<p>BTW:
The analogy to the Northern Ireland troubles is inapt. The IRA was not part of the government of the Republic of Ireland, nor were they receiving financial support from the Irish government. No need to bomb Dublin. And the IRA did bomb London. But that is getting off topic.</p>
<p>Okay, so morally, killing Lebonese civilians is okay occording to Bolten</p>
<p>sked to comment on the deaths in an Israeli air strike of eight Canadian citizens in southern Lebanon Sunday, he said: “it is a matter of great concern to us …that these civilian deaths are occurring. It’s a tragedy.”</p>
<p>“I think it would be a mistake to ascribe moral equivalence to civilians who die as the direct result of malicious terrorist acts,” he added, while defending as “self-defense” Israel’s military action, which has had “the tragic and unfortunate consequence of civilian deaths”.</p>
<p>So the dead Canadians familiies should be grateful they were bombed and blown to bits for a moral cause…</p>
<p>The idea that any kind of death of innocent civilians who have done nothing wrong is somehow moral is appalling</p>
<p>During WW!!, I am sure we killed innocent people in the name of war, but how can that be called moral…</p>
<p>To be the deaths of people who did nothing wrong could ever be called moral, but guess I have different standards and have a different value on lives then some, no matter what plot of land they are on</p>
<p>My point was that having some sense of restraint was a good thing. The IRA was part of the Irish GOVERNMENT for years…yeppers
The English showed restraint, so did the irish Government, we sent in admbassodors, but here, nadda, guess Condi is going when its the right time, whatever that means</p>
<p>Yup. The Israeli acts were not ‘malicious’. They just can’t aim too good. It’s those American rockets - just don’t shoot straight. </p>
<p>“If democracy continues in Israel, ever so slowly the Knesset would become more and more Arab, less and less Jewish.”</p>
<p>It’s why Israel doesn’t have a constitution.</p>
<p>I found this essay interesting and thought others might as well. This jumped out at me and I wonder if it is true. Food for thought anyway:</p>
<p>“It must be remembered that to this day, few Palestinians have any idea that in 2000 the United States and Israel offered a comprehensive negotiated solution including an independent Palestinian state in all of Gaza, most or all of the West Bank, and much of east Jerusalem, including sovereignty over the Al-Aqsa mosque.”</p>
<p><a href=“http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2006/issue2/jv10no2a9.html[/url]”>http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2006/issue2/jv10no2a9.html</a></p>
<p>gla posts: "Bolton quote: “It’s simply not the same thing to say that it’s the same act to deliberately target innocent civilians, to desire their deaths, to fire rockets and use explosive devices or kidnapping versus the sad and highly unfortunate consequences of self-defense,” Bolton noted.</p>
<p>You may agree or disagree, but he did not say that Lebanese lives were less valuable than Israelis. And saying that most Palestinians are angry and radical is not the same as saying they are terrorists."</p>
<p>Are these examples of some on the left’s fondness for the concept of “fake but accurate?”</p>
<p>If you think killing people in wartime is immoral, so be it. If you think there is no distinction between deliberatly killing civilians and the accidental killing of civilians in a war zone, I will not try to change your mind.
I assume you are not trying to justify Bin Laden, but to try and understand why he is killing innocent people (in revenge for U.S. actions in the world?). Hitler was trying to defend Germans in the Sudetenland. And Daniel Pearl was killed because his mother was a Jew. As Jean Renoir said, ‘The tragedy of life is everybody has their reasons’</p>
<p>Everyone knows that Canadians are terrorists, anyway. (As I remember, the recent episode of civilian murder was started by one group capturing another’s SOLDIERS? Or am I missing something.)</p>
<p>If the Israelis aren’t targeting civilians when well-directed missiles slam into apartment buildings, exactly who are they targeting?</p>
<p>Few American Jews, but virtually all Israelis are aware that Palestinian governments have on three occasions offered complete recognition of the state of Israel once a Palestinian state is established. Without such a state, there doesn’t exist a state (a tautology) that could recognize Israel if it wanted to.</p>
<p>Accidental? Guess bominb bridges with cars on them are accidents, bombing house with people sleeping, oopssy!!!</p>
<p>So carelessness is also forgiven…</p>
<p>And hey, good thing Snow has a clue huh!!!</p>
<p>There is a distiction for the attackers, but to those being attacked in their homes, who is to say who is the aggressor?</p>
<p>IF you are just minding your own business, and perhaps even voted against the leadership, to think your death is not “even” with another’s, well guess that would be okay with you</p>
<p>BinLaden killed thousands of Americans, we have killed thousnad of Iraqs, are we morally superier in the deaths of people, children, who did us no harm</p>
<p>14000 Iraqs killed this year onour watch</p>
<p>I have heard that reasoning from my Palestinian friend, who also says recognition of Israel comes last, after they get their state. Of course, this doesn’t make any sense to me, since without the Palestinian recognition of Israel, with whom should the Israelis negotiate and make that state? With people who don’t believe they should exist? Who believe that all of the land is theirs? Who believes they should be obliterated?</p>
<p>Doesn’t sound like strong basis for negotiation, and if their goal is to get the state, recognition can’t wait.</p>
<p>OK, CGM. Israelis are trying to kill Canadians. I am not sure why, but I’ll have to take your word for it. Do you feel the murder of your children is morally equivalent to the putting to death of a Bin Laden? How many of the 14k Iraqis killed ‘on our watch’ were the victims of suicide bombers? Is it the same to have someone killed ‘on your watch’ as to slice their head from their shoulders?
I think we do make moral distinctions based on motivation all the time. A drunk driver who kills someone is not heald to the same level of culpability as a psycho who sneaks into your house and murders your children. I guess we can say that both victims are dead and don’t care why they were killed, but we don’t.
War is horrific. I am not trying to justify it. But their is no way that Israel could or would allow Hezbollah to introduce longer range missiles that could reach Haifa or Tel Aviv. And Hezbollah does not store its arsenal at an army base, but in residential neighborhoods.
When Israel withdrew from Southern Lebanon part of the agreement was to disarm Hezbollah. To the contrary, the Lebanese government is unable or unwilling to control Hezbollah.
What would you suggest the Israeli response should be?</p>
<p>I consider myself a liberal, a progressive, but on the topic of Israel, progressives part ranks. </p>
<p>Gla’s question is a good one. What should Israel do? Diplomacy, concessions, doing nothing, have not halted the suicide bombers and rocket launchers. There are hostile nations on all sides of Israel, who regularly use Israel hate rhetoric in their media and as part of their national identity. The rockets continued, even after the negotiated departure from Lebanon in 2000. And from Gaza, the first night after withdrawal.</p>
<p>What SHOULD Israel do…aside from wait to be annhilated? And negotiate with whom? A side that doesn’t feel she exists?</p>
<p>No negotiations with terrorists. Israel must fight till the bad guys are no more.</p>
<p>“What SHOULD Israel do?”</p>
<p>Try something really bold: Announce willingness to withdraw to 1967 borders <em>if</em> the right conditions are met; they might not even know what the conditions are now. The response from neighbors would determine the next steps.</p>
<p>I think announcing that you will give up your only bargaining chip (withdrawal to pre 1967 borders) before the start of negotiations is self defeating. Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon has been met with what? Aggression brought on by the feeling that Israel is ‘weak’.
This is a very long-lasting problem that does not allow simplistic ‘silver bullet’ solutions. Nor is dividing up the players into ‘good guys’ vs. ‘bad guys’ help.
Israel made a grave mistake by expanding into the occupied territories after 1967. Moving out now will be very difficult and would be the source of serious domestic strife, perhaps even civil war. Until the Palestinians give up the hope of destroying the state of Israel it is impossible.
The actions of Hezbollah go beyond fighting for Palestine. To the same extent that Israel is a U.S. client state, Hezbollah must answer to Iran and Syria. That is to say, the conflict is not just local, but reflects wider geopolitical concerns.
The U.S. occupation of Iraq, and our one sided support for Israel has only complicated the situation. Can you imagine Bush bringing together Abbas and Olmert in the U.S. for negotiations?</p>
<p>"What SHOULD Israel do…aside from wait to be annhilated? And negotiate with whom? A side that doesn’t feel she exists? "</p>
<p>Oh, quit with that nonsense. A nation backed to the hilt by the greatest military power in the history of the world, one which has more military might in the Middle East than all the countries from Egypt to Pakistan combined, and then some, has an awful lot of options, if it wanted to pursue them. Their rockets come from the U.S., their airplanes come from the U.S., their jet fuel comes from the U.S., and if they enjoy being a proxy for the U.S. they shouldn’t be surprised when they are viewed as a U.S. proxy. And the catastrophic occupation of Iraq has made that a particularly bad position to be in.</p>
<p>Suicide bombing is just a tactic, just like any other. They use the weapons they have at their disposal. If Israel wants to target apartment buildings filled with women and children because they can, and can manage to hit them with their U.S.-made weapons, all well and good, but it is hardly the moral high ground for a country without a constitution.</p>
<p>Nothing - not negotiations, not accords, not concessions - has prevented the West Bank from being turned into a bunch of Bantustans, with schools and clinics bulldozed and walled off. I expect we’ll see - within 5 years - that the Israeli Arabs are next.</p>
<p>Hezbollah’s a bunch of bad guys. Lots of bad guys in the world. If you want to choke 'em off, you’ve gotta make 'em look like a bunch of jerks to the people who would otherwise support 'em. Killing Canadians, I’m afraid, doesn’t cut it.</p>
<p>From the The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas’ Charter)</p>
<p>"Article Eleven:</p>
<p>The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day."</p>
<p>Please clarify why you think a return to 1967 borders will appease a movement that has the above as a fundamental aim.</p>
<p>Mini:
The fact that Israel is a U.S. client state doesn’t mean it shouldn’t fear for its survival. Of course it is the most well armed state in the Middle East. It is outnumbered by hostile neighbors almost 50:1.
The fact that Israel has no constitution is a red herring. Neither does the UK, Canada or New Zealand.
Suicide bombing is a tactic. So is nuclear war. So is mass rape. So are chemical and biological weapons. We try to make some distinctions, albeit usually grotesque, but there you have it. If all tactics are equivalent then so be it.
By making Hezbollah look bad to the people who support them do you mean the Iranian Holocaust deniers or the Syrian facists, or?
Do you not think that Hezbollah rockets are stored in residential neighborhoods? </p>
<p>
Nor have terror attacks against civilians.</p>
<p>Israel should respond the same way that the US responded toward Russia in the Cold War. No concessions till they radically alter their way of life. What’s happening now is just not working.</p>
<p>I read a very telling article about how when Israel left the gaza, the infastructure that Israel left was more or less destroyed, green houses, other public works buildings etc. </p>
<p>Also, can someone explain why a terrorist group has 13k rockets? They aren’t even a nation state!</p>
<p>Please note that I didn’t say withdraw. Announcing a willingness to talk about withdrawal is just the first step in a long dialog, with endless details to be worked out, including security guarantees by many countries, including the US and Europe. Hezbollah and Hamas must be disarmed and their charters repudiated (e.g., by referendum). Withdrawal would begin only after <em>Israel</em> is satisfied with conditions; nothing would be imposed. But the effect of the announcement alone would be profound. If the effort fails, it’s back to the status quo, endless fighting forever.</p>