ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

As, I stated, a full investigation is necessary!!!

"Gee, what a cool guy that Slick KKKlinton is, an ALPHA MALE, wow man......"

Ann Clwyd, chair of the parliamentary Labour party, said the "vast majority" of Labour MPs were "very critical" of Israeli policy and wanted a ceasefire to get humanitarian aid to the Lebanese civilians.

Olmert: War in Lebanon Promotes Withdrawal Plan

14:48 Aug 02, '06 / 8 Av 5766
by Hillel Fendel


Olmert angered many in the nationalist camp with his remarks to AP this morning. "Irresponsible" and "dangerous" were among the calmer responses.

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told The Associated Press today that he feels Israel's success in Lebanon will create "new momentum" for his plan to unilaterally withdraw from most of Judea and Samaria.

Contrary to many Israeli analysts, who feel that the unilateral retreat from both Lebanon and Gaza strengthened the terrorists' resolve to fight Israel, Olmert appears to believe that he has now proven that Israel can fight off any attack that emanates from territory abandoned by Israel.

MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union) believes the opposite. "Just yesterday," Eldad said, "Olmert admitted that Israel is unable to uproot Hizbullah from Lebanon and remove the threat of Katyushas - and then without reaching the logical conclusion, he now says he wants to turn Judea and Samaria into an Iranian base as well."

Likud MK Gideon Saar said, "Olmert's remarks show that he is totally detached from reality. After his policy of unilateral retreats brought rockets to Haifa and Ashkelon, he stubbornly insists on continuing this wanton policy that will certainly bring rockets on every location in Israel."

MK Uri Ariel (National Union) said,
"At this difficult hour, when national unity is required, Olmert chooses to speak specifically about that which divides us. The Prime Minister is converging inside himself [a reference to the withdrawal plan that Olmert calls 'convergence'] and is disengaging from what is happening here. The vast majority of the nation has already woken up from the illusion that withdrawals and disengagements will bring quiet and serenity. With one hand, Olmert is fighting against Hizbullah, but with the other hand he is strengthening it."

Olmert also told AP that Israel's three-week-old offensive in Lebanon will stop only after a international peacekeeping force is deployed in southern Lebanon - something that does not appear to be on the agenda in the coming days. He also said that the release of the two Israeli soldiers abducted and held by Hizbullah must be unconditional.

MK Benny Elon, head of the National Union party, termed Olmert's remarks "totally irresponsible," and said they "endanger Israel's victory in the current war."

The Council of Communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha Council) issues a statement saying Olmert's remarks give a "supportive wind to terrorism." The Council said that Nasrallah is "now encouraged to keep fighting until he achieves all his objectives. It looks like Olmert wants to dismantle the consensus that exists regarding the war."

Caught between its support for Israeli goals vis-avis Hezbollah, and its sympathy for Lebanon and desire to consolidate the goals of the Cedar Revolution, the Bush administration may now see the wisdom of an expedited ceasefire.

Quote:

Caught between its support for Israeli goals vis-avis Hezbollah, and its sympathy for Lebanon and desire to consolidate the goals of the Cedar Revolution, the Bush administration may now see the wisdom of an expedited ceasefire.

Now wouldn't that be a jolly goddamn ephiphany.

Perhaps it is time to remind ourselves that Israeli politics/society contains elements of seriously nutty extremism, as evidenced by the assassination of their own Prime Minister a decade ago.

Rather strange in conclusions though. Palestine should be its own state for Palestinians, but Israel should not be a Jewish state? How does one reconcile that without saying that Palestinians should have something that Jews should not? The Jews have done a lot to accommodate the Arabs while the Arabs have done precious little to accommodate the Jews. (I do think the Palestinians need their own spot in the world.)

I keep hearing one theme repeated again and again lately. Syria and Iran have no interest in bringing this conflict to a close because every dead Arab is a boost to their greater ambitions which is to eliminate Israel altogether.

All Hezbollah has to do to win is not to lose. Israel loses unless it wins.

So, McTag, you are saying that if there was no state of Israel, there would be no militant Islamic fundamentalism? No Islamic terrorists? All would be at peace?

How do you suppose a tiny little country with a fairly limited Jewish population and a land area smaller than some New Mexico counties could create that much angst in the world?

Okay, here's Israel's side on this. I'm looking for a comparable commentary from the other side. Does anybody have one?

Mess with Israel at your peril
Uri Dromi International Herald Tribune
Published: July 14, 2006

JERUSALEM The recent outburst of violence in the Middle East might look like just another one of those cyclical rounds in which Arabs and Israelis grab at each other's throats. Yet at stake is something much more serious: the ability and the willingness of Arabs to accept the existence of Israel in their midst.

Twice in the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict, in 1948 and in 1967, the Arabs tried to destroy Israel. In 1948 there was a premeditated plan resulting in a concerted attack by five armies, charging the newly-born Jewish state from all directions. The Arabs of Haifa, for example, were advised by their "brothers" in Syria to leave temporarily to Beirut, because, they boasted, "in two weeks we will throw the Jews into the sea."

The rest is history. When the war was over, the Jews had the land, and the Arabs of Haifa, their children and their grandchildren became refugees in Lebanon. The anniversary of 1948, which in Israel is celebrated as Independence Day, is mourned by Palestinians as Naqba (Arabic for catastrophe).

The Six Day War was not planned, but was rather an escalation. President Gamal Abdel Nasser of Egypt intoxicated himself and the Arab masses into believing that this time Israel could be knocked out. When the guns went silent, the Arabs once again had reasons to regret their aggression, with the West Bank and Gaza in the hands of Israel.

Since then, we have had the Yom Kippur War, the Attrition War, the Lebanon War, two intifadas and endless terror. Israel has not only survived, but has become stronger. It is a vibrant and prospering democracy, with robust economic growth over the last five years, the highest number of books published per capita in the world, and second place in the world in the publication of articles in scientific journals.

The Arabs, in the meantime, with all their aggression, have only brought on their peoples misery and poverty. President Anwar Sadat of Egypt and King Hussein of Jordan tower above this self-destructiveness as leaders who really served the best interests of their people by making peace with Israel.

So now Hamas and Hezbollah are again feeling Israel's muscles, to see if we have mellowed. It has long been the idea of Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, that Israel has become weak, like a cobweb that can be easily torn apart, or better, destroyed from within. These people, who mistake democratic life for weakness, just can't grasp the fact that a democracy, if attacked, will always have the upper hand because free and proud people who fight in self defense will not be defeated.

The Arabs' cries of joys over the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers will soon turn into cries of pain, when Israel brings home the message that no, it hasn't mellowed. And when the dust settles, Arabs will once again realize that their aggression against Israel only strengthens the Jewish state and weakens the Arab cause.

Hamas, with its reckless conduct, will move the world community to declare the Palestinian Authority a failed state. Hezbollah, with its arrogance, will stir the rage of the Lebanese people, who will be fed up with its disastrous acts. The Lebanese have already demonstrated their capability vis-à-vis the Syrians, when they had enough of them in Lebanon.

Finally, if I were President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, I would wipe the smile off my face and start worrying. Soon enough, this troublemaking Alawite dictator of Sunni Syria, who has hosted every terrorist organization in the region, will learn the hard way the basic lesson of the Arab-Israeli conflict: If you mess with Israel, Israel wins and you lose.

Uri Dromi is the director of international outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute in Jerusalem.

SOURCE

So, McTag, you are saying that if there was no state of Israel, there would be no militant Islamic fundamentalism? No Islamic terrorists? All would be at peace?

How do you suppose a tiny little country with a fairly limited Jewish population and a land area smaller than some New Mexico counties could create that much angst in the world?

How do you suppose a tiny little country with a fairly limited Jewish population and a land area smaller than some New Mexico counties could create that much angst in the world?

Foxfyre wrote:

How do you suppose a tiny little country with a fairly limited Jewish population and a land area smaller than some New Mexico counties could create that much angst in the world?

Well, I suppose a tiny little country like Israel could create that much angst by

- having a military budget almost twice as high as all the countries it has a common border with combined (Israel: $9.45 billion vs Lebanon: $540.6 million, Egypt: $2.44 billion, Jordan: $1.4 billion, Syria: $858 million, West Bank: none, Gaza Strip: none.)

- having WMD at its diposal

- being financially and militarywise backed by a global superpower


There are several more points that could be mentioned, but I think just one of the above would be sufficient to answer the question.

But for the sake of comparison: do you remember how you felt when it was revealed that Cuba, a tiny little country smaller than Pennsylvania, with a fairly limited population in comparison to the US, had Soviet nuclear missiles installed on the island? Do you think that created much angst?

On the other hand, niether the United States nor Israel has never questioned the right of its neighbors to exist nor has threatened them with anything other than retaliation if they should attack the USA or Israel. Further neither is on record as intending to wipe anybody off the face of the earth. Can you say the same of Cuba aka the Soviet Empire at that time?

The Arab countries do not fear the USA and I doubt seriously they fear Israel. In fact when their necks are on the line, who do they call to come save them? The USA. And they know we will. Every single time.

By Alistair Lyon, Special Correspondent

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Hizbollah fired more rockets into Israel on Wednesday than on any previous day of the 22-day-old war, after helicopter-borne commandos attacked guerrilla targets in Israel's deepest raid into Lebanon.

Air strikes in support of the helicopter raid in the Hizbollah stronghold of Baalbek in northeastern Lebanon killed 19 people, including four children.

In Jerusalem, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told Reuters Israel would fight on until an international force reaches south Lebanon -- even though no country has volunteered to send troops in the absence of a truce and a durable ceasefire agreement.

Olmert called for an international combat force to implement a U.N. resolution calling for Hizbollah to be disarmed, saying Israel had already destroyed much of the group's military power.

Soon after he spoke, one of more than 180 rockets launched by Hizbollah landed just inside the West Bank after flying further than any fired at Israel in the past three weeks.

Israeli police and Hizbollah both said it was the highest number of rockets fired into Israel on one day since the war began. The barrage, which killed one person near the northern city of Nahariya, followed a two-day lull in such attacks.

Olmert said earlier Hizbollah's infrastructure had been "entirely destroyed" in the Israeli offensive.

Foxfyre wrote:

On the other hand, niether the United States nor Israel has never questioned the right of its neighbors to exist nor has threatened them with anything other than retaliation if they should attack the USA or Israel. Further neither is on record as intending to wipe anybody off the face of the earth. Can you say the same of Cuba aka the Soviet Empire at that time?

I think it can be said that neither the Soviet Union nor Cuba have officially stated that they intended for the United States to be "wiped off the face of the Earth", or have threatened the USA with anything other than retaliation.

Does that mean that having nuclear missiles installed on Cuba was a rosy perspective?

And does your statement that the USA has never threatened Cuba with anything other than retaliation apply for the Bay of Pigs Invasion as well, or is that just the occasional exception to the rule?

I understand that you wouldn't want to have a nuclear armed neighbor next door, and that you would want to do everything possible to do away with such a threat. But I don't think that these concerns are only valid for Americans, but not for the people of Lebanon.