<p>We have completely lost our sense of pragmatism and a focus on long-term goals. Was Israel in the “right” for responding to Hezbollah? Of course. But in doing so the way they did, they are uniting the Arab and Muslim world in a way that that never could have been achieved before. Their goal of “wiping out Hezbollah” obviously cannot be achieved via this response since they are actually creating more support for them. We have the same situation in Iraq: by what we are doing in the name of a war on terrorists, we are creating terrorists faster than we can destroy them. Does not anyone in either the Israeli or US administraions see that?</p>
<p>I know a lot of people who would rather be “right” than happy and will destroy relationships because they would not accept anything other than absolute “My-way-or-the-highway” results. And that’s what we have for an administration today (“with us or against us”). Does not anyone see that the best security for Israel in the long run is an economically stable Lebanon? What good does it do in the long run to destroy bridges and power plants and airports and other infrastructure and generally bombing a population back to “the stone age?” It breeds further discontent and more radicalism. That result is well-forseen. Is that what is best for Israel? Is it best for the US to have every Arab and Muslim state in the world anti-American?</p>
<p>I am not “pro-Palestinian.” Terrorism (e.g., shooting Katyusha rockets into civilian populations) is abhorrant to me. But the pragmatic, long-term solution is for coexistance with economically viable neighbors. The root cause of these conflicts between Israel and Palestinians (and their neighbors) seems to me to be a mentality of victimization on the part of the Palestinians. This war is doing nothing about that, and is actually fueling that Palestinian view.</p>
<p>Your argument against such a strong reprisal, i feel of all of them makes the most sense logically and it would work between democratic countries, however the middle east isnt logical, and the gov’ts and terrorist orginizations of arab countries DO NOT care AT ALL about their citizens. The problem with what you said is that this israeli attack is not what will unite the arab terrorists. It is israel’s existance that unites them. Let me give you this example rockets from hezbullah have so far killed 2 arab children when they landed in nazareth, an arab town. Now, most israeli arabs kept silent about that, but the ones that were vocal all blamed israel for hezbullahs attack. Here is another example last summer israel pulled out of every inch of gaza. Logically, this should bring peace. Israel makes an overture and the palestinian arabs respond with one of their own, however that was not the case. Gaza just became an even greater terror base. The day Israel finished its pullout rockets started to land in Sderot. This continued for a year until it culminated with the murder of 2 soldiers and kidnapping of one. In 2000 Israel completely pulled out of lebanon. Again, hoping for peace, however Hezbullah saw this as weakness and it also stepped up its attacks. There are plenty examples of this happening and each time any peace overture by the Jews is exploited as a weakness. Maybe the common arab doesnt really care either way if israel is there or not, but those in charge, those ideologically brainwashed from birth do care and they will do everything they can to destroy israel. Its not about a small parcel of land its about the people living there.</p>
<p>What are our (USA) long-term goals? With regard to the Middle East, they should be the same as Israel’s: long-term, peaceful coexistence without terrorism.</p>
<p>So both nations should ask themselves two questions:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Is this achievable?</p></li>
<li><p>If so, what is the best path to that goal?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>We ALL assume it is achievable (at least that’s a stated assumption). So just ask: Is a destabilized and economically ruined Iraq and a destabilized and economically ruined Lebanon (and potentially a destabilized Iran and a destabilized Syria) the way to achieve that goal? The answer seems so obvious…</p>
<p>Replying to ski’s valid point above: This seems to indicate that the assumption number 1 above is NOT achievable. If that is the case, what are we do do? Wreak our revenge and wait for Armageddon? </p>
<p>We all agree that the problems seem insumountable. It’s the word “seem” in the previous sentence that holds out at least a sliver of hope.</p>
<p>sure if u phrase it that way, however, non-democratic or non-free governments often appear to be economically and politcally stable bc of such harsh rule but they really arent. Lebanon was no more stable then than it is now despite the heavy hits it took to its infrastructure. Iran is likewise a very unstable and weakened country. Prior to the destruction of the soviet union many liberals in america said that the SU is far from falling, its economy is strong and running. The NYT often featured articles about how we should co-exist with the SU bc its a strong super power but the fact was that the country was weak and crippled bc the people were completely demoralized and its government led to a very crippled economy (that appeared strong from the outside) My belief is the only way to win the war on terror and create peace is war. A war similar to WWII. In 1942 would you have called for peace bc an unstable germany and japan are worse for the world than a stable one (1930’- a very weak germany) War solved the problem. No one belied that japan could become modernized and it was to ingrained in their religion to ever think they will live a different way than they lived then. Now japan is a great and prospering country. The middle east isnt about stability and logic. Its about an unfounded hate. The same hate that rippled through europe against jews in 30’s/40’s. The only way to stop it is war followed by a slow generational “backing-off” from hate against israel. This will take a hell of a long time but it will be much more effective that giving the arabs everything they want so they can build up their terror weapons even more and attack again.</p>
<p>But Skis, you are clearly intelligent enough to understand that traditional warfare doesn’t work in guerilla situations. In past world wars, we have fought an enemy with a state. Americans and Israelis and western powers know how to fight a traditional enemy with traditional methods, not an ever increasing group of cells and terrorists all over the globe. You can’t “stamp them out” As fast as you kill them, more join up. Such is the nature of this enemy.</p>
<p>Clearly, bombing the heck out of Lebanon has not in any way quelled Hezbollah’s mission. And, in fact, it has emboldened all of the Arab world, even the more “moderate” Muslim nations, who now all stand behind Hezbollah.</p>
<p>I concur that there is a serious risk from Islamic terrorists. But traditional warfare, which you are championing Skis, has sure not turned out to be successful in doing anything but making ALL the Arabs and Muslims, as well as the rest of the world, aside from the US, hate Israel. Not the way to go, especially when anti-Semitism is on the rise world-wide.</p>
<p>Here’s my solution to end terrorism: bomb every inch of terrorist territory, including Syria, Iran, Lebanon, and whoever else. Just like we did in WWII with Japan. And how did that end? Victory!</p>
<p>Tripperian, your wet dream may become a reality yet.</p>
<p>And considering that there are probably cells all over North and South America, Europe, Asia and Africa, we may just have to nuke the whole world and start over.</p>
<p>Well, that’s one way to end the problem…I just don’t happen to have that kind of a death wish.</p>
<p>Well again, what u are saying isnt true. Israelis strike did not embolden the arab world, israels existance emboldened the arab world. This war started in 1948 this is merely just a continuation of israels war of independance. Also i do not see why this warfare wont work against terrorism. It sure as hell worked earlier for Israel. In 2002, Ariel Sharon launched Operation Devensive Shield in Judea and Shomrom. This was fierce house to house urban war fare against terrorists who hid amongst their own. There was often times no way of distinguishing terrorist from some plain innocent bystander. The operation was successful. In addition to collecting vast amounts of intelligence, the Israelis managed to wipe out a good amount of the terro infrastructure. This cause a drop in terror. And so Sharon continued his methods most loosely modeled after this operation. Coupled with targeted assasinations and and airstrikes from helicopter gun ships terrorism dropped drastically from 2000 to 2004. In this case warfare worked. Let me take you back now some 20 yrs. In the 70’s and early 80’s the PLO, then in Lebanon, did the same things Hezbullah is doing now. There was roughly 15000-18000 members of PLO in Lebanon. (There are about 2000-3000 Hezbullah terrorists rite now). The PLO began a massive artillery barrage of the Gallilee, very similar to what is going on now. However, the Israeli army managed to push out PLO and send them all the way to Tunisia. The fact is that warfare works. Especially when all else fails. And trust me everything else has failed. I find this a very interesting quote - “If the Arabs put down there weapons there will be no more violence, If the Israelies put down there weapons there will be no more Israel”</p>
<p>I think it captures the essence of this conflict. And if you dont believe it, I can provide you with every example in the world. Just take last summers disengagement from gaza and the subsequent terror emmenating from gaza</p>