Examining Irans ties to Hezbollah

I cannot see how the author’s idea that Hizbollah’s money comes from one specific source (say, zakat) and not the other (say, Iran) might be verified. I would think that the true money sources are very well concealed/disguised. Consider the multitude of financing schemes described on www.fatf-gafi.org. Apart from citing a certain Prof. Simpson on this subject, no arguments are provided. Author’s boast of knowing the exact method only shows his incompetence.
But let’s assume that money has legal, non-Iran sources. The problem of purchasing the weapons remains. Who exactly sells the weapons to Hizbollah for their “clean” money? Author tells us that we cannot be absolutely sure that Iran does. Well, who does, then? Certainly there is a source. So here’s no argument either.
It follows from the above that the idea “Even if all Iranian financial and logistic support were cut off, Hezbollah would not only continue, it would thrive” looks rather as a desired motto, not a supported conclusion.
And there’s more mottos to come. For example, “Given the loose and ambiguous nature of the Iranian government’s control over support for Hezbollah” - why exactly we treat this assertion as a given?
To round it up, I’d like to remind the author that in the middle of the current conflict Nasralla went abroad. Check http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2242709 If Iran’s influence over Hizballa is as described by the author, why exactly did Nasralla chose to meet its envoys in the middle of a war?

This administration built up to a preemptive strike on Iraq and coupled that with rhetoric that is duplicated with Iran.  The bomb test “Divine Strake” was designed to test penetration of Iranian nuclear worksites.

We no longer have the force structure to send troops into Iran, but all signs point to painting Iran as a notch on the Axis of Evil that must be destroyed regardless of factual support for their complicity.

The administration no longer has Colin Powell to proceed to the UN, but the groundwork has been laid and Iran will be in some technical violation and GW will keep repeating that “no option is off the table.” Somebody will carry his water to the UN and we will repeat history.

Kristol was one of the original signatores of the letter by neocons in 1996 to then President Clinton demanding an invasion of Iraq.  The current VP and Feith and others may actually believe that this approach still has merit, even after the fiasco in Iraq and the failure in Afghanistan.

The media is replete with reports about Iran financing Hezbolla, providing high tech weapons and tactical support to the tune of some $5-6 billion.  Hezbolla’s fighters have been decimated and large portions of its weapons stores have been expended, rendering it pretty much unfit to press any fight until and unless Iran rearms it. Something Iran is furious about. Professor Beeman’s thrust at neocons (I am NOT a necon, as a long time active liberal I’m the farthest thing from it), begs the question. Iran’s finger prints are all over this nasty war. Saying otherwise is like fatuously claiming that I.G. Farben just manufactured children’s toys.

Read an excerpt of the Debkafile article: (or use the link here for the whole piece) http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1201

Tehran Takes Gloomy View of the Lebanon War and Truce

August 14, 2006, 3:35 PM (GMT+02:00)

While the damage caused Israel’s military reputation tops Western assessments of the Lebanon war, DEBKAfile’s Iranian sources report an entirely different perception taking hold in ruling circles in Tehran.

After UN Security Council resolution 1701 calling for a truce was carried Friday, Aug. 11, the heads of the regime received two separate evaluations of the situation in Lebanon – one from Iran’s foreign ministry and one from its supreme national security council. Both were bleak: their compilers were concerned that Iran had been manipulatively robbed of its primary deterrent asset ahead of a probable nuclear confrontation with the United States and Israel.

While the foreign ministry report highlighted the negative aspects of the UN resolution, the council’s document complained that Hizballah squandered thousands of rockets – either by firing them into Israel or having them destroyed by the Israeli air force.

The writer of this report is furious over the waste of Iran’s most important military investment in Lebanon merely for the sake of a conflict with Israeli over two kidnapped soldiers.

Suppose I have a land conflict with you.  You buy your gun at Kmart, and I buy mine at Walmart.  Am I now just a proxy for Walmart when I fight you for my land?  (And you KNOW how evil Walmart is). 

Just goes to show how far this administration will go to ignore and obscure legitimate local grievances.  The sad part is how many people actually buy into their crap.

When Hezbollah decided to participate in Lebanese politics in 1992, their leadership wrote up a report and sent it to Iran.  Khamenei said, “Sure, participate in your region’s secular government” because as their theocratic supreme leader, Khamenei has the final say in what Hezbollah does.

But the point the author makes about “terrorism” being “community-based” is important and cannot be stressed enough.  Ahmadinejad, Khamenei, and other Iranian powerholders support Hezbollah in the sense that they don’t like Isreal’s intentions, but the US is not justified in saying that therefore taking out Iran is the next step of a “new Mid-East process”.  In some ways China, Russia, Venusuala, South Africa, Brazil, Cuba, parts of France (every place that is vehemently not in favor of continued US world dominance) supports Iranian intentions and ambitions.  Money and arms move between hundreds of different parties.  People need to step back and think unless they’re willing to enter another World War, because that’s exactly where this insanity is headed.

Imran’s argument might fly if Hezbollah was a sovereign nation that was purchasing its arms from Iran.

It is not.

Hezbollah is a terrorist organization and effectively a wholly-owned subsidiary of Iran. Its weapons came from Iran and Syria; its funding largely comes from Iran (except for the money it makes by drug factories in the Bekaa Valley). Its command and control comes from Iran. This is not prattle from our brain-dead Bush Administration. Iran’s support of Hezbollah has been widely reported.

The author states that it is a “far-fetcheddraw scenario” that Iran instigated these troubles in Lebanon to draw attention away from criticism of its nuclear development program.  Spoken like a true intellectual, who can’t recognize what is entirely obvious.  Everything preceeding Lebanon was about Iran’s nuclear program, Iran needed a diversion and found one.  This is exactly in Iran’s interest.  The suggestion that this couldn’t be the reason because it isolated Iran from other Arab countries is foolish logic.  Nothing comes without cost, even the simple minded leader of Iran knows that and was willing to take the chance to buy time go nuclear.  Dear Author, what will it take for you to see the truth through your muddled thoughts?  Ka-BOOM?  I hope not.

Talk about Hizballah being “controlled” by Iran is premature at best.  The organization is well supported by Lebanese (40% are Shiite) and used by other factions in Lebanon as a political tool for coalitions.  Hizballah is used by Syria next door and by anybody interested in a major internal power.

After being weakened by Israel’s bombing and US bombs, they may seek resupply and support from anybody in the region, but their power to do so was only helped by the images coming from the news.  They caused mostly military while Israel caused mostly civilian deaths.  My guess is that if they drank and walked into a bar right now, that they could not buy a drink, because Lebanese were grateful for the defense of their homeland and support in terms of food, shelter and medical care.  Iran played a smaller role than Israel in winning their reputation as a defender for all Lebanon. Israel’s air attack and invasion was successful in bringing Lebanese together in a way that no internal force could.  I expect Hizballah to garner a greater political force than ever before.

We know the total and the disribution of deaths in Israel because the Israelis reported them. In Lebanon we know only about civilian deaths (and not even the true facts about those).

We have no idea of the numbers of Hezbollah operatives who were killed, because Hezbollah is not part of a national government but rather a secretive terrorist organization that has hidden all the facts about itself, how many deaths, how many wounded, how many Lebanese civilians wounded because Hezbollah purposely used Lebanese civilians as shields, giving not a damn for how many civilian deaths, women and children, they caused. That’s cold, but then Nasrallah has declared (it has been well reported) that Hezbollah will win because “Jews love life while we (Nasrallah’s followers) love death.” You will note that not a single one of the nearly 4,000 rockets Hezbollah fired at Israel was aimed at a military target. They fired missiles constructed will ball bearings to produce maximum death, and aimed them solely at Israel’s civilian population. So much for the beloved, saintly Hezbollah freedom fighters.

Sure, I bet that Hezbollah operatives would not have to pay for their drinks in bars (what would supposedly devout Muslims be doing in a bar anyway?). But the IDF soldiers are equally beloved by Israelis.  The dead and maimed soldiers are the flower of Israeli youth, Israel’s future. Their loss is a heavy burden for that small nation and Hezbollah’s vicious terrorists are responsible for every death.

Decampe quotes Debkafile as an authoritative source, but after reading Debkafile for a couple of weeks it seems more like a combination of propaganda and wishful thinking, spiced up with enough on the ground facts to keep the reader returning. The article quoted seems more like juicy gossip than Iranian policy. I prefer Beeman’s analysis.

Re Accesslaw’s comments: To me it is fantasy to think that Hezbollah is a stand alone organization. Whether you call it terrorist or freedom fighter, Hezbollah is armed with the best weapons, war-technology and defensive systems money can buy. This is an army any high-tech state would be proud of and it is not funded by guys with tin cups begging on street corners. If, as Beeman says, Hezbollah is a charitable institution, it is one that hands out butter while using the people it supposedly helps as human shields. At best, Hezbollah gives not a damn for Lebanese citizens except for the propaganda value of their deaths. At worst, Hezbollah actively sought the death and destruction in Lebanon in order to obtain gruesome images to broadcast on Al Manar and Al Jazeera.

I am appalled at the anti-Israeli (ant-Semitic) attitude of my fellow members of the Left. I have spent decades working for, writing about and marching for peace and the rights of people for decent lives. To see a band of vicious killers (remember Nasrallah’s declaration that “We will win because Jews live life while we love death.") like Hezbollah hailed as freedom fighters and saviors of the Arab world turns my stomach.

Decampe: “To see a band of vicious killers (remember Nasrallah’s declaration that “We will win because Jews live life while we love death.") like Hezbollah hailed as freedom fighters and saviors of the Arab world turns my stomach.”

I would partialy agree with this, I certainly wouldn’t want to live under Hizbollah...but...when the Lebanese priminister came out in support of them, a Christian Bishop in Beirut came out in support of them, large sections of a previously hostile Lebanese population came out in support of them, whether Christian, Muslim or Druze I had to ask myself why I should know better than them, I obviously understand they proclaimed this support under exceptional circumstances however I simply cannot believe that if Hezbollah were seen in Lebanon in Bush/Blairs (idioticaly simplistic) terms as simply a proxy arm of Iran that such support would be so widespread and yes Nasrallah has said many appaling things but I could cherry pick many equaly appaling things said many an Israeli leader.

Whatever may be true about Hezbollah’s funding and arming one thing can be said with certainty, this latest bit of Israeli madness has only served to strengthen them both in the eyes of the Lebanese, the ‘Arab world’ and to some extend the wider world at large.

While the immoral and evil GWB would use war as a way to gain political favor, surely the devout and faithful who run Hezbollah are above such methodologies that cause the death of innocents for their own selfish gains. . .

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!!!!
Ho ho ho ha heeee hee ha ho!!!!
Guffaw!!! ha ha ho hee he ho haaaa!

PS - I would not shoot at planes with guns. I also would not shoot or kill innocent civialians. Both are stupid and the latter is immoral. I guess i am just funny that way. Buck buck!

Wolf: “While the immoral and evil GWB would use war as a way to gain political favor, surely the devout and faithful who run Hezbollah are above such methodologies that cause the death of innocents for their own selfish gains. . .”

You know Wolf, I wonder if you...armed with only an AK 47....would stand out in the open with your other chickenhawk mates in formation when confronted by F16’s and Apache helicopters despite your home and family being bombed...I kinda doubt even you’d be that stupid.

I especially liked your girly, ticklish laugh by the way.

Things can get confusing if the word terrorism continues to be used with no real analysis of what that actually means. As the late Eqbal Ahmad explained, terrorism is mostly used to arouse emotions:

“Terrorism is a threat to Western civilization.”

Terrorism is always applied to someone else but is never applied self critically. Despite the barbarous crimes committed in our name - the United States - we never commit terrorism. “We spread democracy.”

Ahmad identifies five forms of terrorism: State Terrorism, Religious Terrorism, Criminal Terrorism, Pathological Terrorism, and Political Terrorism.

As the author of this article indicates, political terrorism evolves into state terrorism when the U.S. seeks to justify an attack. We never know why other than we are “combating evil.”

The U.S. and Israel engage in state terrorism - the most dangerous form of terrorism - but obscures this reality by maintaining an authoritarian position that literally controlls public discourse about the use of violence.

How is it possible to have a counter terrorism department when state terrorism, sanctioned by powerful military forces that bomb and kill innocent people, cause the most devasting forms of terror and loss of life?

Clearly, the Lebanese have suffered a disportionate level of violence, particularly to the infrastructure, which blatantly reveals Israel’s total disregard for human life. If we call Hezbollah terrorists, what name do we give to Israel’s military? Systematic Terrorism.

Frankly, for all I care, you can put laurel wreaths on the heads of everyone in Hezbollah and anoint them with patchouli oil. They would still be murdering scum who target women and children and other innocent civilians with vicious anti-personnel weapons intended to maim and kill as many as possible. As I said above, they fired 4,000 anti-personnel misslies at Israel and did not aim a single one at a military target. By their own words, they give not a damn for human life. There’s not an ounce of difference between Nasrallah and bin Laden. The historical monster who most comes to my mind when I reach for a comparison is Pol Pot, murderer of millions. Not terrorism? Give me a break.

Decampe:

Your post is the typical emotional retreat to well-rehearsed cliches when confronted with the facts.  But even here, you’ve got it wrong.  The missiles were launched at Israel AFTER the Israeli systemic bombing of Lebanon’s population and infrastructure, a bombing that Israeli officials themselves admitted amounted to collective punishment of all of Lebanon, guilty or innocent, to get them to split with Hezbollah. 

So explain again how Israel has not behaved like a terrorist and how 1000 civilian deaths compare with less than 50 caused by Hezbollah.  It should be noted that the overwhelming majority of Israeli casualties were heavily armed SOLDIERS rather than civilians.

As a side note, since Israel was chased out of Lebanon by Hezbollah in 2000, Hizbullah has not fired a single rocket at Israel (Hamas, on the other hand, has fired such rockets).  Hezbollah’s battle is with Israeli soldiers occupying Lebanese territory (the Sheba Farms) not Israeli civilians.  In addition to the facts, you’ve got your Arabs confused.  Not surprising since even Bush cannot tell Osama and Saddam apart.

Imran: Hezbollah attacked Israel not the other way around, or have you forgotten? In the process Hezbollah murdered eight Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two. Hezbollah was then shocked, shocked that Israel responded with heavy artillery and bombs and did not just bend over and meekly negotiate a prisoner swap.

Regarding what Hezbollah wants. Top of their list is the return of the “heroic” terrorist Samir Kuntar, the only Lebanese prisoner that Israel held prior to this war. Kuntar, together with four other Lebanese nationals, back in 1979, came by boat into the northern Israeli city of Nahariya and first killed two policeman. They then invaded the home of an Israeli family and killed the father. Then Samir Kuntar himself smashed in the head of the family’s 4-year- old daughter with the butt of his rifle. He is a ruthless and cold- blooded murderer. He’s been sentenced to four life terms in Israel.

Some hero he is.

Your Shaba farms claim is pure horse manure. Israel could give up Shaba, the Golan Heights, and every square inch down to the Negev and Hezbolah still would not be appeased. Hezbollah wants one thing, the total destruction of Israel and the death of all who live there (aparently including Israeli Arabs by the way they indiscriminately rocketed Nazareth and other Israeli Arab settlements). That’s been clearly articluated by Nasrallah.

Civilians died in lebanon because that’s what Hezbollah wanted, hiding like cowards among innocent Lebanese and then acting horrified when those civilians died in Israeli counter-attacks.

Regarding the civilian deaths in Israel, it wasn’t for a lack of trying on Hezbollah’s part. They fired 4,000 anti-personnel missiles at Israel’s civilian population, not giving a good god damn where they came down. Had Israeli aircraft not knocked out Hezbollah’s long range Iranian-supplied rockets (also hidden in Lebanese civilian areas), those murderous things would have rained down on Tel Aviv and other major Israeli population centers.

And if I’ve got my Arabs confused, explain to me the difference in murderous intent between Nasrallah and Osama bin Laden?

The Iranians tried to send a cargo plane full of more C802 radar-guided missiles to Syria for Hezbollah via Iraqi and Turkish airspace shortly after hostilities commenced in July.  US intelligence found out 3 days prior, and asked Iraqi and Turkish controllers to deny the cargo plane fly-over rights.  This was successful.  There is indisputable satellite imagery of the boxes containing the missiles as well as the unpacked launchers.  So, who here can explain this in terms of “limited to moral support?” Is this author a complete crackpot, or just a propagandist shill?

I’m not too concerned about any of this though.  The cease-fire is a joke, France has already surrendered as has the feckless UN force.  The IDF will be finishing off these jokers shortly and hopefully coming down hard on their Syrian supply lines.  Of course, this would only be treating the symptom of the larger disease and might buy remission for a few years.  Until the Arab world has its Council of Trent and decides that certain aspects of the Koran are a little more than incompatible with peaceful co-existance with the rest of the world this war will rage on.  I prefer that they solve their own pride/shame problems without involving us.  But, if they choose to remain biblical (or koranical, as it were) and exporting violent jihad, well then the West might just have to get “Old Testament.”

Decampe:

Like the media, you imply that this conflict is only 5 weeks old, when Hezbollah captured the Israeli soldiers, the implication being that there could be no reason for Hezbollah’s unprovoked “attack.” However, the conflict is older than this, and your mention of Samir Kuntar and four others implies that you know this (left out of your discussion is that Israel agreed to their release as part of an exchange, and then reneged on it after getting their own people back.  But more importantly, left out your discussion are the thousands of others kidnapped by Israel, held without charge for years, languishing in Israeli dungeons).

Regarding “heroes,” Prime Ministers Shamir, Menachem Begin, and Ariel Sharon, were all documented mass-murderers of civilians.  Yet, they are heroes of the Israeli people.  So spare me the holier than thou speech on “heroes.”

And blaming the victims for their deaths is not worth responding to.  Suffice it to say, Israel either had no idea where Hezbollah was, or did but did not want to engage them in their fortified positions in southern Lebanon, and decided instead to attack the entire infrastructure and civilian population of all of Lebanon, knowing full-well that such bombing would kill the innocent, as a means to get them to do what they couldn’t.  That’s why the vast majority of casualties were civilian.  It was collective punishment in the form of mass-murder, pure and simple.  That is “murderous intent.” Daily lamentations of civilian casualties were pure sop, as the Israeli bombing continued day and night.

Hezbollah responded.  Give them F-16’s and they won’t fire unguided Katyushas (not giving a “god damn” where they come down).  Leave occupied territories that don’t belong to you, and you won’t see innocent Lebanese of all stripes unite behind Hezbollah.  Propoganda serves a useful purpose in confusing the enemy and sating a gullible electorate, but its down right dangerous/negligent to actually base policy on.

So, let me get this straight, after 27 years the Lebanese, represented by Hezbollah, out of the blue decided to kidnap two Israeli soldiers to get the murderer Samir Kuntar back? What a crock.

Regarding Israel knowing where Hezbollah was, I have no idea, not being in on their intelligence briefings. We do know this, the moment Hezbollah started firing its rockets it was clear that the firing locations were in the middle of civilian areas. So what would you have Israel do, stand there while Hezbollah dropped rockets indiscriminately into its cities?

Regarding Israel giving back “occupied territories” what is enough for you? What are we arguing about here?

The 1948 boundaries? The Arabs could have had those from the beginning of the Partition of Palestine but chose to attack Israel instead. It clearly isn’t Gaza or the West Bank. Israel vacated Gaza and was in the preparation stage for vacating the West Bank when Hamas and Hezbollah decided they couldn’t stand the idea of peace and decided to kidnap Israeli soldiers to stir up trouble and kill the deal.

A Palestinian State? The Palestinians could have had one as offered by the Camp David accords and later by the US Roadmap to Peace, but chose instead to rise in an intifada that killed 1,000 Israelis over three years.

Would you be satisfied if Israel vacated everything except a single square inch in the Negev? I doubt it. So what will satisfy you-- other than the complete destruction of Israel and the death of every Jew there (which is what Nasrallahi has called for) ? Don’t tell me that all this death and destruction was just about that little piece of land, the Shaba Farms? That’s another crock.

Regarding Hezbollah getting F-16s, why stop there? I suppose the problem is that it is hard for Hezbollah to hide F-16 behind the skirts of their women.

Actually, why not have Iran give Hezbollah the bomb—I mean the hydrogen bomb? Dropping an H-Bomb on Israel would REALLY make a statement.

Imran:

From what I understand (Zawahiri) Spain is “occupied territory” too.  What are the Muslim plans for that?  You really think this is all about the Shabaa Farms?!  That is just an excuse for the genocide they desire to commit.  I agree that the airpower only war was a big mistake on the part of Israel, they needed to go in hard.  I’m sure the next round they will be international peace forces will be completely discredited.  Go IDF!~

My energetic and peace loving friends, please read the latest Seymour Hersh article in the New Yorker re Lebanon. 

According to Mr. Hersch, the unusuallly high damage rate of Israeli boming was due to the (depleted uranium GBU 28) Bunker Busters that we provided.  It seems that GW wanted to test these weapons before using them on Iran and we had heard that Hizballah had tunnels that would provide a good comparison.

Don’t let all this talk of human lives get in the way of a good test. 

Unfortunately, not all is as it seems.  Even the issue as to who the aggressor is is an artifact of a point in time.  In late January of this year, Israeli military deliberately shot and killed a lone shepherd on the Lebanese side of the border with the excuse that he had probably been on the Israeli side at some time.  Read the UNIFIL reports.  Hizballah retalliated and the see-saw continued and worsened until July.  Go before or after late January and we can find the opposite aggressor.

The point is that by not stopping the violence, we are ensuring that yet another generation that has lost family and has a perfect reason for revenge will not only seek it but find it. 

We can stop the nonsense in Iran before it starts simply by NOT bombing the crap out of them and expecting them to respect us for doing it.  What a concept.  Preventive maintenance instead of preemptive war.
geocopy

Geocopy:

Ummm....I have a feeling that the Iranians (regime) declared war on us a long time ago (1979) and that every act of magnamity on our part only makes us seem weaker.  Khomeni himself recently told us our “razor is dull” and that we are a “weak horse.” Oh ya, geocopy - to your “violence doesn’t solve anything” mentality I could cite most of human history to prove you are wrong.  Unfortunately, the fact is we are dealing with a regime in Iran that literally believes in a 12th Imam in a well who will emerge at the dawning of the apocalypse to lead the Shia to final victory.  Furthmore, they believe it is their religious duty to create these conditions.  I think this is obviously a very dangerous force, even a lib like you might understand that.  So, the Chamberlins will continue caterwalling about how UNSC 1701 is “peace in our time” and history will undoubtedly repeat itself.  You see, by applying limited violence now in support of an Iranian popular revolution, we can save the world guarenteed destruction in the future.  It is as simple as that.  I don’t expect you to understand that though, you are clearly too short-sighted.  What if someone had the balls to take out Hitler in 1938?  They have declared their intentions time and time again, it would be damn negligent not to act.

Hyjinx:
I can understand using violence to respond.  Unfortunately, it does not work very well.  We hijacked the Iranian government by installing a Shah and they finally got wise and retalliated.  They used violence to capture people in our embassy.  Again, it is a matter of perspective.  Exactly when in history are you calling something an aggression?  If you don’t count all the crap we laid on Iran, then you are absolutely correct, they had no business taking hostages.  Unfortunately, human memory is such that folks hold grudges and they are carried from generation to generation.

If you think that we are safer here because we are fighting them there, then you will never figure out that we are generating enemies faster than we can defeat them.  What we have done in Iraq is to set out flypaper to attract all the malcontents in the world into a place where they can bleed us dry.

To put this in the same breath as defeating Nazi Germany is pathetic and laughable, except that some poor sucker might believe it.  We did not generate enemies during WW II.  They were already there.  What we needed to do was to defeat that enemy and jail the people like Prescott Bush (GW’s grandad) who provided coal, steel and banking for the Nazis.

Geocopy: Where exactly in the Hersh article in the New Yorker is there a mention of Israel testing GBU-28 depleted uranium bunker busters on behalf of the U.S. military? I must have missed it.

to decampe:
Seymour mentions the bunker busters in the 21 August issue of the “New Yorker.” I put in the parenthetical addition of just what those bunker busters were.  That I gleaned from the net as you are free to verify.  Simply enter Google and use “bunker busters lebanon” and you will get several hits.  That is why I use the parenthesis.  It is not from Seymour, although if you were to ask him, he might agree.  You can also find some related stuff under “Divine Strake” which is a test that we planned for June that never got by the people of Nevada.

You need a super-dense material to go through all the concrete that the Israelis did otherwise the bomb shelters work pretty well unless you have a firestorm to suck out the oxygen in the shelters.  Fires were minimal except for brush fires.  Divine Strake was designed to use explosive material without a DU core but with a several kiloton effect (although I think that it was actually a fuel bomb mix in the style of Timothy Mc Veigh.)

All this is a rehearsal for Iran.  Even after increasing the enlistment age to 42, we are running out of volunteers and we simply do not have the forces to invade Iran that has 3x the population of Iraq and almost 25 times the population of Lebanon.  Massive bombing, possibly nukes, is our only alternative for the Iranian subterranean.  We have no allies dumb enough to do it and we don’t have the troops or national will to open another war to have GW gamble on the trifecta.

Geocopy:

I take the very long view on these things.  I think by sponsoring revolution in Iran we can’t lose because there is simply nothing worse than what is there.  It is the same as defeating a Hitler because in both cases a deep-seated fascist ideology is at work and once you shatter the illusion (of the “ummah” in this case) you will discredit the ideology.  The Japanese were as suicidal as they come during WWII, we literally beat that out of them.  We are now very friendly.  I prefer that the West not have to go that route.  I think the Iranian people themselves our our best hope, I’ll bet they’re so very happy they “got wise to us” and replaced the Shah with a hell-on-earth totalitarianism.  Almost all polls of Iranians show a very strong desire to be free, I think they do not carry much of the baggage as the rest of the Arabs b/c they are Persian and have their own tradition.  I feel the country could be a major force for good, but the West is going to have to do what is necessary, whether that looks like WWII or the Cedar Revolution is up to them.

Also, do you know why we didn’t “generate enemies” during WWII?  It wasn’t because people around the world loved us so and wouldn’t side with the Nazis, it’s because they FEARED us.  It is a Machiavellian world, and only when it is clear that resistance is completely useless and will only end in your destruction, humans who are sane will choose not to resist.  The West is simply unwilling to instill that kind of fear, which would fill the void of respect.  So we suffer perpetual war.  I do not believe the people we fight are hydra like and sprout 6 for every 1.  I think we haven’t made it clear what it really means to lose to the populations that support and harbor.  Make it clear that after we demolish the terrorist organization in their midst that there will be no aid money or international gravy train with violins.  That will discourage future terroristic behavior and save everyone the pain.  WE CAN WIN IF WE REALLY WANTED TO.

Geocopy,

I find your parenthetical additions to the Hersh story to be as disengenuous as the doctored and faked Reuters and AP photos of bomb deaths and damage. Let me give you a hint: when you ascribe statements to a well known journalist like Seymour Hersh, you probably ought to check first to see whether or not he actually made them. If English is not your native tongue, maybe you ought to get someone who speaks it fluently to translate the article for you. Because you’ve added a whole bunch of stuff that Hersh never said.

He didn’t use the words “bunker buster"anywhere in the piece; he didn’t use the words “depleted uranium”; he didn’t discuss “collateral damage” in relation to these bombs. In fact he mentions bunkers only once, and that in a general statement about hunting down missiles, bombs and tunnels from the air.

This is not just interpolation on your part, this is the worst sort of fabrication. You found some nonsense on the web by some other blowhards and decided top spice up Hersh’s report, because it wasn’t nasty enough for you.

Your speculation about depleted uranium in these things is just that, speculation. The UN spokesperson gave a similar warning about speculation during a press briefing in which the depleted uranium bunker buster charge was made. You say that the bunker busters produced several kilotons of effect; well you’d need an actual nuke explosion not a fuel-air bomb to produce that size of a burst Your claim is the same sort of crap that was thrown around about the Israelis using phosphorus warheads and about poison gas. Propaganda nonsense.

Try sticking to facts and not putting words into the mouths of respected journalists. Maybe some of us would listen more if you did that.

> I am NOT a necon, as a long time active liberal I’m the farthest thing from it

HE HE HE, this is a classic statement of so called “left” wing apologists for Israel and other reactionary policies like attacking Yugoslavia..  The classic case is Dissent Magazine which claims to be progressive but are actually right wing warmongers and champions of “humanitarian bombing”.

I used to be familiar with some of the neoCons when they were “leftists”.

They were hypocrites and liars when I knew of them in the 50’s, Their anti Communism was barely distinguishable from Hitler or McCarthy.  Many of these ultra right wing leftists are utterly disgusting people and do more harm to the left than ordinary right wingers.

> Hezbollah attacked Israel not the other way around, or have you forgotten?

No it didn’t, where did you get that silly idea?  There was an on going conflict for years and most of the attacking was by Israel. Look it up!

You would only believe that if you were an apologist for Israel.

(Hell, Chomsky was visiting Southern Lebanon as a guest of Hezbollah about 3 months ago and they were buzzed by an Israeli drone over Lebanese territory).  According to the Lebanese Israel overflew Lebanon on an almost daily basis).

Spinoza750:

And the difference between you and bin Laden is?

> And the difference between you and bin Laden is?

Well thank you Mr. deChump for putting me in the category with a world class leader. I never thought I was so important as to rank with evil incarnate.

But it is a shame that you are so ignorant that you don’t know that there is great enmity between Hezbollah, Iran and Syria and the bin Ladenites.  If you knew anything about the Middle East you would know that those entities hate bin Laden and think he is crazy.  I bet you don’t know that many in the Middle East consider bin Laden a CIA stooge and in cahoots with a faction in the CIA--- at least till relatively recently.

Then again most of your posts are ignorant right wing rants so what is to be expected?

Spinoza750:

Whether those sects of Islamofascists hate each other or not is a moot point.  They all work towards the same end: the destruction of Western civilizations beginning with the Jews.  That makes them all equally culpable, and don’t be so naive to believe they don’t cooperate operationally.  Wasn’t it recently that non-other than UBL’s son was “released” from Iran to lead the war for Hizbollah in Lebanon?  Wouldn’t that be direct Sunni/Shite cooperation?  The enemy of my enemy is my friend is always true.  Shatter the illusion of the “Ummah” and bury the Nasser ideology of panarabism, that will put a stop to these fanatics because they will no longer have an ideological pot to piss in?  So, please, enlighten me about the ME....

Hyjinx since you are a rabid Zionist I doubt I or anyone can enlighten you about the Middle East.

> Suddenly, and following Saudi-Israeli-Bin Ladenite cooperation in Lebanon, Zionist organizations in the US changed their minds. They now declare that Saudi text books are filled with messages of love, tolerance, and cooperation.

posted by As’ad @ 5:10 PM link

I took this from the Angry Arab Web Site which is one of the best sites on the web to give insight especially on Lebanon.  As’ad is very good at indicating hypocrisy of all types.

He loves to go after idiots.

> Whether those sects of Islamofascists hate each other or not is a moot point.

Of course it isn’t.  You don’t know what you are talking about.

Thanks Hyjinx22, I couldn’t have said it better myself.

What amazes me is after I have spent nearly 40 years toiling in liberal causes from the anti-war movement of the ‘60s and the Free Speech Movement in Berkeley to decades as a labor journalist working for organized labor, as a political activest in the middle of the struggle for fair play for the aged, blind and disabled, for the working poor, for the candidates who spoke against Nixon and Reagan and the Bushies, I get called a Right Winger by this moron because I don’t subscribe to his view that Israel is a nazi state and Hezbollah’s terrorists are fighters for freedom (wow, and all that in one runon sentence, too!)

You can’t get through to them. To them Israel is not a real nation but only a “usurping entity.” They’ve shat in their own beds and blamed it on Israelis and Zionists. They’ve, failed a to lift a finger to help the Palestinians over whose plight they cry crocodile tears. They hold grudges against Israel that seem to go all the way back to the 10 Plagues god visited upon the Egyptians, grudges that are part of the fabric of a terrifying revival of anti-Semitism.

Regarding bin Laden, you are correct according to the NY Post, which reported on August 3 in a story headlined “Iran Unleashes Qaeda Heir to Aid Hezbollahah” that “The son of Osama bin Laden has gone from Iran to Lebanon with the mission to organize terror attacks against Israel, it was reported yesterday. Saad bin Laden, 27, one of the terror mastermind’s eldest sons, was released by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard last Friday, according to the German daily Die Welt.  “From the Lebanese border, he has the task of building Islamist terror cells and preparing them to fight with Hezbollah,” the paper said, quoting intelligence sources.”

I stand by my comparison of Spinoza750 to Osama bin Laden.

decampe: I find it difficult to believe that someone with your claimed credentials is not able to express regarding Israel is if it is some sort of sacred cow.  And what would be the NYP source for this fairy tale about son of Bin Laden? Should we give the NYP the same sort of benefit of the doubt as we giver those who claim that Abjabad said “wipe Israel off the map” when a correct translation shows he said no such thing? Most of what you say, to me, who was persuaded only over a period of years to become critical of Israel, sounds like Goebbels. That the Israeli regime is a land thief and completely thuggish, racist and genocidal towards its’ neighbours is undeniable.

accesslaw:
You ask who says Saad bin Laden was released by the Iranians to work with Hezbollah in recruiting terrorists? Well, to those I cited above (the NY Post and the German Die Welt) add ABC TV Network news, the Sunday Express of India and the London Daily Mail, CNN and the Calgary Sun. (I’d add Israel Fax to that list but you’d probably shriek “bias.")

I believe the name of the President of Iran is “Ahmadinejad” not “Abjabad” as you said above (unless that Farsi translation is bad as well). And if Ahmadinejad was mistranslated when he was reported to say “[we must] wipe Israel off the map” what was it you claim he really said, “Let’s invite the Israelis over for tea”?

Was this the same Ahmadinejad who was quoted by the Times of London and about a billion other members of the media as saying the Holocaust was a “myth” or was that another Farsi mistranslation?

decampe: Just because a rumour is repeated does not make it true. Did you notice that Olmert’s claim that NATO killed 10,000 civilians in Yugslavia was unquestioned? NATO historically claimed 500, Yugoslavia claimed 1,000 to 1,200, so 10,000 was just another taste of chutzpah and hasbarah . I no longer believe any Israeli source without verification.

I asked for the SOURCE of this rumour about Bin Laden’s son, it sounds to me like the usual Debkafile type of fanciful “intelligence”.

Yes both quotes attributed to Ahmadinejad are mistranslations and repeated for the purpose of demonization and propaganda of a popular, democratically elected leader. For one source examining the translation issue, see http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12790.htm

One of the reasons the Bush Administration initially missed the terrorism story was that their obsessive “state worship” blinded them to the simple fact that states are not needed to support and sustain “terrorist” movements. In fact, Hezbollah is a vital and legitimate part of the Lebanese State doing quite well what the PLO attempted but failed to do over 20 years ago when they were expelled from Lebanon by Israel.  Hezbollah commands a great deal of respect and legitimacy both running Lebanon and militarily defending it.  Its social organizations are needed and its military is formidable in defending Lebanon against foreign aggression.

Iran’s role is weak. Iran doesn’t share interests or agenda with Hezbollah.  Open support would bring condemnation and reprisals.  US claims that Hezbollah is an Iranian proxy is propaganda in the war on terror designed to justify an attack on Iran for ulterior motives like weakening America’s most formidable enemy in the region.

The current conflagration between Israel and Hezbollah was not provoked by Iran. It was planned by joint US/Israeli contacts for three month leading up to the Hezbollah kidnappings of the IDF soldiers.  As Sy Hersh pointed out in his New Yorker article, there was repeated and unprecedented contacts between high ranking US and Israeli officials contemplating the political and military advantages of a full scale conflict between Hezbollah and Israel. 

It was known that Hezbollah was unhappy about its fighters held captive by Israel and the most recent (and quite understandable) refusal of Israel to include the notorious Samir Kuntar in a prisoner exchange.  The Hezbollah wanted to force a prisoner exchange with Israel to enhance its prestige in Lebanon at a time when continued Iranian support is risked by the US military presence in the region.  Israel escalated a brutal war with the Palestinians which included destruction of infrastructure, targeting of civilians, and collective punishments drawing Hezbollah into the conflict.  The Israeli response was out of all proportion and threatened the existance of Lebanon more than Hezbollah. More than 800 Lebanese civilians were killed with thousands more wounded and over one million people, or 25% of the Lebanese population, became refugees.  The obvious objective was to destroy Lebanon in order to remake it physically and politically and to reduce the danger of Hezbollah rocket attacks pursuant to a US assault on Tehran.  There was also an attempt to delegitimate Hezbollah on the Arab Street.  The exact opposite occured!

It is clear that non-state actors such as Hezbollah and al-Qaeda are forces to be reckoned with as they can act quite well and independantly of formal state sponsership. The time has also come for a comprehesive peace settlement in the region.  Israel didn’t learn from its last major “War of Attrition” in the late 1960s and early 70s when it employed massive strategic bombing inside Egypt’s Suez Canal Zone in order to alienate President Nasser from his people and bring about his overthrow. The exact opposite occured. The region filled up with Soviet weapons that the Russians were previously reluctant to send and the entire Middle East lined up behind Nasser. It also created future military difficulties for Israel in the Yom Kipper War in 1973 which resulted in high Israeli casualties!

By the same token, Israeli brutality in Lebanon has made a hero of Nasrallah and further entrenched Hezbollah’s role in Lebanon.  The Neoconservative dream of a restructured Middle East in line with US preferences is a dangerous pipedream.  The vain attempt has only created the perception of a weakened US/Israel Axis. It will also lead to a new round of negotiations pressuring Israel into serious concessions to the Palestinians that, ironically, the war was designed to avoid in the first place.

OK, we’ve argued this to death: who’s right, who’s wrong, who started it, is Hezbollah or Israel right or wrong. It leads only to more “I’M right,” “No I’M right.” arguments without end.

What now?

Can we move past this argument to the nub of the issue, which is what do we do now? What will ensure long-term peace in the region? What will ensure safety and prosperity for all the parties, Israel, Lebanon, the Palestinians?

I believe that secure borders, self determination for all parties, and economic security are the fundamental needs.  That’s a very general statement though. As always, the devil is in the details.

So what is the path to real,long-term Middle East peace?

Geez, I check out for just a couple of days, and the postings have gravitated to civilizational confrontation!  I thought this post was about how 3000 Shiite guerrillas held off the “mighty” Israeli Army, Navy and Air Force (Thermopylae-style).  Normally, I would point out that this “civilizational” divide is a further diversion from the actual facts on the ground (Bush uses it to justify just about everything he does), but here goes.

How come every time Israel (or Bush for that matter) kills someone, she is defending “the West” against Islam? 

What “West?” The Christian West?  There are more Christian Arabs than Israelis (ironically, many of them in Lebanon).  The Vatican (some would say the very definition of “the West” as the instigator of the Crusades) still lacks full diplomatic relations with Israel because of its treatment of Catholics, who in their bad fortune, happen to Arab.

Geographic West?  How can Christian Russia be part of “the West” when she is east of Islamic Algeria?  How can Israel be part of “the West” when she is east of Islamic Egypt?

“Judeo-Christian” civilization?  Until the last half of the century, “the West” was systematically exterminating Jews.  The most telling of which side of the civilizational divide most Jews were on was in Islamic Spain.  When “liberated” by “the west,” Spanish Jews ran from the Christian inquisition, and other “western” horrors, to the Islamic Ottoman Empire.  In fact, noble crusaders usually embarked upon crusades against Muslims with “warm-up” pogroms against local Jews.  Although there certainly were instances of Muslim-Jewish antagonism, they were minor compared to the doctorinal hatred of Jews bred into Christian Europe’s conscienceness.  “The west” really just atoned for its sins against the Jews after the Holocaust.  Doesn’t a “civilization,” Judeo-Christian or otherwise, have to be more than 50 years old?

See how effective and useful it is to talk about East vs. West when you’re trying to distract a gullible electorate from what appears to be a modern-day Thermopylae.

Accesslaw: I read the discussion in informationclearinghouse of Ahmadinejad’s speech and how it was purportedly misunderstood by those translating it. Unfortunately the informationclearinghouse website is a jumble of really bad English, so that the translation they offer and their own explanation reads like ancient Etruscan translated into English by someone whose native language is Klingon. In other words it’s a mess.

But the best I can get out of that jumble it is that informationclearing house claims Ahmadinejad was really only saying “whoever accepts the legitimacy of this regime [Israel] has in fact, signed the defeat of the Islamic world. Our dear Imam targeted the heart of the world oppressor in his struggle, meaning the occupying regime. I have no doubt that the new wave that has started in Palestine, and we witness it in the Islamic world too, will eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.”

Now as a native speaker of English I may be having trouble with the labyrinthine nature of the translation, but the distinction escapes me between Ahmadinejad’s saying “wipe Israel off the map,” and his saying “eliminate this disgraceful stain from the Islamic world.”

Maybe you guys in the heart of the “hate Israel” movement see a distinction, I sure as hell don’t.

Excellent interview with British MP George Galloway about media bias against Hezbollah.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=730041565017127482&q=british+mp& ;hl=en

Big surprise, Galloway despises Israel, how about telling us something new.

Typical AIPAC response: rather than address the issues actually raised by the speaker, attack the speaker personally as an “anti-semite” or one who “despises Israel.”

Notice that there was NO discussion of what he actually said. 

Silencing or marginalizing critics of Israeli actions in this fashion will not help Israel find the right answers (much like Bush attacking his Iraq war opponents as traitors rather than listening to their criticism and formulating better policy).  It will guarantee them an Israeli version of “stay the course.”

I don’t know why Israel has the right to rip up Lebanon and engage in massive eco-terrorism by bombing the fuel tanks attached to power generating facilities south of Beirut because of foolish, irresponsible statements made by the Iranian leader. This is the main excuse being used: Ahmedinijad’s inflammatory statements about Jews and Israel.  Now what is widely considered a genocide against innocent people has been commited in Lebanon pursuant to the goals of neo-conservative conquest of the region.  In addition, the Eastern Mediteranian has been toxified at the expense of the US and other taxpayers.  Israel is way out of hand.  It is worse than it’s ever been!  Some one in the US has to put them on a shorter leash.  This will be for the good of the world and even the US Jewish community itself.  The March elections in Israel turned out the most right wing electorate and Parlaiment in Israel’s history-worse even than the 2001 and 2003 elections of Sharon. The Laborites, who have been under the rightist influence of those like Haim Ramon, as well as peripheral left parties like Meeritz, are horribly marginalized. Now Israel is dominated by Likud (far right), Kadima (Likud lite), Yisrael beitanu (racist Russian reactionaries), and numerous religious parties all of the right. There is about 5% Israeli Arab representation (Israeli Arabs are over 20% of resident Israeli citizens). The new government is out to prove its resolve with regard to national security. This is highly dangerous.  The separation wall and the IDF atrocities bode ill for the region in general.  Israel’s current role is highly negative.

cabdriverinchicago: “Israel is way out of hand.”? Israel got out of Gaza, was in the process of getting out of the West Bank, and negotiated plans for a Palestinian state. The response from the Palestinians was 1,000 Isralis killed by terrorists in three years, kidnappings of their soldiers by hezbollah and Hamas, new murders of Israeli settlers and 4,000 rockets launched by Hezbollah indiscriminately into Israel at civilian targets. Yeah, that sure looks like it’s Israel that’s out of hand.

Imran: Silencing what critics? I mearly said that in his incredibly angry rant, Galloway said nothing new, nothing to move the debate along. I don’t recall censoring him in any fashion.

Meanwhile, do you have an answer to my question above: “What will ensure long-term peace in the region? What will ensure safety and prosperity for all the parties, Israel, Lebanon, the Palestinians?”

The Palestinian reality is that Israel was created by Europeans, guilty over the holocaust, on their land; that despite the “people without a land, a land without a people” slogan, hundreds of thousand real people, who had lived there for generations, were expelled, to create this “Jewish utopia” in 1948.  The Palestinians suffered further losses by trusting neighboring Arab regimes to regain their land by force.  The tactical and military errors notwithstanding, the land remains stolen against the wishes of the indigenous population.

It amazes me when people talk about how “grateful” the Palestinians should have been to get what was offered in 1948.  It’s the equivalent of me taking half your land by force, and then when you fight me to get it back, I defeat you and take the rest, mocking that you should have been happy with the half I left you.  What hogwash!

Today, if there is to be a solution, the question is not who gets what as a matter of right, but how much taken/occupied land should Israel get to keep, or be rewarded with, by virtue of its monopoly on overwhelming force.  I won’t kid myself about the reality of a nuclear armed Israel, even on stolen land, if you won’t delude yourself about the “righteousness” of Israeli imperialism.

The solution lies in the hands of those who have stolen the land.  They want “security” after having stolen land, but don’t want to have to return any of it.  Some “liberal” Israelis might part with a portion of it, but only if they get to keep the best parts, including Jerusalem.  In return, the Palestinians get ghettos in the West Bank and Gaza, and have to kill fellow Palestinian discontents who won’t accept such a “grand bargain.”

Rather than asking the Palestinians why they obstruct such “peace,” honestly ask yourself what you would do.

Can I read that as saying you would not accept any solution that includes the continued existance of Israel, regardless of where the borders are placed?

Decampe,

How long are we going to continue to hear the same nonsense blaming the Palestinians and their leadership for the collapse of the Oslo Accords?  The Israelis never simply quit Gaza but merely redeployed troops outside the area while continuing to maintain logistical, military, sovereign control from outside. Israel can determine whether or not aircraft can land at the Gaza Airport and in fact completely controls the airspace around Gaza. True, the 8,000 settlers were removed with compensation and resettled in the West Bank where Israel plans to strengthen the occupation.  It must be remembered that Dov Weissglass, Sharon’s chief aide, described the Gaza Disengagement as “ a unilateral suspension of the peace process in phemaldehyde” by Israel that would “ensure that there would be no peace process with the Palestinians.” Israel continues its military control of the area.

In the West Bank, what peace activist Jeff Halper calls “the matrix of control” has been in place throughout the Oslo negotiations and after.  What the Palestinians were offered was three major cantons separated physically by Israeli salients containing Jewish settlements which protrude deep into Palestinian territory utterly destroying the continuity of the West Bank and thereby its viability as a state. The IDF check point system creates delays, and is impossibly obstructive of normal life. What we have is a Bantustan system which in South Africa became the cause of a three decade long struggle against Apartheid but in Israel is supposed to pass for a just and lasting final status agreement between two sovereign states. The building of the separation wall has made matters even worse and has destroyed the viability of the Palestinian economy creating total dependency of Israel and outside donors. Poverty and unemployment is rampant in the occupied territories.  This is the context in which the extremist Hamas won the PLC elections.

The collapse of the Oslo accords with the Al Aksa Intifada following in its wake has taken the lives of over 6,000 Jews and Arabs since September 2000. That is 1000 lives annually.  Over 80% of the casualities are Palestinian Arabs.  It is now well known that it was Sharon who sunk any hopes of the Agreement’s success. By appearing on top of the Haram al Sheriff overlooking the Western Wall of the Temple Mount with a crowd of militant Jewish Settlers waving Israeli flags and making bellicose pronouncements, Sharon must have known he would provoke a violent conflagration.  Arafat and others tried to stop the incident and save the talks but to no avail.  The Israelis refused to give up on their expansionist colonization drive and the US refused to intervene so long as the whole thing could be credibly blamed on Arafat and the Palestinians.

The tiny Israeli left has been discussing dezionization. What this means is twofold.  On the one hand it means acknowledging Zionism’s inherently expansionist colonial drive and reversing it. On the other it means adopting a modern, liberal notion of citizenship and extending it to the Arabs of Israel. This means taking in some of the Palestinian refugees from 1948 and ceasing to obsess about the demographic problem. It also means a viable Palestinian state along side Israel. Only then can there be peace.

OK, so cabdriverinchicago believes that the road to peace means adopting a modern, liberal notion of Israeli citizenship and extending it to the Arabs of Israel, taking in some of the Palestinian refugees from 1948 and ceasing to obsess about the demographic problem. He/she also says it means a viable Palestinian state along side Israel.

A question for cabdriverinchicago : Can you clarify what changes this would mean for Israeli Arabs, who are already represented in the Knesset? Do you mean granting citizinship to Arabs on the West Bank and in Gaza? What do you mean by taking in some Palestinian refugees? Which ones and how many? Can you explain what you mean by the “demographic problem”?

Do others have ideas? (Would a move by Israel in the direction proposed by cabdriverinchicago be acceptable to Israel’s Arab neighbors? Would this be acceptable to Hezbollah? to Syria? to Iran? who have called for Israel’s complete destruction and generally refuse even to recognize the legitimacy of the State of Israel?)

Cabdriver wrote

>>
What the Palestinians were offered was three major cantons separated physically by Israeli salients containing Jewish settlements which protrude deep into Palestinian territory utterly destroying the continuity of the West Bank and thereby its viability as a state.
>>

Utter bullshit. For starters, check Wikipedia, “Camp David 2000 Summit” entry. Don’t start to wail about its credibility - if you have anything better, just post a link.

>>
The building of the separation wall has made matters even worse and has destroyed the viability of the Palestinian economy creating total dependency of Israel and outside donors.
>>

Now, that’s something. Creating a wall that separates palestinians from Israel created dependency of Israel?? By the same token, the Berlin wall created the dependancy of East Germany on West Germany?

>>
Poverty and unemployment is rampant in the occupied territories.
>>

No wonder. Check the amount of money palestinians receive from their various donors and it’s uses, and Arafat’s personal fortune as well. Check the amount of weaponry purchased.

>>
It is now well known that it was Sharon who sunk any hopes of the Agreement’s success.
>>

If you ever heard about Karel Capek, read his article on polemics. Esp. see #10 - Quousque

>>
By appearing on top of the Haram al Sheriff overlooking the Western Wall of the Temple Mount with a crowd of militant Jewish Settlers waving Israeli flags and making bellicose pronouncements, Sharon must have known he would provoke a violent conflagration.
>>

No wonder after the caricatures in danish papers we’ve seen a world-wide arab hysteria. Comparing to the things arabs say and do, this definitely was subversive.

>>
Israelis refused to give up on their expansionist colonization drive
>>

Expansionist? Where to, exactly? Israel was only expanding after it was attacked by its neighbors. If you are aware of Israel’s plans to conquer some land somewhere, or such deeds in the past, let me know.

>>
On the one hand it means acknowledging Zionism’s inherently expansionist colonial drive and reversing it.
>>

Left Sinai and received tunnels for smuggling of weapons and explosives. Left Gaza strip and received more rockets on southern towns. Enough, I think.

>>
On the other it means adopting a modern, liberal notion of citizenship and extending it to the Arabs of Israel.
>>

Been there, done that. There’s more than 1 million arabs with Israeli sitizenship in case you forgot. Now they dance on the roofs of their houses when Hizballa bombs Israel, when Al-qaida blows innocent people etc. The really modern notion would be to deprive them of that citizenship. But to bring in more of the same? Take them to where you live instead.

Now, you should really talk with that dealer of yours (Capek’s #1 Despicere)

Well said, dizz

Decampe:

I did not deny the existence of Israel.  In order to find a solution, one must correctly analyze the problem.  The purpose of my previous post was to place the Middle East paradigm in its correct context.  I get tired of hearing how poor Israel is just defending herself, as if hordes were attacking for no reason whatsoever, without any discussion of the land grab which is the basis of the conflict.

There are those in Israel who do not want to give up any land for any reason, and envision a God-given mandate for a Greater Israel, of biblical proportions (no pun intended).  There are those Palestinians who will not want to reward Israeli agression with any of their stolen land.  And only one of them has a monopoly of overwhelming force, including nuclear weapons.  So now, tell me, which side should, or is in a position to, begin the compromise?

Again, what do you propose, Imran?

My best guess:

Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, including East Jerusalem.

Dismantling of ALL Israeli settlements in these areas.

Release of ALL Palestinian prisoners.

Reparations for:

(1) the land Israel gets to keep, and
(2) harm done to Palestinian civilians, both in Palestine and those driven out, and
(3) destroyed homes, fields, crops and infrastructure.

Palestinian state (with all sovereign powers) on West Bank and Gaza, a viable land corridor linking the two, with its capital East Jerusalem.

Right of return for all Palestinians expelled since 1948.

However, as mentioned earlier, there are imperialists in Israel that do not wish to part with any land, and even the so-called “liberals” there want a facade of a Palestinian state, at the mercy of Israel, with no meaningful sovereign powers. 

The self-righteous Israeli dismissal of any compromise because some Palestinians might reject any deal is putting the cart before the horse.  Also implied in these dismissals is the Israeli recognition that any deal legalizes its theft of Palestinian land and isn’t morally acceptable.  Finally, such self-righteousness is simply unbecoming for the thief who started this whole mess in the first place.

This is good! How about this, decampe!

1. Equality before the law and in every public service in Israel, i.e., housing. property ownership, building permits, marriage, health, per capita electoral representation, immigration—for all Israeli citizens regardless of religion, ethnicity or jewishness.

2. Tax incentives for every Israeli family to adopt a Palestinina family, using the money saved from cutting off all tax incentives and costs presently allocated to settlement/colonization of Golan, West Bank, and Gaza.

3. Demilitarization of Israeli relations with neighbours, activation of expansive programs of collaboration and diplomacy to address all grievances and to restore full peaceful relations, trauma counselling for the two generations of Israelis who have been contaminated by military service at checkpoints and other instruments of Palestinian population imprisonment and control.

4. Legislative definitions of Israeli hate crimes to include all chauvinistic speech derogatory to goys, arabs, muslims, etc., pro-active enforcement, and active re-eduation programs for offenders, together with an thorough examination of all Israeli education curricula in partnership with non-jews to identify hate ful ideas and prevent their inculcation into the next generation.

How’s that for a start? I’m sure I missed a couple of hundred of other potentially positive initiatives towards a justice and equality. Jewish Israelis could then rightfully claim to be a “light unto the earth” and a good example for their neighbours to follow.

Interesting. Probably some negotiable items among those proposals.

And in return:

Secure borders for Israel. Enforced by international peacekeepers.

An end to all terrorist attacks upon and within Israel, including an end to firing of katusha and other rockets from Gaza and Lebanon..

Soverign Lebanese state control over all civil and military functions of Lebanon, including full enforcement of UN Resolution 1701 calling for disarming of Hezbollah.

Return of all Israelis held captive by Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.

An end to all acts and expression of anti-Semitism and hate speech against Israel and Jews.

*Borders . . . 1947, Israeli compliance with UN resolutions and international conventions, including return of refugees. Peacekeepers absolutely, place Israeli nuclear weapons/facilities under UN guardianship.
*No occupation = no terrorism. Full sovereignty, including border control, absolute freedom of person, commerce, financial transactions, no Israeli trespass/harrassment of airspace.
*Incorporation of Hezbollah (who are Lebanese residents after all) into national military command structure, may require up-to-date census and per capita representation in national legislative assembly (presently apportionment is based on 1930’s figures I believe). Simple disarmament is unrealistic as H were responsible for ending Israel’s occupation and for repelling Israel’s new invasion . . . unless Israel also disarms.
*Full reciprocal prisoner exchange/release. An end to Israeli abductions and extrajudicial executions, and other covert/black flag actions.
*An end to the prohibition against fair criticism of Israel and Jews, ordinary critical thinking rules apply.

>>>grudges that are part of the fabric of a terrifying revival of anti-Semitism. <<<

Yes and it is people like you (ex liberals) who are responsible for the rise of this anti-Semitism.

Your responsibility is because you don’t honor fair play. You refuse to give any credence to the feelings of Muslim people.  George Galloway has expressed the issue perfectly; NO JUSTICE, NO PEACE. You have to treat people fairly and as human beings instead of looking at the world in a Machiavellian way.

I was in Israel during the Yom Kipper War and Israel at the time was still civilized. On Israeli Army Radio they were playing Pete Seeger and Joan Baez and there was expressions of respect for Arabs as people.  There was hope for an accommodation.  Since Reagan and Thatcher and the rise of Fascism only one world view has dominated. Might Makes Right.  Israel has joined the fascist camp of the USA and until fascism is defeated there will be no peace in the world.

And what is Fascism?

It is Nationalism and the belief that your tribe is better than any other tribe, it is militarism and the belief that war is the only way to achieve glory and honor and land and it is capitalism, the belief in doing in your neighbor before he does you in.

I have said many times before : you negotiate with your enemies, not with your friends. Hamas offered a Hudna.  Israel rejected it.  It should accept it.  And then negotiate, not from strength but from fairness.

>>>> Secure borders for Israel. Enforced by international peacekeepers.

That means Israel will have to give up all ideas of a greater Israel.  Not likely to happen.

>>>An end to all terrorist attacks upon and within Israel, including an end to firing of katusha and other rockets from Gaza and Lebanon..

That means that Israel will have to agree to give up state terrorism and that is not likely to happen

>>>Soverign Lebanese state control over all civil and military functions of Lebanon, including full enforcement of UN Resolution 1701 calling for disarming of Hezbollah.

Who is going to disarm Hezbollah?  Actually Jumblatt (sp) has called for them being integrated into the Lebanese Army but that is not likely at this stage.

>>>Return of all Israelis held captive by Hamas, Hezbollah, etc.

Not likely a problem.

>>>An end to all acts and expression of anti-Semitism and hate speech against Israel and Jews.

Not likely to happen in anything like the near future but it should be a goal.

Hatred levels are intense in that area of the world.

Well, I had a whole response here and it vanished during editing. Trust me, I was eloquent.

I guess the nub of what I was saying is that the only way to attain long-term peace is to get past the anger and hate on both sides. Accept the fact of Israel’s existance. Accept that the Palestinians want out from under what they perceive as Israeli domination. Accept that peace requires negotiation (with enemies AND friends) and successful negotiation requires compromise. The US has been ham fisted. The UN has been impotent. Radicals among the Arabs and Iranians have seized the opportunity to press their agenda. Israel (fearing for its existance) has been fractuous and aggressive.

Get past it, Do we want to fight for another 60 years while the weapons get more deadly and the sides more bitter and entrenched? Or do we want to negotiate the best deal we can get?

Decampe:

My mother told me I’m jewish myself, I don’t care, it doesn’t matter one way or another, if I’m jewish, polish, german, welsh, english all in one, personally. Personally, the only racism I’ve experienced in my lifetime has been from jews who perceive me as goy or christian therefore automatically antisemitic. LIttle of it, from a very few, to be sure, and overwhelming outnumbered by roomates, girlfriends, a wife, etc., who happened to be jewish. It doesn’t matter to me and I wonder why it matters to others and why it is brought up all the time as I think it is an insignificant issue in our societies of today. In other words, shut up already, because I experience it as a weapon of intimidation against rational discussion even in my own community with my neighbours.

Well, Jabotinxky is the symbol of the zionist ideal of eretz israel, his photo hung over Sharon’s desk as premier, and the settelments in Golan, West Bank, Gaza and Sinai didn’t just happen they were state sponsored and heavily subsidized. Sure there is tension, but I perceive the rabid liberators of the Land of Israel “metre by metre” (Sharon) to be the strongest force in Israei society most of the time, after all, the eviction of up to 1 million arabs in 1947, the erasing of their villages, and the refusal to allow the refugees to return, is the foundation of the “demographic” problem. Ethnic cleansing. Apartheid. Abominable.

What are you smoking? Hamas and Hezbollah “kidnappings” caused Israeli warfare? Very recently, Israel abducted Palestinians and Lebanese . . . but it’s ok if they do it? It adds up to how many, 10,000 arabs imprisoned without charge or trial? Do you also ignore the constant overflights breaking the sound barrier and terrorizing civilian populations day and night? The escalating Israeli shelling and bombing of Gaza after the socalled “withdrawal”? Checkpoints? Bulldozing houses and orchards? Judaizing east Jerusalem? Abducting elected representatives? Books are and will be written about judeonazism in Palestine.

I respect the Israelis who individually befriend Palestinians, who protest the wall with Palestinians, who are beaten and shot by Israelis together with Palestinians, who monitor the checkpoints to document Israeli brutality against Palestinians, these are the true leaders and heroes of Israeli society.

that’s odd, i got your comment by email and i responded but your’s is not posted here, so here it is

decampe just responded to the entry you subscribed to at In These Times.

The title of the entry is:
Examining Iran’s ties to Hezbollah

You can see the comment at the following URL:
http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/discuss/2790/

1. I thought we had a hunda right now (or at least an uneasy truce).
2. Anti-Semitism is hate directed against Jews for the simple fact of their
being Jews. You may have grievances against Israel, you may have grievances
against Jews you identify as zionists. But hate directed against Jews who
around the world who are uninvolved in these events is pure anti-Semitism.
If you see the issue at that level then you and I have no common ground to
negotiate anything and should just end this discussion.
3.I despise the Bush regime as much as you do. Do NOT tar me with that
brush. America can be better than that; most Americans ARE better than that.
4.The ugliness of feeling in the Middle East is pervasive; I don’t hear any
Arabs singing Dylan or his Arabic equivalent today either. There is plenty
of blame to go around. As I said, for all the tears that the Arab world has
shed over the Palestinians, they have lifted no a finger to help them
(except to 72 virgins in heaven).
5. Of course the issue is Nationalism. You have Israeli nationalism and Arab
nationalism. If you want to gain peace now (and not ascend into nuclear war,
which is where I terribly fear this could all end) then you have to get past
nationalism on all sides.
6.Negotiaiton is the forging of a contract, and is as necessary with your
friends as with your enemies, perhaps moreso.
7.I am flbberghasted at the claim that Israel as a nation seeks the status
of “Greater Israel.” Perhaps factions within Israel want the West Bank.
But naitonal policy over the decades has had Israel repeated win and then
cede back territories including the Sinai, Gaza, south Lebanon and parts of
the Golan. As national policy, Israel has moved to exit Gaza and the West
Bank, moderate Palestinians have welcomed such a move. Radicals like Hamas
have initiated terrorist acts (such as the kidnapping of the Israeli soldier
near Gaza that started the most recent battles.)
9.I don’t know who is going to disarm Hezbollah; Israel could have finished
the job—albeit at some cost— if not for the ceasefire. But UN
Resolutions 1559, 1680 and 1701 have all called for disarming them and any
other non-governmental militias. If Hezbollah’s army became part of the
Lebanese army, subject to their command and control and responsive to the
Lebanese Parliament, then a case could be made that the UN requirement has
been met. But as long as Hezbollah is an entity unto itself, subject to no
one’s command except that of their own leaders, then they are in violation
and must disarm. I do not understand how one can call Lebanon a sovereign
nation as long as a big chunk of its territory and populace is under the
control of an organization with a powerful military force.

Thanks, I wondered what in the world had happened to that post. It was there, I hit a key to edit it and then it was gone. I appereciate your reposting it. I can’t imagine how it got emailed to you. I hadn’t finished editing it but the remaining things are mostly typos so I’ll leave it as is.

Regarding your comments about Jews seeing you as a goy or Christian and therefor ipso facto anti-Semitic. I would never make such an assumption and the vast majority of Jews I know would not. I know there are those with strong antipathy toward Israel for reasons that they believe are very valid. I don’t always agree with them (with you) but I understand that their animosity is rooted in a view of actual events. Anti-Semitism is different, it is hate directed at Jews for the simple fact of their being Jews.

It is a hate that brought on mass murder of Jews by burning in the Middle Ages when Jews were accused of purposely spreading the Black Death. It is hate that forced untold numbers of Jews during the Inquisition to abandon their religion at the threat of immolation. It is hate that forced Jews into the Pale of Settlement in Eastern Europe to “cleanse” them from the rest of Europe. And it is hate that culimnated in the horrid auto-da-fe of the holocaust where half the world’s Jews died horribly at the hands of the Nazis.

This happened not because of what Jews had done but simply because they were Jews. That is anti-Semitism.

As I said above, you and I can debate our differing views of Middle East history until kingdom come. It would make an informed argument. You argue your position very well. I try to state the case as I see it. But it will not change “the facts on the ground” (as the current term of art is used): the existance of Israel, the needs and desires of the Palestinians, the position of the other Arab states and of Iran.

So, what do we do? Do we continue fighting with more and more powerful weapons until there is nothing but empty radioactive sand from Tel Aviv to Tehran? Or, do we accept that peace requires real negotiation and negotiation requires compromise on both sides?  I have repeatedly asked for people to discuss the possibilities for peace, and repeatedly received more one-sided history lessons in reply.

OK I submit, we are not going to agree on history. So how do we solve this without blowing up a chunk of the world?

Decampe:

I accept that negotiation is the most beneficial way to resolve this.  The problem is that both parties should want to negotiate.  Therein lies the rub, so to speak.

Both parties must perceive some gain from negotiation versus war: the party that can get everything it wants by force does not want, or need, negotiation.  And Israel has a monopoly on overwhelming force.  It takes what it wants, and even when it “negotiates,” it dictates rather than negotiates in good faith, using the rejection of such dictation as further excuse for more war.

The Palestinians (or Hezbollah for that matter) do not have nuclear weapons, tanks, aircraft, submarines and $4 Billion+ in military aid from the US.  Israeli aggression and barbarism has forced the militarily weak to engage in assymetrical warfare (guerrilla and terror tactics), that will deprive the overwhelmingly powerful of both security and peace of mind, in an effort to level the playing field, so that BOTH parties, not just the weak, will want and benefit from, negotiation rather than force.  Based on prior Israeli behavior, this will likely continue.

Decampe:

I also share your analysis of the horrible consequences of anti-semitism.  How many question, with the same vigor, the anti-muslim hatred currently in vogue? 

Many of the posts here are nothing but anti-muslim tirades rather than a discussion of issues (much like Bush analyses of the issues, with the proviso that I am not painting anyone here with the horrid/putrid Bush brush).

I do not engage in such tirades. I respect Islam and Muslims who practice it. But I am intensely wary of those who use their religion (some fundamentalist Christians,some radical Islamists, and even some Jews) as a cudgel against others.

In the US for a whole variety of reasons (anger at Al Qaeda among the ones most prominent), Muslims are facing hate and persecution that they have not experienced before., at least not at such an intensity. For a country that pretends to be the moral conscience of the world, that’s despicable.  As I said, I have been active on the front line of liberal causes for decades, putting not just my words, but my body as well in the line of fire to protect worker’s rights, and the rights of the downtrodden and dispossesed. I do not tolerate such bigotry, not here in the US, not in the Middle East.

I know it seems we are poles apart on the Middle East. But ultimately this will be settled not by war but by compromise and acceptable accommodation.

That means we have to honestly lay our positions out and honestly agree to listen to each other, really listen and not just argue over who is right.

I think we’ve made a little bit of a start on the forum and the effect of failure is so awful that I think we have to keep going.

Decampe and Dizz,

Why don’t you wake up. Both the ICJ and an Israeli High Court have declared the Wall a violation of international law as is the occupation itself. Even the US Juror on the ICJ, himself a Jew, concurred with the other jurors’ opinions but dissented on technical grounds.  The wall has rendered the economy of the West Bank unviable by all accounts. It has usurped over one sixth of the land much of it arable land just for security purposes itself. The discontuguities created has made doing business and travel impossible on any reasonable basis. This has been shown over and again. This has stranded thousands of Palestinians between the Green Line and the Wall itself effectively confiscating their land. The Israeli land grab has resulted in immeasurable suffering as have the countless checkpoints which have resulted in a number of deaths due to delays for those seeking emergency medical treatment.  The occupation of 3million people is an abomination and the world knows it! Just stop defending thus shit.

In 2002, 22 members of the Arab League offered Israel an unprecedented offer of total normalization of relations with an acceptible Israeli offer on 1948 refugees in return for withdrawl to the pre-1967 armistice lines . Israel refused to even consider it.  Israel refuses to make any meaningful concessions due to unconditional US support for Israeli colonialism.  The wall has created an external dependency by making the Palestinian economy unviable.  Palestinian laborers continue to rely on the Israeli job market, mostly for construction jobs, even as Israel is trying to replace them with European and other foreign immigrants.  The control of the West Bank by Israel is an endeavor to unilaterlaly determine the final status of the conflict. Palestinian violence is legitimate resistance to this oppression.  The Israelis need to leave the West Bank unconditionally taking the settlements with them.  Only then will there be justice and hence peace. Israeli colonial rule in the occupied territories is the only obstical.

OK, so now cabdriverinchicago’s cards are on the table: he says Israel must unconditionally depart from the West Bank.

(I’m not going to argue the issue of the wall either way. Israel saw it as a ugly but necessary solution to constant inflitration, clearly the Palestinians revile it. But the issue may be moot anyway as the thrust of attack seems to have shifted to indirect fire from rockets etc.)

The settlements in the West Bank have been a central point of debate for a long time. If Israel did unconditionally leave what reciprical guarantees would they get that peace (meaning no suicide bombers and no katushas) would come?

Does anybody else think this is the solution?

decampe:

Thanks for the props.  Hang in there man, don’t give up the good fight.  Someday most of these people will be mugged by reality and hopefully they’ll notice!

Imran:

Oh sure...Hezbollah the big, bad organization to which all powers are impotent.  Let me clue you in jackass, if Israel REALLY wanted to get down with them, they would have.  Olmert is weak and ineffectual, Bibi would have really “tuned them up.” The airpower only approach was a loser from the start against the dug in.  What they needed were 30,000 troops, flamethrowers to clear out those little rat holes and many checkpoints south of the Litani.  I have absolutely no doubt that it is very doable, especially after cutting off their Syrian supply line.  Alas, there will be another round