What Can You Say, They Do What They Want

[Dingfod]

At the risk of being labeled antisemitic, I don't like what Israel is doing right now with it's attacks on Lebanon, or for that matter Gaza. It seems so disproportionate to the offenses against Israel. It doesn't matter what I think, Israel does whatever it wants regardless of what the rest of the world thinks and gets away with it because of veto power of the U.S. has in the U.N. If not for that fact, I think there would've been blue-helmeted troops occupying Israel for the last three decades or so. This latest disproportionate attack on Lebanon is just one of many examples of Israel's outlawish behavior. I recognize that Israel has the right to defend themselves, but the kidnapping of two of their border security seemed to me to be more of a police matter than what they say is "an act of war."

It concerns me that I don't see much of anyone outside of the EU or Russia really condemning this latest action, not even liberals. Of course, I'm on night shifts right now and might be a bit out of touch right now. However, I haven't seen anything here at FF about it either. Why is there no outrage?

Conservative pundits are even linking Syria and Iran to it. Of course, they want permanent war, so it figures. There always has to be a boogey-man. But, because of that, I fear the worst possible outcome will come to play, that Bush-league will use any reaction to an attack on Syria itself from Syria or Iran to be the call to war for U.S. forces, any reaction at all.

Internally, I feel conflicted. On one hand, I feel a bit of outrage, but I sympathize with those that are just unreactive because I can hardly work up any real emotion about it myself because I see it as just one more thing I can't do a damn thing about. I've already got way too many of those things in my life now.

[Angakuk]

Israel's policy is one of massive and disproportionate retaliation. The irony is that this was precisely the same policy pursued by the German army during WWII in its struggle with the partisans. A German soldier is killed, march out a dozen men of the village and execute them in the square, with the whole population looking on. It was an ineffective policy then and it is equally ineffective now. It didn't stop the Maquis and it won't stop Hamas or Hezbollah. Why? Because, for the true believer, the cause is more important than life, his own or anyone else's.

[wei yau]

I'm conflicted about the recent conflict myself. I think it's natural to see Israel's reaction as disproportionate because it is. As Angakuk stated, this is policy. I just don't see it as a very good policy. Israel has a rep as being a bad-ass nation. Don't mess with the IDF. Mossad will hunt you down and kill you in your sleep. Etc, etc.

Yet, the situation doesn't seem to have improved one bit.

You'll hear that to follow any other policy would result in Israel being pushed into the sea. Is this what the hardline policymakers would have us believe? Staying the course will never resolve the conflict, but keep everyone in perpetual war. Altering the course will result in the end of Israel, so we'll just keep fighting forever.

I can't imagine the type of fear and anxiety that produces that type of thinking.

[LionsDen]

Originally Posted by wei yau

I'm conflicted about the recent conflict myself. I think it's natural to see Israel's reaction as disproportionate because it is. As Angakuk stated, this is policy. I just don't see it as a very good policy. Israel has a rep as being a bad-ass nation. Don't mess with the IDF. Mossad will hunt you down and kill you in your sleep. Etc, etc.

Yet, the situation doesn't seem to have improved one bit.

You'll hear that to follow any other policy would result in Israel being pushed into the sea. Is this what the hardline policymakers would have us believe? Staying the course will never resolve the conflict, but keep everyone in perpetual war. Altering the course will result in the end of Israel, so we'll just keep fighting forever.

I can't imagine the type of fear and anxiety that produces that type of thinking.

I share your sense of being conflicted about this. It truly saddens me when people fight and die. I like compromise and peace where everyone gives in a little. That cannot happen here with moslems dedicated to destroying non-moslems or Palestinians dedicated to regaining their homeland (either way one sees it).

One wise pundit said that the real agenda is Iran's trying to embroil the US and Israel in greater war in Lebanon. Iran fears middle east democracy and Lebanon is on the way to democracy after a semi-legitimate election.

My country USA has made some harmful demands upon Israel to withdraw from Gaza and trade land for peace. This never works.

---

If I were a Palestinian, I'd prefer to live in peace with Israel and write off the taking of my land, and stop the fighting. But I see things through prosperous American eyes from a free country.

[wei yau]

Ironically, I'm not fearful of an escalation of events beyond Israel striking Lebanon. It's not because I'm an optimist, but because I'm a pessimist.

It is no one's interest to get involved in the conflict. I believe that all regional powers benefit from maintaining a status quo in the conflict with Israel. It serves as good rhetoric and distraction. Also, with an Israeli military backed by the considerable power of the US, the Arab regional powers simply cannot win in a conventional conflict.

So, despite their rhetoric and bluster, the Arab countries won't involve themselves unless attacked directly. And I doubt that Israel would do that, despite their own rhetoric and bluster.

In the end, those are just words and at the end of the day, these powers are going to act in the best interests, even if it means back down from the rhetoric.

[LadyShea]

Israel is completely overreacting. It's ridiculous. And I don't think criticizing the actions of a government can be considered anti-semitic.

It seems like this goes back to OT times, they couldn't just beat their enemies in battle, they had to kill their children, slaughter their livestock, burn their fields...

[Godless Dave]

I don't really consider it an overreaction. When a nation's soldiers are captured or abducted they try to get them back. I object to a lot of what Israel does, but not when they respond to actual attacks on their territory or military.

[LadyShea]

Bombing airports, government buildings and blockading all ports because three border agents were abducted by extremists doesn't seem an overreaction to you? The Palestinian and Lebanese governments didn't do this, extremist/terrorists did. If some neo-Nazi group from the US abducted an Israeli diplomat while he was here, would they be justified in bombing the White House?

Of course you try to get them back, you have the best intelligence agency in the world...go get your soldiers...you don't endanger civilians in the process.

[TomJoe]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Bombing airports, government buildings and blockading all ports because three border agents were abducted by extremists doesn't seem an overreaction to you? The Palestinian and Lebanese governments didn't do this, extremist/terrorists did.

These "extremists" as you call them are part of those respective governments.

[LadyShea]

Originally Posted by TomJoe

These "extremists" as you call them are part of those respective governments.

Having fellow "club" members in the government doesn't mean one is acting on behalf of the government.

Our government is comprised of many Christians, does having Christians as part of the government make the acts of extremist/fringe Christians (like KKK or abortion clinic bombers) on behalf of or with approval of the government?

[TomJoe]

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Having fellow "club" members in the government doesn't mean one is acting on behalf of the government.

Do you have any evidence that those governments have no knowledge of what's going on?

Originally Posted by LadyShea

Our government is comprised of many Christians, does having Christians as part of the government make the acts of extremist/fringe Christians (like KKK or abortion clinic bombers) on behalf of or with approval of the government?

That's a stupid, nonsense comparison. If the KKK became a political party and had elected officials in the government, and then if they acted up, other countries could reasonably expect the US to do something about it or they could assume collusion. It has nothing to do with Christians as a whole.

[LadyShea]

Do you have any evidence that those governments have no knowledge of what's going on?

How could I provide evidentiary support for them NOT knowing something? Do you have evidence that they do have such knowledge?

Originally Posted by TomJoe

That's a stupid, nonsense comparison. If the KKK became a political party and had elected officials in the government, and then if they acted up, other countries could reasonably expect the US to do something about it or they could assume collusion. It has nothing to do with Christians as a whole.

It's not a nonsense comparison. All I was saying is that Hezbollah contains extremists just as Christianity contains extremists and that the actions of extremists within any larger group do not necessarily reflect the beliefs of that group as a whole nor should the group as a whole be held responsible. Add to that the fact that some members of that group are in turn part of an even larger group, like their nations government, and you simply cannot make such sweeping accusations against the Lebonese government.

Besides, Hezbollah is a minority in Parliament, only holding 28 seats. So a minority (extremists) within a minority party (Hezbollah) within the government does not make that government responsible.

[California Tanker]

I think part of the problem is that the last time two Israeli soldiers were captured by Hisbullah, they were executed and Israel traded some 500 prisoners for the return of their bodies. The quiet method didn't work last time, and they have no intention of seeing the same again. Ergo, why not try something a bit different? Trading didn't seem to work last time, some say it just enourages more.

The two incidents in Gaza and Lebanon are separate, but obviously seen as related. In the one case, the Israelis had completely left Gaza, removed (forcibly) its own settlers, and pulled back across the border. Whoever was in Gaza obviously wasn't happy with that move, and apparently in the year since they pulled out, there have been over a hundred border incidents. Given that Hamas are in power over there, it's difficult to say whether or not the abduction was known about by people in charge. Presumably Hamas are not the only anti-Israeli group. I view the operations there as more of a punitive strike.

Lebanon, on the other hand, is a slightly different issue. Hisbullah are claiming to be responsible, and they're a notable political power, complete with a government minister. If members of the Democratic Party went and abducted a Canadian, and then announced it, don't you think that the Canadians would hold the American government to task? The Israeli reaction is certainly on the far side of 'Strong', but it's still far less than total war. Given that the Israeli viewpoint is that the transgression was an act of war, from their point of view they are not over-reacting, and responding to an act of war with another.

I think it's a no-win situation. Israel does nothing, you end up with a situation like the last time. Israel decides it's had enough, it gets condemned anyway. Well, if you're screwed either way, why not remind people that pissing off Israel is a bad idea?

NTM

[Godless Dave]

Originally Posted by California Tanker

I think part of the problem is that the last time two Israeli soldiers were captured by Hisbullah, they were executed and Israel traded some 500 prisoners for the return of their bodies. The quiet method didn't work last time, and they have no intention of seeing the same again. Ergo, why not try something a bit different? Trading didn't seem to work last time, some say it just enourages more.

Well they're not trying something "a bit different", they are trying a very old tactic, one that has also failed many times in the past.

The difference between Northern Ireland and Israel is the Irish could see that giving up their claim on Northern Ireland would not result in wholesale disenfranchisement or persecution of Northern Irish Catholics. The British government had changed to a policy of operating in good faith for several years prior to the vote in Ireland.

The Palestinians have no such assurances. They negotiated a deal with Rabin only to see Rabin assassinated and his successor renege on the deal. They have seen Israel seize land and build settlements and call it self-defense, they have seen Israel bulldoze farmland and shoot 14-year-old girls and call it self-defense. They can see that Arabs with Israeli citizenship are treated like second-class citizens in their own country. They have no reason to trust Israel, so forsaking violence like the Irish did is not nearly as attractive to them.

Similarly, Israel knows from past and recent experience they cannot trust Hamas or Hizbollah. So from a national security standpoint it makes sense to try to rescue their soldiers and also eliminate the ability of Hamas and Hezbollah to attack them. Some of the operations they are doing now are probably with that aim, but as usual some of the military operations have more to do with making Israeli citizens feel good than with actual strategic objectives.

[LadyShea]

What scares me, CT and Godless Dave, is that this seems almost like Israel is trying to force Syria and Iran to do something, which will force the US, Russia, and UK to do something and possibly other countries decide to do something and the ante keeps getting upped and we have an everybody-in game including the superpowers trying to protect their interests in the region.

Really, my criticism of Israel is due to fear. We all know they can kick the asses of every neighbor individually, we all know the US will back them no matter what, but if everybody gets pissed off what happens? If everyone starts feeling they are only defending themselves what happens?

[quiet bear]

If I may interrupt for a moment...

I'd like to say I have learned more about what is going on from this thread than any other source. Thanks folks.

Please proceed.

[California Tanker]

If I were a Palestinian, I'd prefer to live in peace with Israel and write off the taking of my land, and stop the fighting. But I see things through prosperous American eyes from a free country.

That's pretty much what happened in Ireland. We ended up removing the territorial claim to the North from the Constitution. 98% of voters in the Republic didn't think the issue of what flag flew over Belfast was worth all the bother.

It is no one's interest to get involved in the conflict. I believe that all regional powers benefit from maintaining a status quo in the conflict with Israel. It serves as good rhetoric and distraction. Also, with an Israeli military backed by the considerable power of the US, the Arab regional powers simply cannot win in a conventional conflict.

So, despite their rhetoric and bluster, the Arab countries won't involve themselves unless attacked directly. And I doubt that Israel would do that, despite their own rhetoric and bluster.

Pretty much a spot-on analysis. About the only thing I'd change is that Israel doesn't need the backing of the US for a military victory. One of the things they learned in 1973 was that they needed to be less reliant on external sources of supply and intelligence. As a result, they now build their own ammunition, tanks, missiles and so on. In many cases those pieces of equipment are more technologically advanced than what the US has in its own inventory.

NTM

[wei yau]

Originally Posted by California Tanker

Pretty much a spot-on analysis. About the only thing I'd change is that Israel doesn't need the backing of the US for a military victory. One of the things they learned in 1973 was that they needed to be less reliant on external sources of supply and intelligence. As a result, they now build their own ammunition, tanks, missiles and so on. In many cases those pieces of equipment are more technologically advanced than what the US has in its own inventory.

You know, since I've often eyed the Merkava tank model at the hobby store, you'd think I'd have realized Israel's self-sufficiency in military manufacturing.

For some reason, I had in my head that the Israelis didn't produce much more than small arms, but reading your post I realize that can't possibly be true any more.

Would you know if the Israelis produce their own air force? Or is that still largely US provided?

[trientalis]

If anyone's interested, billmon at the Whiskey Bar blog has written an essay on the Israeli/Hamas/Hezbollah situation. I thought it clarified a few things.

All I can say is geez louise, what a pickle!

[LionsDen]

Originally Posted by California Tanker

That's pretty much what happened in Ireland. We ended up removing the territorial claim to the North from the Constitution. 98% of voters in the Republic didn't think the issue of what flag flew over Belfast was worth all the bother.

Pretty much a spot-on analysis. About the only thing I'd change is that Israel doesn't need the backing of the US for a military victory. One of the things they learned in 1973 was that they needed to be less reliant on external sources of supply and intelligence. As a result, they now build their own ammunition, tanks, missiles and so on. In many cases those pieces of equipment are more technologically advanced than what the US has in its own inventory.

NTM

Thanks for the insight into Ireland. When I made my original reply about living in peace and benefitting by forgiving and moving on, I knew that there had to be more examples. I was thinking about the American examples of the new South after the War Between the States and also about the status of Hawaii and of American Indians.

Thanks for the new example to add to the list, CA Tanker.

[California Tanker]

As I'm surfing on my lunch break, I got linked to a bunch of Lebanese blogs. They seem to be about equally vehement between Israel and Hisbullah/Nasrallah. I'll do some copy/pasting when I get home.

NTM

[LadyShea]

Look TomJoe, I am not saying I think Hezbollah or Hamas are right, nor that I like or support them. I think they are asshole extremists for the most part. All I am saying is that civilians are dying and that I think it's wrong to hold an entire nation of people responsible for the actions of extremists and punish them as a whole due to those actions.

Israel was too quick to bring out the big guns, in my opinion, and should have tried some talking first, the extremeists are likely to get more insane over it, possibly retaliate against our troops in Iraq just because that's what guerillas do, and I fear the conflict will spread and lead to another world war.

[California Tanker]

An observation has been made elsewhere that this is something of a wake-up call for Lebanese people. For the last few years, Israel hasn't been in Lebanon, and Lebanon has been reaping the rewards of relative peace. Booming tourism, a rebuilt infrastructure, and so on. With the departure of Syrian forces, there are really only two groups left: The Lebanese government and its forces, and Hezbullah and its forces. (Which is surprisingly organised group, with some 11 battalions). With foreign forces out of the picture, and Hezbullah only bothering the Israelis, and not the Lebanese government, nobody in Lebanon had any great incentive to deal with the private army of one of the political parties. Why should they? They're getting their tourist dollars, they're at peace for the first time in God knows how many years, what's the benefit to rocking the boat?

Well, now we know.

Interestingly, there were two Lebanese army officers taking the tank officer's course in Ft Knox with me. Seemed decent enough chaps, I hope they're OK.


I guess a question is "What did they expect the Israelis to do after kidnapping two of their troops?"

NTM

[California Tanker]

Just to thicken the plot, the weapon which hit INS Hanit, and presumably sank the Cambodian-flagged Egyptian-manned merchant vessel ("Noor Light?") in the same attack has been identified as a C.802 missile. This is a moderately large anti-ship cruise missile which has only been exported to one country: Iran. The thing is 7 meters long, weighs in at 3/4 of a ton, and apparently a few of them have been sitting in Lebanon for a while. Getting them to Lebanon must have been interesting as well.

NTM

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by California Tanker

Just to thicken the plot, the weapon which hit INS Hanit, and presumably sank the Cambodian-flagged Egyptian-manned merchant vessel ("Noor Light?") in the same attack has been identified as a C.802 missile. This is a moderately large anti-ship cruise missile which has only been exported to one country: Iran. The thing is 7 meters long, weighs in at 3/4 of a ton, and apparently a few of them have been sitting in Lebanon for a while. Getting them to Lebanon must have been interesting as well.

NTM

So who is exporting them to Iran? Who makes these? Who sells these? Who is providing the expertise to arm and launch?