posted
Agreed, but consider who has called for sanctions and what they have to gain by taking an anti-Israeli stand on the world stage. Everyone in the S.C. vetos anything that is contrary to their own intrests or that of their allies/partners in commerce...unless doing so would point to their own complicity in whatever brought about the notion of sanction in the first place.
I think a big reason no one is seriously talking sanctions against Israel (now-yet)is that (with regards to the Security Council) Israel is not doing anything they would not do themselves under the same (or less) provocation.
The official word seems to be "we'll give Israel a week to "wrap up" it's operations". It's like a brawl were the friends of guy winning say to themselves "get ready to pull him off". It's as much for the victor as it is for the defeated.
As long as Israel does not re-occupy Lebanon, I doubt any sanctions will be called for against Israel. Besides, sanctions would just further isolate Israel and make any diplomatic cease-fire that much harder.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Da_bang80
A few sectors short of an Empire
Member # 528
posted
Was there a formal declaration of war? Israel is bombing another country here. And it's not like in Afghanistan where they were basically dropping bombs in the middle of nowhere. Israel is doing exactly what Hezbollah wants it to do. And thier doing a decent job of making Israel seem like the bad guy (At least to the people of Lebanon if what Anderson Cooper says is true).
I see this on tv and I think of all the people who've been displaced, all the destruction this and other conflicts cause, and I think to myself: When will this end?
-------------------- Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change. The courage to change the things I cannot accept. And the wisdom to hide the bodies of all the people I had to kill today because they pissed me off.
posted
Hezbollah are a terrorist organisation sheltering in Lebanon. But could the Lebanese government do anything about them, even if they wanted to? Sure there's bound to be an element that welcomes their presence and supports them, but others must regard them as a threat to already-shaky Lebanese stability. Jordan was able to expel the PLO after they tried a takeover, could Lebanon get rid of the Hezbollah? It all depends on how much support the government and the terrorists each have; if the indiscriminate bombing merely fuels anti-Israeli hostility rather than anti-terrorist resentment, then Lebanon can't do anything and innocent people will continue to die.
posted
The inability of the Lebanese government to do anything has been one of the major reasons for the Isreali strikes. The Lebanese army is not strong enough to take on Hezbollah, in addition to which are the difficulties of rooting an organisation such as Hezbollah out from amongst the general populace and the difficulty of using a less than fantastically trained, funded and equipped army in that kind of situation.
Hezbollah has some support from the local population (at least passively). Not to mention that Lebanon doesn't really want to piss off Syria and Iran, Hezbollah's main supporters.
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Er...most reports I've seen show that Hezbollah has had and still has a LOT of support from the populace- it's not like Hezbollah are holding the general populace hostage, they're being sheltered in southern Lebanon. The far more moderate Lebanese government is helpless to oust Hezbollah (or even omit them from elected positions in Parliment) because the government has only slightly more pull with the populace and in the southern region, less.
Has there been a war declared? Yes. Many many times: By Hezbollah, and the P.L.O.- just because the methods they use are not what we're used to in warfare, does not change the facts: they declared war, started hostilities, took prisoners, and vowed to continue do do so untill their enemy were all dead. Sounds pretty official to me. Also, consider that Hezbolah has more of an organized army than many countries- these are not just bands of gurrellia fighters. And they're duly elected representitives of Lebanon. Spliting hairs on this is like saying "It's the Republicans that invaded Iraq- not the U.S.A." In for a penny...
If the people of Lebanon really wanted Hezbolah gone, they could force them to disband- they got Syria to leave without anyone's help, and these are their own countrymen after all.
All that being said, the humanitarian crisis is going to get worse before it gets any better.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
I said 'at least' passive support. Obviously, the level of support varies. The majority of Shi'a Muslims in the area support Hezbollah to a certain extant and there are many for whom that support no doubt extends to active assisstance. However, the Christian community (about 40 per cent of Lebanese) is substantially less fond of Hezbollah. Sunni Muslim opinion appears to vary; many in the south are of course at least passive supporters due to the services provided by Hezbollah that the government can't. One of the reasons for the relatively high civilian body count is that most Hexbollah facilities are located in civilian buildings and area.
You have to remember as well the reason why Hezbollah are so strong: Syria and Iran. Hezbollah are effectively an extension of the Iranian Revolutionary Gurad. Not as easy to dislodge as the Syrian army, particularly given the facilities and services provided by Hezbollah. It all comes down to what we were saying about aid money above. If people think they are getting a benefit from a particular country or organisation, they are going to support it.
Oh, and you cannot ever say to terrorist groups that they are in a war with you. Ever. The provos always claim that they are soldiers, no different from our lads. Terrorists are terrorists. They are not soldiers. Isreal is saying that this is an action against Hezbollah, not Lebanon (note the lack of operations against the Lebanese armed forces).
[ July 24, 2006, 12:19 PM: Message edited by: Wraith ]
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
posted
From the Quran:
5:51 O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not take the jews and the Christians for your allies: they are but allies of one another and whoever of you allies himself with them becomes, verily, one of them; behold, God does not guide such evildoers.
Pretty much sums up what the hardliners base their practices on.
-------------------- There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Quoting a passage whose main charge is a generic "thou shalt have no other god before me, or friends believing in a god that isn't also me" does not make your post any more insightful.
quote:Originally posted by Jason: Bullshit- the US first became a superpower by not giving away the farm and concentrating on industry in the post-WWII era.
Have we prahaps forgotten about the Marshall plan?
Registered: Nov 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Jason: Bullshit- the US first became a superpower by not giving away the farm and concentrating on industry in the post-WWII era.
Have we prahaps forgotten about the Marshall plan?
No, but that had the objective of allowing the countries devastated by WWII to recover on somewhat equal footing (thus making Soviet takeover of a very weak country less likely). It was also a plan set forth back when the U.S. was not only the sole country not ravaged by war, but the sole nuclear power as well. We could afford altruism in spades.
Somehow this grand notion of assisting our allies and potential allies became an ongoing charity to whatever country is unwilling or unable to fend for their populace or who's leaders have crippled the countries through poor judgement of unwise military posturing. Current U.S. foreign aid policy is like the Marshall Plan without the "plan" part.
I would not seriously say cuttng off all foreign aid is a good idea, only that many many Americans live in desperate conditions (see New Orleans ongoing plight) while the government pisses away millions on aid to people that would as soon burn our flag as aid us against our enemies. When America is truly the paradise it should be, then we'll have both the rescources and true democracy of the people we always preach that other countries should emulate. Besides, with a nigh-insurmountable national deficit, it's either re-examine who we're giving money to or strip all government programs (thus making Americans suffer for charitues no one voted for).
Back to topic, The Charlie Rose Show once again was fantastic- by tomorrow you should be able to watch the interview with DENNIS ROSS, Former U.S. Envoy to the Middle East. The smartest guy I've seen interviewed on this whole issue. He makes a great case for Lebanon's potential to contain Hezbollah mid-country with their Syrian and Iran aid cut off and with the Lebanese army patroling the Israeli border (giving them real legitimacy and making Israel less airstrike-happy) and how to get Saudi Arabi involved in the peace process -and why their intrests are in Hezbollah losing thios conflict. Ross explains that (in the even Israel leaves Lebanon and an enboldened Hezbollah grows even stronger Iran would use Hezbollah as a club to further their worlview for the Middle-east. A worldview that certainly is at odds with moderates like Saudi Arabia.
quote:Originally posted by TSN:
"And thier doing a decent job of making Israel seem like the bad guy..."
Israel are the bad guys. So are Hezbollah. This is a bad guy vs. bad guy situation.
Dont make me break out the Bruce Springsteen albums...
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
quote: Somehow this grand notion of assisting our allies and potential allies became an ongoing charity to whatever country is unwilling or unable to fend for their populace or who's leaders have crippled the countries through poor judgement of unwise military posturing. Current U.S. foreign aid policy is like the Marshall Plan without the "plan" part.
In part yes. but it all stems from the great power politics of the Cold War. The Soviets were more than willing to pump money and arms into thrid world countries. The US had to respond. And deeper than that, paying people off is and always has been a vital part of maintaining power and at least a semblance of control. From the federated tribal system of the Romans to the Rajas of British India, this is the way it's always been done and the way it always will be done. No, it isn't perfect, but what is?
The middle east does present a particular problem, with the entrenched hatred of the US, partly due to US actions, partly due to an ideological opposition and partly due to several decades of propaganda. But money always makes things go easier.
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by WizArtist II: From the Quran:
5:51 O YOU who have attained to faith! Do not take the jews and the Christians for your allies: they are but allies of one another and whoever of you allies himself with them becomes, verily, one of them; behold, God does not guide such evildoers.
Pretty much sums up what the hardliners base their practices on.
Searching the Internet, I found one translation saying that there is the word "certain" where you put "the" between "take" and "Jews."
There is also: 5:57 O you who believe, do not befriend those among the recipients of previous scripture who mock and ridicule your religion, nor shall you befriend the disbelievers. You shall reverence GOD, if you are really believers.
It doesn't say anything about not befriending people who don't ridicule your religion. We can learn from this that quoting from religious books does not make us understand this crisis any better.
posted
Or, at least, quoting from translations of religious books without knowing how accurate they are.
"I would not seriously say cuttng off all foreign aid is a good idea, only that many many Americans live in desperate conditions (see New Orleans ongoing plight) while the government pisses away millions on aid to people that would as soon burn our flag as aid us against our enemies."
There are many other areas of governmental spending that ought to be diverted to domestic humanitarian aid before diverting foreign humanitarian aid.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Big Oil Aid, paying farmers not to farm, and a huge slew of pork barrel projects that would fill this site database with crap.
Plus grants need to be watched better, an NPO in the NE asked for $19,000.00 for a project, and got $30,000.00 for it. At $11,000.00 per state you could pay someone to work 26 hours a week for a year here in IL. This would vary by state and area, I think San Fransisco has the highest minimum wage in the nation, so it would be far fewer hours, but the states using Federal minimum wage could work more hours. After taxes this would at least pay rent in most areas of the nation.
-------------------- "You are a terrible human, Ritten." Magnus "Urgh, you are a sick sick person..." Austin Powers A leek too, pretty much a negi.....
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
