, I believe Israel's early response was to seal the borders. Is it still true that Palestinians living in Gaza rely extensively on working/shopping in Israel? If so, what were the limitations of that response?

Turn we now to Lebanon, where Iran-sponsored Hezbollah terrorists crossed the border into Israel and snatched two Israeli soldiers, carrying them back to Lebanaon.

The targets in this operation were Israeli soldiers, therefore the Hezbollah operatives were not engaged in terrorism (on this outing, anyway.)

Now thats a gray area. One is not only a terrorist when engaged in acts of terrorism. Hezballah is a terrorist organization, and hence its operatives are terrorists whether they happen to be attacking military targets or not. They almost certainly were not wearing uniforms, and they definately launched an illegal act of war across an international border, so at best they were sabateurs. This is better than attacking civilians, but on the other hand they were only attacking soldiers in the first place to get them out of the way so they can commit ethnic genocide against all of Israel. Either way, sabateurs should be hunted down and killed and their sponsors held accountable for both acts of war, warcrimes, and/or international terrorism. To make a long story short, Israel should be taking shots at Hamas and Hezballah whereever in the world they may be found. A few smart bombs in Demascus and Beirut are in order.

There are so many narratives, so many realities...

But soon to be found out is which reality sucks more.

I'm not sure what implications T.J. Madison expects us to take from whether attacks on soldiers can be acts of terrorism.

But I disagree. Terrorism is an act designed to place a population in fear of violence. Attacks on national symbols are a way to generate fear beyond the specific target. Soldiers are no less national symbols than buildings. The attack on the Pentagon was not intended to defeat the U.S. militarily, but to reveal the vulnerability of our military institutions. Here the terrorists are letting Israelis know that even though your armies can defeat us, you are not safe, not even your bravest and best are safe.

This is where the cognitive disonance of the generic terminology of Terrorist and War on Terrorism begins to really grate.

We need to name our enemy. Retrenchant Islam.

Israel has to recover the initiative, and Iran should be bombed for what they are doing inside and outside their country.

Of course, the situation in Iraq must improve before the latest can happen.

I don't think the Lebanese government should not be blamed, it is their country the one that is used to attack Israel. Although they cannot control Hezbullah, they are responsible in some way.

Sharon retreat from Gaza wasn't as bad, I think, removing the settlers from the equation there wasn't a mistake, and some public support is won. Many goodwill people cannot understand why Palestinians dig a tunnel into Israel, kidnap a soldier killing two more, and they still seen them complaining when they turn on the TV to watch the news.

It seems clear to me that if we label "Terrorist" on anyone who kills to inspire fear, then the Israeli military is clearly terrorist -- they certainly claim that they are killing women and children not for the purpose of killing women and children, but for the purpose of terrifying the terrorist relatives of the women and children.

And surely Israel's long-running use of walled concentration camps to attempt to starve and subdue the Palestinians will qualify as use of fear/terror against a population, so surely that is terrorism.

My point is that such a wide-ranging definition of terrorism only gives us the Israeli/Hamas/Hezbollah war as a war of terrorists -- much like the Baghdad battles have become, of terrorists militias dueling it out, with one of them being a US terrorist militia being cheered on by right-wing and anti-Arab US citizens -- but nonetheless a tragic duel of terrorist militias.

It may be profitable to the oil barons, and the weapons dealers and war profiteers, and so to Bush and his buddies, but it is tragic to most of the civilians being affected.

PD Shaw #7: Terrorism is an act designed to place a population in fear of violence. Attacks on national symbols are a way to generate fear beyond the specific target. Soldiers are no less national symbols than buildings.

The problem is that by this reasoning, any national army can be described as terrorists. Armies certainly exist in part to put opposing nations' populations in fear of violence. And strikes on national symbols are commonplace in 'legitimate' war as much as in terrorist operations.

I would stick to the simpler line that a terrorist remains a terrorist even when the particular action he is involved in today is not a terrorist act. Israel has maintained that it is an act of war and I think that is an apt description.

J, you are exactly right, and it is no coincidence this kind of thing didnt happen when Sharon was in charge. His idea was that when Israel is on its side of the border and gets attacked, there is every moral perogative in the world to respond to violence with decisive violence. The problem is that when you respond with measured violence, you embolden your enemy. Sharon got that, Olmert doesnt.

The elected government of the Palestinians snuck across a border and kidnapped and murdered. That is an act of war by any standard, and had Sharon still been there I dont doubt he would be deconstructing the Gaza strip house by house making it a parking lot until the soldier was released.

The worst possible way to treat this kind of incitement is via the gradual measured escalation. That is what Israel is up in its neck to now. It matches the attacks on it, and pretty soon the 'cycle of violence' crap gets bandied about. When somebody provokes you and you fling yourself at them beating the crap out of them relentlessly until the threat is squashed, nobody brings up the cycle of violence. Being decisive is critical in the early stages because it is often impossible to retrieve later. Think of the International Community as a herd. The herd despises being upset even more than they hate Israel in general. They will always gravitate towards the solution the returns relative calm as quickly as possible. If the Israel response is sudden and complete, Hamas surrendering will be pushed. But if Israel is going tit-for-tat, demanding Israel make a deal and end the engagement will be forced. When your spear is on the other guys throat, nobody wonders how to bring a stop to the fighting.

"they certainly claim that they are killing women and children not for the purpose of killing women and children, but for the purpose of terrifying the terrorist relatives of the women and children."

They certainly are not and I defy you to produce a link showing Israelis are targetting women and children under any pretext.

"It may be profitable to the oil barons, and the weapons dealers and war profiteers, and so to Bush and his buddies, but it is tragic to most of the civilians being affected."

If it were truly so tragic perhaps the civilians next time wont elect a party that launches attacks against the Israelis after Israel withdraws from Gaza. If they are truly so sick of the violence, allowing Israel to hand over Gaza and the West Bank might be adviseable, not preventing them from doing that via violence.

Well said before, as a Israeli citizen, livin in israel, i can say that Israel has whole right to attack any targets whithin Lebanon.

Hezbullah did not only killed and kidnapped soldier, they injured 9 civilianes with rockets, so yes, they are terrorists, if you still think they are not terrorist here is another reason, they want Samir Kuntar back.

Samir Kuntar is the worst kind of terrorist there is, in the 1970's he killed a whole family in thier own home, he has blood on his hands, he is cold blooded murder, and he is the 1st reason Hizbullah attacked, they said they want him back on previous realese of terrorists, but Israel said no, they didn't gave up.

Bottom line: Lebanon declared war on Israel, Israel has the right to protect her self.

'Degenerate' is not a transitive verb.

Dept of Corrections:

I meant to use revanchist in #8.

I don't want to get bogged down in a definitional debate on "terrorism" unless someone can point out what difference it makes. Without an international concensus that terrorism is "beyond the pale," its just words being thrown back and forth. I will point out though that the U.S. definition of terrorism criminalizes violence or potentially violent acts intended:

(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping;

Israel's long-running use of walled concentration camps to attempt to starve and subdue the Palestinians

Is that the one also operated by the Egyptians?

The definition is really quite easy.

Arabs/Muslims are terrorists, either currently or wannabe's, if they follow the directions given to them in the Koran.

Israeli's are not.

I'm surprised that no one wants to go after Baby Assad in Syria.

Let me be the first to mention that the Gaza withdrawal gave Sharon some political initiative inside Israel but also in Europe. I guess it's easy to say "So what" from here, but the EU (as a whole) is Israel's largest trading partner. Giving at least the appearance of dismantling the colonialist enterprise in the Occupied Territories makes Hezbollah look more terrorists and less like freedom fighters. Without Euro support, all those ritual condemnations of Israel are just empty threats.

Israel also needs to ratchet up the crisis, to a point where their military strength comes in.

Should Israel decide to:

*Exile ALL of Gaza's inhabitants, and take back Gaza permanently, not only can no Arab government do nothing about it, but it shows that military weakness has consequences as does voting for terror over negotiations. Palestinians voted for War and they should get it, along with the inevitable defeat.

*Annex all of Southern Lebanon permanently and exile all the inhabitants (after killing every Hezbollah fighter they can find) there is also not much any Arab governmemnt could do about it and it would show the Lebanese the consequences of not dealing with Hezbollah themselves.

*March into Damascus and overthrow/kill Assad; take the Syrian Heights completely. Nothing the Syrian Army could do about it and it also shows the folly of essentially declaring war on Israel: you declare war on Israel and the full military strength of Israel comes into play.

Sadly the Arabs need another war and humiliation before they will realize:

1. Israel will not go away and "enough terror" won't make Isreal cease to exist, negotiations that are serious (not kidnapping soldiers) are in order.

2. Policies of hot-cold Wars with Israel are no substitute for development, even if that threatens Arab Culture and Islam

[Co-incidentally, this is an opportunity for the US to strike Iran pre-emptively, perhaps sinking their entire Navy would be in order. Iran and Syria are raising the stakes, we should raise them again on an order of magnitude to force them to fold]

If criminal thugs with a political agenda crossed into U.S. territory and attacked a U.S. military outpost, what would the U.S. do?

Invade Mexico

How did that work out? Probably not very satisfactorily. But how much of that had to do with the competence of the U.S. expeditionary force? And was Pancho Villa assasinated as a result of the international crisis he caused?

Jim:

The Arab countries can do something about an exile policy. They can refuse to accept the exiles.

The idea of basically going back to a Greater Israel scheme is not tenable. The borders are not securable. How do you police all of the border between Eilat to Gaza? You'd probably have to reoccupy the Sinai and push the Palestinians into Egypt. Occupying Southern Lebanon is an even bigger problem, population ethnically cleansed or no. Expanding Israel doesnt make it more secure, particularly since it means going back to war with Egypt and Joran (they arent going to take the Palestinians for the asking).

The right solution is to withdraw to something equivalent to the Green Line and level anything within a square mile that shoots, rockets, or tunnels after you.

I find I agree with this comment and am therefore reconsidering my position.

Seems some people want to play word games and situational ethics. Boobytrap a corpse and kill the police along with innocent bystanders and the explosion is merely incidental. The dead police are a result of an insurgent act; the dead relatives, terrorism. Forget that the two incidents are one. We must properly label to placate the conscience of Western "civilization". The perps in Hamas, Hizb'allah*, etc. have shown repeatedly they don't give two shits who they target but it's soooo important to everyone else.

*Isn't spelling Hizb'allah "Hezbollah" kind of like spelling Christmas "Xmas"? We should work on our transliterations perhaps.

NBC news says Israel holds the moral high ground:

I watched NBC news for the first time in a long time to catch the latest on Israel. The commentary at the end of segment went something like this: "Israel left Lebanon 6 years ago. They left Gaza a year ago. Why can't they leave Israel alone?" Which goes back to my previous points about Sharon. He has created a situation where even a weak leader can take strong measures.

Israel has the high ground. Don't forget to replace the * with o

Or you can just TinyURL it like...

Israel has the high ground.

Mark of course there will be war with Jordan and Egypt. That's been in the cards for decades.

Israelis can't have peace. It's not ever going to happen until Arabs are decisively defeated (again); certainly Israel can force at gunpoint (by shooting those who refuse) the total evacuation of Gaza and reclaim it.

Unless Palestinians suffer an irreversible loss of territory they will simply go on doing what they are doing, waging War against Israel while asking Europe, America, etc. to shield them from the consequences.

As for Egypt (which has been waging low-level war with Israel as well through Hamas); simply destroy the armed forces bordering Gaza and force them to accept the Palestinians. Move them by force into Egype and those nations around the Palestinians will be forced to share the pain of Israel.

The only solution for Israel is to make sure everyone else shares their pain and keep upping the ante.

Lebanon and Syria are weak states, not largely populated, and riven by large factionalism. It's highly unlikely they will be able to mount a concerted effort against Israel. Egypt is far more dangerous (and thus Israel should actively pick a war with them NOW). Making War with Egypt NOW before Iran has it's full complement of ICBMS with nukes is crucial.

Iran has made no secret of it's ambition to finish Hitler's job ... among other things it will make them beloved of all Muslims and the stronger Muslim leaders over bin Laden.

The fight is existential ... so Israel should actively increase the hostilities. Reducing Damascus to rubble will FORCE Iran to act before they are fully ready. Israel IMHO faces the question: save some of their people in a war now; or lose them all (with Iran's nukes married to Kim's missiles) a few years later?

Israel's power is militarily unmatched in the region, and if they act now (on the heels of another Muslim atrocity in India, more Muslim plots against the US) it forces many issues:

Dems to side with their Nutroots against Israel or with Israel?

Arab nations around them to make a decisive choice: co-existence with Israel or war and defeat?

Palestinians to decide on losing everything or saving the West Bank (Gaza IMHO MUST go back to Isreal or Muslims will simply choose more war).

Lebanon and Syria are weak states, not largely populated, and riven by large factionalism. It's highly unlikely they will be able to mount a concerted effort against Israel. Egypt is far more dangerous (and thus Israel should actively pick a war with them NOW). Making War with Egypt NOW before Iran has it's full complement of ICBMS with nukes is crucial.

Should I find it odd that no one in Israel wants to pick a war (what a charming idea) with Egypt? Have you thought of taking up chess, Jim, as a more socially constructive way of exorcising these "war now" demons?

Unless Palestinians suffer an irreversible loss of territory they will simply go on doing what they are doing, waging War against Israel while asking Europe, America, etc. to shield them from the consequences.

And what leads you to believe ethnically cleansing them a few miles will entice them to stop doing what they are doing?

As for Egypt (which has been waging low-level war with Israel as well through Hamas); simply destroy the armed forces bordering Gaza and force them to accept the Palestinians. Move them by force into Egype and those nations around the Palestinians will be forced to share the pain of Israel.

And then instead of Jordan and Egypt keeping the Palestinians in their populations under lock and key, their nations suddenly become armed camps for same. How does that enhance Israels security- quite aside from certainly alienating every other nation on the planet including the US?

The only solution for Israel is to make sure everyone else shares their pain and keep upping the ante.

Then why not just fire bomb Gaza and the West Bank? Why bother ethnic cleansing at all? Genocide is certainly pain sharing.

"Lebanon and Syria are weak states, not largely populated, and riven by large factionalism. It's highly unlikely they will be able to mount a concerted effort against Israel."

Do a little research about Israels last Lebanon foray. Why do you insist on picking fights with the 3 governments that actually work productively with Israel (Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon)?

"Palestinians to decide on losing everything or saving the West Bank (Gaza IMHO MUST go back to Isreal or Muslims will simply choose more war)."

That is one of the oddest statements i've seen in a while. Everything you're advocating is politically impossible for Israel, diplomatically suicidal, and militarily feasable but terribly costly. Oh, and lets not forget morally repugnant.

The way you deal with a belligerent neighbor isnt ethnic cleansing and starting wars with everbody the same color in the region. You deal with the people on the trigger, which includes Hamas, Jihad, Syria, and Hezballah/Iran. Thats quite enough on Israels plate.

Only problem, Mark, is that the groups targetting the citizens of Israel are diverse. They are not simply militant groups that are readily definable and distinguishable from the surrounding populace. PFLP always had the PLO, Al Aqsa has FATAH, Hamas' humanitarian arm has the attack-dog Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, ditto Hizb'allah(except with the Pasdaran). All these groups are actively involved in the political machinery of their hosts. So it's all well and good to say "attack your attackers" but it's not very practical now is it? Hence why democracy is such a linchpin to solutions for the ME. If the Palestinians get fed up with Fatah and turn to Hamas and Israel finds the situation worse then the pressure they bring to bear against the Palestinian voters should be commensurate. Simple logic, no? The people of Palestine can't be expected to act differently than the people of Pittsburg. If Hamas brings them worse misery than Fatah then they'll swing the other way and hopefully wind up somewhere secular and peaceful. Maybe it's a pipe dream but it's certainly more realistic than assuming everything will turn out the same as it did back when Israel was dealing strictly with autocrats and puppet regimes.

Iran's equivalent of their NSA arrived in Damascus today. Hamas, Syria, and Iran are working in concert to pick a fight with Israel. They seem to have that fight.

One way to read Iran's nuclear weapons taunts over the last few months is that they have been goading the US and/or Israel into starting a shooting war. Now they seem to have uppped the ante. Sadrs goons are all over the streets of Baghdad often in police uniforms killing Sunnis. This is a disturbing set of circumstances. The paranoid in me is suspecting Iran is hatching a long planned coup de main across the entire Middle East.

If Iran can tie down the US in Iraq with a Shiia uprising while going to war with Israel (which they seem to think they can come out on top of apparently) things get scary real fast. The long term prospects seem bleak for Iran, so one has to think they have some immediate objective in mind.

Possibilities, by decreasing likelihood:

-Topple Lebanon and establish a true puppet state to keep a low intensity war with Israel burning, using the last Israeli invasion as a model.
-Stretch the IDF thin and try to win a decisive air/missile battle over Iran to change the balance of power and preempt an Israeli attack on their nukes. A Parthian Shot, so to speak (appropriate).
-Draw Jordan and Egypt into a broader conflict.
-Defeat Israel on the battlefield and take a conventional fight into Israel proper.

and this is the one that really scares me, no idea what the odds are:
-engage Israel in a shooting war and use this as a pretext to detonate a nuclear weapon(s) over Israel.

Frontinus, I agree with you. My argument is that ethnically cleansing the Palestinians out of the region is not going to make them any more eager to stop shooting at Israel, nor make Israel any more able to prevent it. My strategic idea has been to withdraw to the Green Line and respond to any violence across the now border with devastating and certain destruction. This goes right along with what you suggest. If Hamas launches a rocket and gets a city block leveled in response, the Palestinian people will have a huge incentive to stop that rocket from being launched.

Israel should just engage in more ethnic cleansing?

Maybe that would work. Just uproot all them Muslim and Christian Ay-rabs, and be done with it.

Shove 'em into the sea, or into the Arabian desert.

Even if, individually, they haven't attacked Israel, after all, they're Arab. So, you know, they're collectively guilty. Somehow.

Besides, Uncle Sam will continue to pay for the whole thing. Probably.

Contrary to popular opinion the terrorist groups have been working together for decades. The demarcation lines in Islam are pure fantasy...pablum spoonfed to pleasant democrats. The Marxist PFLP, the communist PKK, and other non-religious groups trained alongside jihadis in camps run by Soviets and Cubans and occassionally...Irishmen or Germans. AQ even train and support Sufi groups in Somalia for pete's sake. Categorizing them all is a preoccupation and ultimately a distraction.

No way Jordan or Egypt join anything. One false move and they lose the gravy train that started with their bilateral treaties with Israel. Advocating an attack by Israel is pure lunacy.

Some people seem to think that with each new generation Israel must hand out a fresh ass-whooping to their neighbors. But history has atleast shown that the last two have brought peace treaties. Now I put as little faith as anyone else in UNDOF since we've seen how impotent UN forces can be in the area(see: Sinai, '56) but even if the UN fails utterly there's still the Golan. And Syria isn't stupid enough do that again. So you have Syria disconnected, two border states under treaty, and two others that have voted with relatively(don't ask) little outside interference. Now there's plenty of reason to be pessimistic about an impending war but I don't think things are as bad as they look. Matter of fact things are probably a hell of a lot better than the democracy-has-failed chicken littles would have us believe.

Oh, I agree with you in general, Mark. I just have a bad habit of picking a nit and using it to go off on a tangent. Senility or something.

The only problem is you can't do much to Hizb'allah since their backers are Syria(pretty strong monarch) and Iran(whatever you want to call their whole IGC/voting setup). Putting pressure on an unaccountable group won't accomplish much. And with Hamas(as it was with Fatah) you get the shell game. Now this I blame entirely on Europe and the U.S. If we cracked down on the Palestinian government and Hamas is in a pinch you'll start to see Al Aqsa, or Islamic Jihad, or .... carrying out the attacks and the government can start crying about Israel impeding their police activities and it's totally not their fault. Then sheepishly the West shrugs their shoulders and walks back to the Hague leaving the whole mess for later. There really is no answer other than democracy. And the only reason democracy is the answer is because it makes force much more effective.

> The only solution for Israel is to make sure everyone else shares their pain and keep upping the ante.

The analog is unfortunately, I guess, "the only solution for Palestinians is to make sure everyone else shares their pain and keep upping the ante".

The Palestinian pain is far more widespread, as nearly a majority of Palestinians suffer under the concentration camp enforced poverty, and lack of electricity, and the associated disease and mortality. But the Israeli pain makes better TV -- it is much easier to film the shocking violence of one bomb, than to film the widespread poverty and hopelessness of the Israeli concentration camps. And of course the violence done to Israelis is accessible to reporters in ways the violence done to Palestinians is not, due to Israel having much better censorship controls (because their violence is done by army contingents who do not flee after killing people, but remain and rule the scene.) But both are feeding back and forth this spiral of violence opposing peace.

Obviously this is a good arrangement for ongoing ethnic cleansing by both sides.

Wouldn't it be nice if there were some other solution than ongoing sectarian violence by both sides?

Donald Sensing ended with: ok, I'm done now

But I'm strangely dissatisfied. What is the point in painting the scene if you offer no suggestion of how to proceed?

Ahmed, polling has shown that the Palestinian people themselves prefer violence. They reap what they sow.

> Ahmed, polling has shown that the Palestinian people themselves prefer violence. They reap what they sow.

This argument can be used just as appropriately and logically by those who argue that the US citizens prefer violence and must be killed in all places.

That is to say, bluster in favor of violence is cheap to come by, and easy to use to rile up emotions, favor aggression, and oppose both peace and democracy. This is just the nature of the beast, which is homo sapiens.

Ahmed: It is difficult to talk to someone whose back assumptions about reality differ so far from yours.

"The analog is unfortunately, I guess, "the only solution for Palestinians is to make sure everyone else shares their pain and keep upping the ante"."

No, the analog for the Palestinians is if they just stopped fighting they would have peace. Therein lies all the difference.

"...as nearly a majority of Palestinians suffer under the concentration camp enforced poverty, and lack of electricity, and the associated disease and mortality."

It is not the Israelis that keep the Palestinians in poverty, but the Palestinians themselves. They have corrupt leaders and they've never shown that building an economy or a civil government are any sort of priority for them. Demonstratably, Israel has encouraged prosperity in Palestine. Palestine's poverty is due to its own people's decision to make endless war.

Let me ask you this question? Who are better off? The Arabs in Israel, or the ones in Palestine? Where would you rather live? Where are you more likely to obtain wealth? Where are you more likely to have freedom? It's not Israel which is the greatest enemy of a Palestinians wealth and freedom, but his fellow Palestinians. If you don't believe that, then its safe to say you neither live in Palestine nor do know anything about it's legion of 'security' forces.

"But the Israeli pain makes better TV -- it is much easier to film the shocking violence of one bomb, than to film the widespread poverty and hopelessness of the Israeli concentration camps."

What you call 'concentration camps', I call slums. If you think they are 'concentration camps', you don't know anything about concentration camps. One wonders how the Palestinians have more children per family - that is surviving children - than any where else in the world, if they are living in a 'concentration camp'.

No, perhaps you could argue that the Israeli's are 'slum lords', and have a semi-serious argument, but if you are talking 'concentration camps' you are living in a fantasy world.

"And of course the violence done to Israelis is accessible to reporters in ways the violence done to Palestinians is not, due to Israel having much better censorship controls..."

I'd be laughing if that statement was so tragic.

"Obviously this is a good arrangement for ongoing ethnic cleansing by both sides."

Twenty percent of Israel is Arab. What percentage of Palestine is Jewish? What percentage of Baghdad? Did you know that a quarter of a million jews who been living there since before Mohammed walked the Earth where in Iraq alone before they were evicted from that country? Who is guilty of ethnic cleansing again.

Your ignorance would make me angry if I didn't know the cause of it Ahmed. Censorship indeed. Find me the free Arab press if you can.

"Where is the international community? Where is the Security Council? Where's the United Nations? Where's the whole world? We are under fire.", Hezbollah Spokesman

HAHAHA.. that's funny.. let's see.. if you did'nt provoke a battle with rocket attacks, kidnappings, and bungling "the peace process" then you would'nt have Isreali planes dropping bombs on you!!..

In the words of Walter Brimley, "It's the right thing to do, and a good time to do it".

This is overdue- well deserved. It is never good when civilians are damaged by warfare they have nothing to do with-

Iran says "no place in Isreal will be safe"

Wake Up America- stop buying Oil- Just stop.. it can be done- all it takes is initiative, and the will of the nation to find other ways of doing business... remember.. some amount of every dollar you spend driving that big SUV of yours.. pays for yet another Katusha.. another terrorist plot.. another subway gas attack.. why do you continue to do business with, and fund your enemies?

Dave (#43) "Wake Up America- stop buying Oil"

I believe your premise is that if we stop buying oil, then terrorists won't get funded?

How about the rest of the world? Wouldn't they have to stop buying it too? And it's not just oil -- no more plastics? Getting off of oil quickly will be expensive, torturous, and traumatic for the nation. Or is the plan to cripple our economy so we can feel better about ourselves while the rest of the world continues to develop and grow with cheaper fuel? So you would rather wake up in twenty years and have the same terrorists with a weaker US and a stronger China? Somehow that makes no sense at all to me.

Dear Daniel -
you vastly underestimate the USA.. and its ability to navigate the winds of change. First, Oil as you know it.. used for fueling things like cars is not a forever deal.. so.. the show is going to end eventually and not that far off given a near exponential acceleration in consumption.
There will be nations who have accepted this eventuality and made the change.. then there will be those who tried to hang on to a sinking ship.. In biology there is a saying "There were variations in the species.. some did better than others".. What nation will be the variation that did'nt get the message on Oil?

With that said, imagine what great industry this nation would engage in knowing it had to replace oil for fuel. Whole industries would spring up.. innovations.. different ways of doing business, and transport.. money, lots of money to be made and spent doing that.

Weaker nation, I hardly think so.. your thinking on a stronger China is short sighted, and lacks faith in American industrial prowess.

As for terrorists.. yes.. if Iran was a poor country sitting on some worthless crude oil.. they might not have time to be so good about mailing Katusha Rockets around ... they might actually just be happy to be able to have basic things.. like food.. I like that image.. a lot!

Help me to understand..from the reference here
http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs7984
on Yahoo.Com.. this guy shows us his arms. his weapons of terrorism.. he is Hezbollah.. amongst his toys of death is an American M16 and statements about Lebonese army sharing, selling, trading with Hezbollah and he demonstrates the complicity of the Lebonese Government and People-Shed no tears for them as Isreal pounds them hopefully into oblivion.. they have brought this upon themselves with their fascism.. they claim that if you are not like them.. Muslim, then you do not deserve dignity or land- this is no different than any of the despots of the past- yet these guys seem expert at Garnering Sympathy.. and manipulating false interpretations of facts to generate sympathetic news reporting. CNN amongst others are complicit in this and report a slanted, almost but not exactly pro Hezbollah view of news.
In my country- I saw this.. just before the end.. America take note.. a deep, dark, horrible monster lurks there and you are being led to it by slanted reporting of the news. Isreal is defending itself only- if it were not.. Isreal would have taken much harsher steps and simply eliminated Hezbollah in a single night of horrible death dealing carpet bombing.. yes.. Isreal has the stuff to do it... make no mistake.. Isreal is being very restrained.
Sorry for my poor english- Sadly.. you Westerners forget too easily that Hezbollah is funded by Iran- and Syria.. listen to their insnae rhetoric.. listen.. dont forget.. listen to it.. pay attention..

"Hugo Chavez Arrives in Iran for Talks With Fellow U.S. Opponent Ahmedinejad"

YES DAN- I SAID "STOP BUYING OIL"..
YES DAN- I SAID-"IT FUNDS TERRORISTS"

Now Dan.. be a good little Iranian Soldier for peace and buy a BIG SUV- get something that really drinks gasoline- and then go buy a bunch of it.. keep buying it..and say to yourself over and over again i dont want to be weaker than china.. i dont want to be weaker than china..and when that first Iranian Made Nuke makes it way here .. via South America carried by hand.. put your head between your knees and ..

Thanks dore -- you never answered my questions and instead launched into a long disjointed diatribe.

Yes. American industry is a great thing. I have a lot of faith in it. My faith stems from our ability not to muck around with it. Not because I think it's some free credit card we can go using whenever we feel like it.

And I don't see any time when the Iranians will be sitting on a bunch of worthless crude. Ain't going to happen. Even with your rosy scenario. Plastics, electricity, poorer nations, etc -- the Iranians will always be able to sell oil for money. Terrorists will always get money from oil. Get used to it, because it's not going to change.

I have to go fill up my Suburban now. I'm going to drive to my doctor. He is of dubious moral chaaracter and probably sends my money to terrorists. The wife wants some persian rugs, but I'm sure that money is going somewhere bad too. And I'd like to buy some olives at the grocery store, but we all know where THAT money goes.

I'm all in favor of energy independence, but stop it with the crazy generalizations! Commerce does not equal support for terrorism. It's just commerce. Supply and demand exists completely outside of the current world situation. I know you want simple answers to simply described problems, but we live in a complex, inter-connected economy. Cartoon-philosophizing isn't going to change that.

Daniel- without using sophomoric references to Cartoon-philosophizing- here's a little hint. Oil is a scarce thing- it's running out. The US is held hostage on a daily basis by it. There is a new world order- sorry, I did'nt make it.. Chavez, Kim Il, Iran, Putin, and Syria seem to be forming a new alliance, a new axis if you will. You really want to support that? But, politics none the less.. I suggest you take a trip around the world- apparently you don't get out much- In Amsterdam, a normal every day guy will ride by you on his bike, doing something short of mach-1, chatting it up on the phone without even beginning to breath hard.. yep.. mostly a in shape group of people- they dont ride around in cars Dan.. and.. umm.. they dont have the same toll on their health care system we do from cardiovascular desease... Also Dan, they are quite productive.. and somehow manage to do quite well in spite of several thousand bicycles. . But Dan.. aside from politics again.. Oil is running out- the air you breath, the water you drink- all degraded by fuel made from oil- emissions Dan, Now, like I told ya before.. There were variations in the species.. some did better than others... Now that said.. wonder which of the species here will make the right choices.. cause.. the outlook for the other guys does not look too good.
As for your doctor- and that rug.. I fail to see the connection- the olives likely come from mexico, Big Olive groves there.. Ya know.. those Mexicans Dan....

Now.. for the real question.. Hezbollah launches a Katusha (affectionate name for Ekatrina in Russian Dan) into Isreal. The missle lands and kills some people- ok.. so the UN is silent.. they launch it real close to population center.. lots of innocent civilians around.. Isreal retaliates.. and because the rocket launcher is so close to civilians.. the worst happens.. some innocent civilians die-it's sad.. and the UN says the same stupid words over and over agin , "We are very disturbed".. another Katusha flys in.. kills some more Isreali's going about their business.. and.. silence.. I dont understand that Dan? Can you help me with that one?
So.. let's examine this.. if you were to completely disarm Isreal, there would be an instant Hollocaust.. if you disarmed Hezbollah.. there would be instant peace.. explain that to me Dan.. please..

As for that Suburu you drive.. try stepping up into something a little more green.. say a nice Hybrid.... Honda makes em.. Ford makes em.. Toyota makes em.. nice cars too..

A Security Council statement expressed the world body's extreme shock and distress at Sunday's Israeli bombing of the southern Lebanese town of Qana, where at least 60 civilians were killed, and offered its condolences for the deaths.

This is from the front page of CNN Web site.. Notice the Security council didnt express any extreme shock and distress when a Katusha landed in Isreal killing innocent civilians.. Not even close to anything that resembles a military target..

Why is it I wonder the deafening sound of silence with each Katusha attack.

There can be no cease fire , no negotiating.. Hezbollah is NOT a country, a government.. it is a bunch of thugs who insist on executing their own style of fascism.. willing to kill to obtain their goals- how do you negotiate with criminals?
Why would you want to. Each cease fire, each time-out is simply more time for these criminals, and thugs to rearm, resupply, reorganize and come back again.. each time.. a little bit stronger.. a little bit more deadly.

End it now.. Hezbollah needs to be defanged and put to an end.. like any other criminal group..

Sorry.that's the way it is.

Dear Don- it appears you are correct!

Check this out from CNN

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan had called the meeting last Friday, but the world's major powers have said no force can be put in place until fighting stops and Israel, Lebanon and Hezbollah agree to its deployment, Reuters reported.

--------------------

Now why is it that Hezbollah is mentioned by the UN as though it is some legitimate government? It is spoken of here in the same light as Isreal and Lebenon.. who by the way is complicit in this... it's clear Lebenon has assisted Hezbollah, sold it and maybe even given it equipment..

So.. who sold M16s to Hezbollah? How come there is no congressional hearing on how this US MADE and US TAX dollar M16 managed to end up in some guys house in Lebenon?

Someone has a lot of explaining to do.. but the silence on some of this is deafening.