Quick Explanation
Can anyone remind me why Israel is getting international condemnation for accidentally killing civilians? The Geneva Convention states that when an enemy hides behind a civilian population they bear the full responsibility for the deaths of those civilians. Beyond that, Hezbollah, per the United Nations does not have the right to be an armed group. They are, in this case, double-ly wrong, both acting as an illegitimate army AND purposefully hiding amoung civilians, thereby ensuring civilian casualties.
And yet, the international community criticizes Israel?!? The world, right now, quite simply, sucks.
Update: And Hezbollah knows it, which makes it even worse. It also promises to continue....but hey, why don't we face facts: there are lots of people an organizations who benefit from terrorism and the misery it causes, ie rogue governments, news media, disgruntled members of society.
4 comments:
If you look at the history of Israel and the rest of the world - especially the UN's reaction to Israel in the past 30 years, you will see the same thing over and over...repeated condemnation for all acts of self-defense. Simply called anti-Semitism. How else would the Holocaust have happened...why do Jews send so much money to Israel, why do they defend Israel - because they don't want to experience another Holocaust, which is what is brewing in the Arab world, very much supported by their European friends who condemn Israel. In addition, many in the Palestinian/Arab world have become very talented at staging their victimhood - just like the fiction they called the "Jenin massacre" and most newstories that show decimated houses that house terrorists and children they hide behind. And might we even add staged corpses! The list goes on and on. There is plenty dirty laundry where that came from.
On a smaller yet very significant scale, did you hear about Mel Gibson!
People just don't like the Jews. I think Kofi Anan is not far from Mel.
"only wars that can be won are defensible"
this is an absurd comment for a couple reasons a) no one gets in a war they think they are going to lose b) no one knows the outcome of a war before it takes place, so how can anyone plausibly defend a war based upon it's outcome before the outcome has occurred c) if this were true, any loser of a war would be unjustified in fighting? so poland was unjustified for fighting the nazis because they couldn't win? the koreans and chinese were unjustified in fighting the japanese because they couldn't win? hunh?
i could go on, but what's behind all this sentiment is an obsession with a definitive outcome that can be defined beforehand. but the world doesn't work this way.
change occurs as a result of taking calculated risks with various possible outcomes...big changes occur when big risks are taken.
it's one thing to argue that israel's strategy might not work. that is a fair position to take. it's like saying the south made a poor tactical decision at ghettysberg to try pickett's charge. it's completely another to say they aren't justified in fighting and yes "accidentally" killing civilians - because they aren't doing it as a matter of policy, but as a reaction to their enemies policy of using civilian's as shields.
To in anyway blame Israel for such a choice, in this specific case, is wrong.
lastly, with respect to the article's matrix of popularity vs. the right...i'm not sure how to measure this notion of world wide opinion or popularity, particularly in the arab world. but it seems to me whatever we say or do, there is this constant threat of "alienating" the arab world. so every policy we enact supposedly is going to drop our image in the arab world, but according to all those making the threats, our image is so low, it doesn't seem to matter to me. you can't go down from hatred. there is no "negative" popularity. so forgive me, if I've long ago run out of patience trying to please someone who thinks 2+2=5.
so i say - fuck em. our popularity in this region is not based upon what we do, but based upon a set of lies propagated by illegitimate governments, islamic fascists, and fantasy ideologists. if we were to eliminate israel and bend over and convert to islam, they'd find some reason to hate us, or disbelieve us, so long as their countries are miserable backwaters of progress.
in the absense of any better ideas, i'm happy to cheer on israel to see them take out as much of hezbollah as possible.
and let me say this to further add to my point. i don't imagine that I will ever NOT support a war against Islamic Fascism or any form of fascism. the only thing i can imagine not supporting is a tactic in this war...but i'm going to have to be shown, pretty clearly, that a tactic isn't working before i'm willing to criticize it.
i favor us style democracy in the region because i see no other long term option for the region. if we continue down the pre-9/11 path the only difference will be that at some point in the future a rogue regime or terrorist organization will get their hands on bigger, badder weapons. and that, incidentally, is exactly what's happened in lebanon this past couple of weeks.
with respect to positive aspects of israeli policy, if nothing else, sending a message to iran and hamas and all the others who would like to keep pecking away, that there is going to be a big cost to doing so. also, for the strategic side, making bold, surprising moves throws off the other players in their calculus.
anyhow, as always, i'm open to listening alternative ideas about how to handle hezbollah, iraq, and the rest of the mess in the mideast...and yet it's still the same tired old things - what is being done won't work for X, Y, and Z reason. I challenge opponents of these actions to talk about ideas that will work...
i'd like to see some evidence that al queda has benefitted from the US invading iraq or that hezbollah has gained from israel attacking lebanon. i think it's a rather debateable claim to make and arguments can be made either way. further, i think you're giving them almost too much credit to think that their violence is much more than an end in itself.
and i don't really understand this position that we should calibrate realism with idealism and it'll slowly but surely get rid of islamic radicalism.
the big problem with islamic radicalism is that no one wants to do the dirty work of killing them and putting them in their place. in lebanon, for instance, most lebanese hate hezbollah, but for some reason, can't muster the courage to do anything about it. worse, i suspect, is that a lot of lebanese secretly like the fact that hezbollah exists as an example of a force that the IDF cannot just wipe off the map.
same goes for al queda. i think most arabs despise al queda, but secretly like that they oppose the west and israel and act as a "back up" if things don't go their way - they can always become super radicalized.
these groups exists because everyday arabs can't decide whether they want to live peaceably with their neighbors and integrate into the modern world or whether they should hold onto age old grievences and oppose perceived cultural imperialism.
this indecisiveness about how to handle islamic radicalism (on the one hand, they like to use the radicalism as a bargaining chip - stick with us, or else, you'll have to deal with these fanatics vs. man, these guys are really nuts), has pushed the hand of the west and israel to do something about it.
the moderate arabs and the islamicists both benefit from a divided west on how to handle the situation. it relieves the arab countries of their responsibility to control armed groups attacking other countries AND it allows the islamic groups to continue to operate against a divided foe.
but whatever. i had a long discussion about israel and palestine and all that bullshit the other night. yes, it's a complicated issue, but i believe it has a simple solution. one must accept that israel, as a country, has a right to exist. the palestinians have to accept it. if not, they can expect and have perpetual war....which as far as i can tell, has not benefitted them. but if they can get over that hump, the rest is negotiation....and the same applies to lebanon and all the rest of the countries in the region.
so long as the arabs cannot accept israel has a right to exist, they will live in poverty and continue to feel humiliated. but that is their choice, not ours or anyone else's.
Post a Comment