DAMASCUS, Syria — At the onset of the Lebanese crisis, Arab governments, starting with Saudi Arabia, slammed Hezbollah for recklessly provoking a war, providing what the United States and Israel took as a wink and a nod to continue the fight.
Now, with hundreds of Lebanese dead and Hezbollah holding out against the vaunted Israeli military for 15 days, the tide of public opinion across the Arab world is surging behind the organization, transforming the Shiite group’s leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, into a folk hero and forcing a change in official statements.
The Saudi royal family and King Abdullah II of Jordan, who were initially more worried about the rising power of Shiite Iran, Hezbollah’s main sponsor, are scrambling to distance themselves from Washington.
An outpouring of newspaper columns, cartoons, blogs and public poetry readings have showered praise on Hezbollah while attacking the United States and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for trumpeting American plans for a “new Middle East†that they say has led only to violence and repression.
Yep. Hezbollah's on the run all right. They're in the last throes. Pretty soon it's gonna be "Mission Accomplished."
How can you eliminate terrorism, without elimination the root cause of the problem, the contigous two state solution to the Palestian conflict.
As for the UN deaths, let them join the others that have died for the Zionist cause as collatoral damage. That is the price of interferance.
Reshaping the Middle East in the name of "freedom and democracy" is a road filled with blood and death. The answer is clearly bombs bursting in air, as the ramparts we watch so gallently stream over the hills of first Lebanon, then Syria, then Iran.
Only when the rockets red glare reveals the American flag flying over Tehran, will the blood lust to control the Middle East be satisfied. Revenge will be fulfilled.
Ender I know I can count on you to cheer that day, to celebrate in the streets. Given the current climate of promoting fear, and mocking compassion leads to no other conclusion than endless graves, and millions of newly created war refugees.
You see no other course. I disagree. I say Ceasefire. You say no way. Revenge not appeasement. Death for Peace.
Yet the voice of fear is shrill and constant. All the Faux News experts agree. The Captain and his minions spread the word. All the right experts agree.
There is only one conclusion.
The terrorists are coming. The terrorists are coming. We must spread democracy to eliminate the terrorists. We will spread democracy with each death. However many it takes.
We shall export our American revolution with a glorious reshaping of the Middle East in our image of democracy. After all we must outsource our patriotism to Israel. They are only defending themselves. There is no other choice. It is, you would say, our war.
There is another way. But you will not hear of it. The tears flow on both sides.
The sorrow, the perpetual hate.
This could have been stopped, but this is what those who are the rulers of this country, the crusaders, consider success.
Military analysts, former senior Israeli officers and soldiers say the mounting casualties in a still-small ground war are rooted in Israel's scant battlefield intelligence, the challenge of operating in civilian areas and the skill of Hizbullah fighters armed with weapons far more advanced than anything many young soldiers here have seen. For example, they said, Hizbullah has been using laser-guided antitank missiles ...
"Obviously it's more difficult than what was anticipated," said Yossi Alpher, a former official of Mossad, the Israeli intelligence service, who once ran the Jaffe Center for Strategic Studies at Tel Aviv University. "I dare say, based on what we've seen so far, these may be the best Arab troops we've ever faced."
the UN may have been more in the wrong than they're admitting - not the UN people on the ground, but their superiors who knew about the bombing long before it became fatal.
If you can handle dailykos diaries that you don't consider rabidly anti-semitic, then check out this analysis and discussion of the UN's response and exchanges in the week leading up to the tragedy.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
what bothers me more, Ender, you're constant whine about everyone's motivation other than your own or your fellow travelers, or the fact that you just don't seem to give a crap about anyone except your fellow travelers?
I'm reminded of a joke (not a good one, I'm afraid, but telling) which I saw on Orcinus. I include it below:
Two South Texas farmers, Jim and Bob, are sitting at their favorite bar, drinking beer. Jim turns to Bob and says, "You know, I'm tired of going through life without an education. Tomorrow I think I'll go to the community college, and sign up for some classes."
Bob thinks it's a good idea, and the two leave.
The next day, Jim goes down to the college and meets Dean of Admissions, who signs him up for the four basic classes: Math, English, History, and Logic.
"Logic?" Jim says. "What's that?"
The dean says, "I'll show you. Do you own a weed eater?"
"Yeah."
"Then logically speaking, because you own a weedeater, I think that you would have a yard."
"That's true, I do have a yard."
"I'm not done," the dean says. "Because you have a yard, I think logically that you would have a house."
"Yes, I do have a house." "And because you have a house, I think that you might logically have a family."
"Yes, I have a family."
"I'm not done yet. Because you have a family, then logically you must have a wife."
"And because you have a wife, then logic tells me you must be a heterosexual."
"I am a heterosexual. That's amazing, you were able to find out all of that because I have a weed eater."
Excited to take the class now, Jim shakes the Dean's hand and leaves to go meet Bob at the bar.
He tells Bob about his classes, how he signed up for Math, English, History, and Logic.
"Logic?" Bob says, "What's that?"
Jim says, "I'll show you. Do you have a weed eater?"
"No."
"Then you're a queer."
This is the logic applied to just about every situation by you and your fellow travelers. It comes down to "if you disagree with my first premise, you must be...(fill in the blank: usually a traitor, against Israel, hate America, what have you).
What you continue to miss with your simplistic thinking is that the situation is more complicated than that.
that I can't locate anything in my post about the motivations of those who might disagree with me... So did you bring that up just to make a generic statement about me?
Of course the situation is complicated. I try to avoid implying any such things that you've listed about people here. Unless it's quite obvious.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
at the incredible hostility on dkos to uncovering such facts about UN and Hezbollah. Reading that is almost like being in a twilight zone where most people are hoping that the information is not true and that Israel deliberately, for 7 days, was trying to destroy that UN building and kill those poor peacekeepers. UN and Annan have almost become idols that can do no wrong to those people and any criticism or accusations are met with well... there are tons of diaries there that illustrate my point including this one.
Thanks for the good link.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I see two users on that entire thread who got a little angry with the rhetoric, but the rest of the 200 comments on there range from agreement to polite and analytical disagreement. Don't see 'incredible hostility' where there isn't any.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
towards Kofi Annan. You malign his motivation every time you write about him and the UN. Am I to believe that this animosity at Annan and the UN doesn't spring from your blind belief in your cause?
The UN may in fact not be as effective as we would like, but until you or your fellow travelers can come up with something even slightly better, perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt. Criticize when they have done something wrong; praise when they have done something right. It appears to me that all you ever do is criticize them. (And the snarky repsone will be something like: well, when have they ever done anything right :-). Yes, I am able to anticipate your resaoning, God save me).
that was a corollary to Enders post. The Ottowa Citizen more or less confirmed Hezbollah's tactics. From a liberal point of view, it'd been nice if the IDF had told the UN guys to evacuate, but that probably would've tipped off the Hezbollah fighters.
As far a pico's link, c'mon Ender, that is nothing compared to what we see over a Redstate every day, just the other side of the coin. Most people are somewhere between the two.
I don't have a problem with Hezbollah or Hamas as charities or political parties. I do have a problem with charities or political parties possessing private militias. Just imagine if that occurred here in the US.
The answer? A stronger Lebanese government that could actually hold and control their own territory. A willingness for all parties to finally settle their border issues, and a willingness for Israel to permit the refugees to come back. That last one will never happen, I realize. But that's the one that is needed most to settle the broader Islam vs the world conflict.
it's the fact that despite all those conclusions people still blamed Israel with bogus suggestions that Israel should not have fired on the position regardless. Face it, for many people there Israel is always wrong no matter what because it defends itself with force instead of strongly worded letters.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
for the Lebanese government to handle the situation now, and it certainly hasn't attempted to handle the situation in the last 6 years. So any solution that involves them patrolling their own border and controlling their own territory is out because they've proven complete inability to do so.
That could be answer for the future when Hezbollah is gone both militarily and from their government.
In the meantime there are only two solutions. Israel occupies the southern part of Lebanon in perpetuity until Lebanon proves that its independent troops can move in and take over. Or the more likely scenario is foreign combat troops move in and physically control southern Lebanon, preventing Hezbollah from moving back in and confronting them with force if they try. It is clear that Israel will not settle for less and Lebanon, having about 0 leverage in this fight, will not be involved in the final settlement.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
in giving impotent organizations that have consistently proven their impotence any benefit of the doubt.
The UN may in fact not be as effective as we would like, but until you or your fellow travelers can come up with something even slightly better, perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt.
Sorry but that's not how it works. If we have no worldwide organization that is better than UN, and the UN itself is worthless, it does not mean we keep turning to UN for solutions in the mean time. Do you think that the vast majority of deals and diplomacy that US does is done through the framework and full approval of UN? It's an impotent cover with no ability to solve world crises.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
maybe it was not as pronounced in this diary because they had to concentrate on UN being used as shields but I've been seeing about 15-20 diaries a day over there that are exceedingly (80-90%) anti-Israel.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Obviously, you seem to believe so. But again, I think this is a rather simplistic view. There are many things the UN does that are not only worthwhile but effective as well. To simply denounce the organization out of hand because it cannot bring Peace to the world ( since it relies on member states for peace-keeping and peace-keeping forces as well as the permanent members of the Security Council having veto power without recourse to majority vote) is to ignore the improtant work that it does do.
Your position on the UN is like your position on everything else you post about: Rightwing talking points without a bit of independent thinking behind it.
If you're going to spout nonsense, at least let it be your own nonsense. This isn't a personal attack; it's just an observation.
Comments :
Israel is in over its head
NY Times:
Yep. Hezbollah's on the run all right. They're in the last throes. Pretty soon it's gonna be "Mission Accomplished."
qui tacet consentire
Terrorism
How can you eliminate terrorism, without elimination the root cause of the problem, the contigous two state solution to the Palestian conflict.
As for the UN deaths, let them join the others that have died for the Zionist cause as collatoral damage. That is the price of interferance.
Reshaping the Middle East in the name of "freedom and democracy" is a road filled with blood and death. The answer is clearly bombs bursting in air, as the ramparts we watch so gallently stream over the hills of first Lebanon, then Syria, then Iran.
Only when the rockets red glare reveals the American flag flying over Tehran, will the blood lust to control the Middle East be satisfied. Revenge will be fulfilled.
Ender I know I can count on you to cheer that day, to celebrate in the streets. Given the current climate of promoting fear, and mocking compassion leads to no other conclusion than endless graves, and millions of newly created war refugees.
You see no other course. I disagree. I say Ceasefire. You say no way. Revenge not appeasement. Death for Peace.
Yet the voice of fear is shrill and constant. All the Faux News experts agree. The Captain and his minions spread the word. All the right experts agree.
There is only one conclusion.
The terrorists are coming. The terrorists are coming. We must spread democracy to eliminate the terrorists. We will spread democracy with each death. However many it takes.
We shall export our American revolution with a glorious reshaping of the Middle East in our image of democracy. After all we must outsource our patriotism to Israel. They are only defending themselves. There is no other choice. It is, you would say, our war.
There is another way. But you will not hear of it. The tears flow on both sides.
The sorrow, the perpetual hate.
This could have been stopped, but this is what those who are the rulers of this country, the crusaders, consider success.
I'm only half stupid
Yep, all is well
Victory is at hand:
http://www.csmonitor...
qui tacet consentire
Actually,
the UN may have been more in the wrong than they're admitting - not the UN people on the ground, but their superiors who knew about the bombing long before it became fatal.
If you can handle dailykos diaries that you don't consider rabidly anti-semitic, then check out this analysis and discussion
of the UN's response and exchanges in the week leading up to the tragedy.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
I'm not sure...
what bothers me more, Ender, you're constant whine about everyone's motivation other than your own or your fellow travelers, or the fact that you just don't seem to give a crap about anyone except your fellow travelers?
I'm reminded of a joke (not a good one, I'm afraid, but telling) which I saw on Orcinus. I include it below:
This is the logic applied to just about every situation by you and your fellow travelers. It comes down to "if you disagree with my first premise, you must be...(fill in the blank: usually a traitor, against Israel, hate America, what have you).
What you continue to miss with your simplistic thinking is that the situation is more complicated than that.
The problem is
that I can't locate anything in my post about the motivations of those who might disagree with me... So did you bring that up just to make a generic statement about me?
Of course the situation is complicated. I try to avoid implying any such things that you've listed about people here. Unless it's quite obvious.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I'll check it out n/t
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Good link (nt)
Come, my friends. 'Tis not too late to seek a newer world -- Tennyson
I am amused... well not terribly so
at the incredible hostility on dkos to uncovering such facts about UN and Hezbollah. Reading that is almost like being in a twilight zone where most people are hoping that the information is not true and that Israel deliberately, for 7 days, was trying to destroy that UN building and kill those poor peacekeepers. UN and Annan have almost become idols that can do no wrong to those people and any criticism or accusations are met with well... there are tons of diaries there that illustrate my point including this one.
Thanks for the good link.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Where do you see incredible hostility?
I see two users on that entire thread who got a little angry with the rhetoric, but the rest of the 200 comments on there range from agreement to polite and analytical disagreement. Don't see 'incredible hostility' where there isn't any.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
You seem to have a great deal of hostility...
towards Kofi Annan. You malign his motivation every time you write about him and the UN. Am I to believe that this animosity at Annan and the UN doesn't spring from your blind belief in your cause?
The UN may in fact not be as effective as we would like, but until you or your fellow travelers can come up with something even slightly better, perhaps we should give them the benefit of the doubt. Criticize when they have done something wrong; praise when they have done something right. It appears to me that all you ever do is criticize them. (And the snarky repsone will be something like: well, when have they ever done anything right :-). Yes, I am able to anticipate your resaoning, God save me).
Yea, I just read the link in Talking Points Memo
that was a corollary to Enders post. The Ottowa Citizen
more or less confirmed Hezbollah's tactics. From a liberal point of view, it'd been nice if the IDF had told the UN guys to evacuate, but that probably would've tipped off the Hezbollah fighters.
As far a pico's link, c'mon Ender, that is nothing compared to what we see over a Redstate every day, just the other side of the coin. Most people are somewhere between the two.
I don't have a problem with Hezbollah or Hamas as charities or political parties. I do have a problem with charities or political parties possessing private militias. Just imagine if that occurred here in the US.
The answer? A stronger Lebanese government that could actually hold and control their own territory. A willingness for all parties to finally settle their border issues, and a willingness for Israel to permit the refugees to come back. That last one will never happen, I realize. But that's the one that is needed most to settle the broader Islam vs the world conflict.
yea, I'm singing Kumbaya again, I know.
That was a good joke (n/t)
it wasn't just people getting angry
it's the fact that despite all those conclusions people still blamed Israel with bogus suggestions that Israel should not have fired on the position regardless. Face it, for many people there Israel is always wrong no matter what because it defends itself with force instead of strongly worded letters.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
there is no way
for the Lebanese government to handle the situation now, and it certainly hasn't attempted to handle the situation in the last 6 years. So any solution that involves them patrolling their own border and controlling their own territory is out because they've proven complete inability to do so.
That could be answer for the future when Hezbollah is gone both militarily and from their government.
In the meantime there are only two solutions. Israel occupies the southern part of Lebanon in perpetuity until Lebanon proves that its independent troops can move in and take over. Or the more likely scenario is foreign combat troops move in and physically control southern Lebanon, preventing Hezbollah from moving back in and confronting them with force if they try. It is clear that Israel will not settle for less and Lebanon, having about 0 leverage in this fight, will not be involved in the final settlement.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
I am not interested
in giving impotent organizations that have consistently proven their impotence any benefit of the doubt.
Sorry but that's not how it works. If we have no worldwide organization that is better than UN, and the UN itself is worthless, it does not mean we keep turning to UN for solutions in the mean time. Do you think that the vast majority of deals and diplomacy that US does is done through the framework and full approval of UN? It's an impotent cover with no ability to solve world crises.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Yes there were,
and there were people who said it was the UN's fault, and there were people who said it was no one's fault, etc.
but Israeli-blaming was by far not the dominant attitude of discussion. This is another cherry-picked critique of the left.
Saint, n. A dead sinner revised and edited. - Ambrose Bierce
sorry but
maybe it was not as pronounced in this diary because they had to concentrate on UN being used as shields but I've been seeing about 15-20 diaries a day over there that are exceedingly (80-90%) anti-Israel.
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Is the UN worthless?
Obviously, you seem to believe so. But again, I think this is a rather simplistic view. There are many things the UN does that are not only worthwhile but effective as well. To simply denounce the organization out of hand because it cannot bring Peace to the world ( since it relies on member states for peace-keeping and peace-keeping forces as well as the permanent members of the Security Council having veto power without recourse to majority vote) is to ignore the improtant work that it does do.
Your position on the UN is like your position on everything else you post about: Rightwing talking points without a bit of independent thinking behind it.
If you're going to spout nonsense, at least let it be your own nonsense. This isn't a personal attack; it's just an observation.
if you say so n/t
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR
Yep.
That joke was pretty funny.
A politician is an arse upon which everyone has sat except a man -- e e cummings
yes it was :) n/t
"To discuss evil in a manner implying neutrality, is to sanction it." AR