Have you heard of the April Understanding? I suppose that you haven't, since you seem very ignorant and highly ideological about the whole conflict. Israel and Hizbullah entered into this understanding in 1996, agreeing to not retalliate against civilians on the other side as part of their military skirmishes. Every single Hizbullah rocket fired into Israel since then has been in response to preceding Israeli attack on Lebanese civilians--what you call "recon work." Don't rant and rave or talk about self-defence--just check it out. Or is that too much work? It is easier to just have an opinion without verifying it? Certainly it is easier on your ideological worldview to not bother too much with facts.

FYI, my friend, as per the April Understanding, Israel should have retalliated against military targets after the Hizbullah capture of the Israeli solldiers. Israel, not Hizbullah, broke the understanding. Israel attacked Lebanese civilians, which was followed by Hizbullah attacks against civilians in Israel. You say that if Israel really wanted to kill civilians, there'd be lots more of them dead. 1,000 in a month is not enough for you?

Israel's military and Hizbullah are both aware--although you are not--that skirmishes have been constantly ongoing for the past several years. Israel's military is aware--although you are not--that the April Understanding made it impermissible for them to bomb civilian targets. They just simply didn't give a damn. Fine. But for some ignoramus to come along and lecture about how Hizbullah broke the peace, Hizbullah is responsible for all deaths, Hizbullah intentionally did this and that is just ridiculous.

Your callous attitude towards the death of Lebanese civilians and the constant talk of self-defence is just silly Really, it is silly. Read a source, any source. Then think about it. THEN write about it. 

 

I cannot understand why it is so important to people to propagate their views when these views are based on nothing but trick knees and political prejudice.

 First, Israel's "recon work" has consisted of shooting shepherds, firing at fishing boats and killing several fishermen, bombing power stations, scaring the people of Beirut and other cities by breaking the sound barrier right over their heads. This is not recon, this is designed to terrorize and intimidate. UNIFIL reports put Israeli violations at just under 600 and Hizbullah violations at just over 100. Interesingly, if you bother with reading the sources before you lecture, almost every single Hizbullah violation was immediately preceded by Israeli violations.

That you either have no clue about the nature of Hizbullah, or simply don't care about the facts, is clear from the rest of your message. Hizbullah receives arms and political support from Iran and that makes the organization, you say, an Iranian militia. This is such nonsense. That they receive outside support does not make them foreign agents. That makes the allies and partners of Iran, sure, but Hizbullah has its own agenda for Lebanon.  

Your claim that the Hizbullah munitions are intended to kil and injure civilians is, yet again, utterly ignorant. Moreover, to claim that Hizbullah is guilty of war crimes after Israel has pulverized an entire country, killed in excess of 1,000 civilians and crippled and injured many thousands more in order to show who's boss tells us something about your moral compass.

Your lecturing style would be welcome if you actually knew something, anything.

Friends:

Comments such the one I've just referenced are smears.  (In case anyone wonders why I don't engage with their authors.  Either here or elsewhere.)

Incidentally, the practice has been greatly facilitated by the anonymity which web-based venues such as the present one make possible.

David Peterson
Chicago

 

Every month since the Israeli withdrawal in May 2000, the Lebanese UN ambassador has turned in a monthly report to the Secretary General in which he details the preceding month's Israeli violations of Lebanese territory, complains about them, and urges the international community to take action. Every month. Yet not once has the Security Council seen fit to act on this.

Also, it may interest you all that Nabih Berri is the speaker of the Lebanese parliament, not a government minister.

And better do it quick, before Tibetan culture completely disappears and wiped of the face of the earth...

I dont have a digified answer to your post. something is wrong with you. I hope your anger does not disturb your digestive system.. If I was you Id seek help from tibetan doctors and go consult a dalai lama..

I do not hate Arabs/Muslims. I was never taught so. I was taught tolerance and respect toward fellow man and women (and now as a parent I am teaching my kids also to respect the environment and animals) I believe in "live and let live" and "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man" again, including respect for the environment and animal rights, not just human rights. However, I DO resent their culture/religion for preaching hatred and intolerance towards others. I DO resent their culture/religion for the treatment of their own women. I DO resent that in the name of their religion the Iranians sent thousands of children to clear mine fields when they were fighting the Iraqis. I DO resent that in the name of their particular sect of Islam they are fighting and killing each other, i.e. Lebanese civil war in the 70's, Iraq/Iran war (also felt the same about the IRA in Ireland) so go ahead and call me a bigot for that. The root of the problem between Jews/Muslims is that the arabs/muslims are raised from infancy to hate the Jews. just listen to the songs that are taught in their kindergartens and schools, or read their textbooks, and compare to the songs the Israeli kids are singing, or their textbooks. or listen to the sermons given by their "religious" leaders. (sorry, I as I wrote above, have no respect/tolerance for a religion that preaches hatred/killing/jihad etc) or read their Koran and what it preaches about spreading of Islam, treatment of non-muslims, or even the treatment of their own women. Israel will never give up its right to exist. Jews will never allow themselves to be slaughtered again. as happened in the Hebron massacre of 1929, earlier pogroms in Europe, the Holocaust, etc. Which is what the Iranians just declared they want to do, and will do once they have nuclear weapons. So as I see it, the cycle of violence will only end when the arabs/muslims accept the right of Israel to coexist with them. Then Israel will not have a need to defend itself, destroying and killing civilians in the process, i.e. being the big bad villain you love to hate so much. Isn't this exactly my "cute" and "bigoted" statement said: Arab lay down their arms there will be no more violence. Jews lay down their arms there will be no more Jews. However, I do not think that either of the above will ever happen in our generation, and possibly the next. If I could do anything, this is what I'll do: I'll stop the cycle at its root, I'll re-educate their entire culture, this will require very drastic means, most of which are not "civilized" and are against "human rights" and the "live and let live" principles which I firmly believe in. but I see no other choice, do you?

kelvin, If you are considering moving to Iran, tell me I move with you.. i think it would be nice helping Iranians by contributing leftist ideology to their cultures.. seriously i wouldnt mind Cuba as long as Fidel is there... ( wow david, the archives you pullout the shelves!) cyrano

 Kelvin:

  For thousands of years, we Jews have been nourished and sustained by a yearning for our historic land. I, like many others, was raised with a deep conviction that the day would never come when we would have to relinquish parts of the land of our forefathers. I believed, and to this day still believe, in our people's eternal and historic right to this entire land. 
  But I also believe that dreams alone will not quiet the guns that have fired unceasingly for nearly a hundred years. Dreams alone will not enable us to preserve a secure democratic Jewish state.
  ---- Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, addressing a joint session of the U.S. Congress on May 24, 2006.  ("Address by PM Olmert to Joint Meeting of U.S. Congress," Prime Minister's Office, May 24, 2006.)

Whatever else they betray, Olmert's remarks here---and he may as well have been quoting Pope Urban II---have the virtue of candor.  Behind Operation Summer Rain (against the Israeli Occupied Palestinian Territories) and Operation Change of Direction (against Lebanon---now advertised to be on the verge of serious escalation) lie the long-term objective of Greater Israel. 

"It is Lebanon, not Israel, that faces a threat to its existence in this war," Ahmad Samih Khalidi, The Guardian, August 10, 2006

David Peterson
Chicago

 

  

 

Kelvin - I presume you live in the west. Why? US/UK/israel is after all a terrorist state as you say, deliberately targetting civilians as their goal. Go help Arab/Persian unity (isn't there a civil war in Iraq between Shiite & Sunni? More arabs have been killed by arabs in Iraq than all the people killed by israel in Lebanon) I guess this "unity" is just aroung the corner. Oh let me guess, if israel did not exist this unity would come. By the way, Hezbollah captured 2 Israelis inside Israeli territory combined with rocket attacks on civilian towns, a war crime. The UN/White House/G8 and numerous newspapers I can link you to all agree. You believe that they were captured in lebanon as part of a foraying unit. I guess Hezbollah TV is your source of information which further adds to my argument that you should move to these countries. You can then celebrate the 1973 victory of the Arabs over Israel (yes, this is still celebreated, kind of Orwellian, don't you think?). Please move out and challenge the state terrorism you decry. I am sure your life will be better somewhere else.

Posted by Kelvin Yearwood:

On UK television last night there was a leaflet read out that had fallen from an Israeli plane onto a Lebanese town following a bombing raid by Israeli planes on the same town shortly before. The leaflet said blame Hizbollah for the bombings, presumably for all the infant deaths, funeral cortege deaths etc as a result of Israel-dropped/US-manufactured bombs.

Israel, which is squeezing Palestinians into ever tighter separate cantons, unviable as an independent nation; Israel that made hundreds of illegal forays into the Lebanon and kidnapped 2 civilians from the Gaza strip before the 2 Israeli soldiers (part of the illegal foraying unit) were kidnapped; Israel injected with billions of US dollars for its beligerent role of undermining Arab/Persian unity, development and independence (all threats to US corporate power in the region) this Israel is 'defending itself'!

These are truly Orwellian times. Murdering hundreds of Lebanese civilians, driving hundreds of thousands off of their land and devastating their lives, this is for the longterm peace! And the invading Israel, at the very worst, will withdraw to its borders while the Lebanon is considered duty-bound to maintain the peace!

When I listen to or read Israeli apologists, it is like being enveloped by an intellectual, emotional and moral vaccuum. The defence of the illegal state of Israel (58 years of progressive occupation of people's land) is paramount. Who was that biblical king who had all the male babies killed to preserve his status and piece of mind? It seems to be something of a metaphor now for the nature of the Israeli state - oppressive, narcissistic, maintenance and extension of power for a hyper-inflated egotism.

This axis of state-terrorism - US/UK/Israel - needs to be challenged. The US public needs to wake up to its state's support for Israel.

Why was Israel in Lebanon prior to 2000? Because Lebanon was the launching pad for numerous terrorist attacks (do I need to refer you to the killing of civilians, school children in Maalot, Nahariya?). Do you deny that after Jordan kicked out the Palestinians in 1970 (also for causing mayhem and havoc in Jordan) they went into Lebanon to attack Israel?

Israel left in 2000 cleanly, and did not attack thereafter. The so called "violations" of Lebanese territory are completely unproven; only complaints to the UN by Lebanon (but of course this is good enough for you, if the Arab side complains it is true no other evidence or fact checking needed...just like the claim to Shabaa farms). However, I am sure there were violations, namely recon, mostly from the air. If this is a justification for war, then every country in the world would be at war due to recon missions by another country. You also conveniently do not mention that the violations by Hezbollah during the same time period include rocket attacks on civilian towns, a WAR CRIME under any definition.

ADMIT that hezbollah started this conflict with a rocket attack on civilian towns in Israel in addition to capturing soldiers. Whatever "violations" Israel may have possibly done, if any, are you saying this justifies war crimes. And don't try to deny that Hezbollah did not fire rockets on July 12th to start this conflict. I can link you to a dozen news sources (Ny times, london times, white house press release, tony blair speech not to mention Haaretz and Jeruslam Post and more).

We all know that the UN resolutions are a joke. For the record, it the Arabs accepted the partition plan of 1947/48, all these wars would never have happened. In this partition plan, Israel was granted 13% of Mandatory Palestine (yes, don't forget to include Jordan in the British palestine mandate, if you deny this check any history on the subject). This is for the record.

"Left or Right, Israelis Are Pro-War," Steven Erlanger, New York Times, August 9, 2006 

New York Times
HOSTILITIES IN THE MIDEAST: SOLIDARITY
Left or Right, Israelis Are Pro-War
August 9, 2006
By STEVEN ERLANGER; Greg Myre contributed reporting for this article.

JERUSALEM, Aug. 8 -- As Israel's war with Hezbollah finishes a fourth difficult week, domestic criticism of its prosecution is growing. Yet there is a paradoxical effect as well: the harder the war has been, the more the public wants it to proceed. The criticism is not that the war is going on, but that it is going poorly. The public wants the army to hit Hezbollah harder, so it will not threaten Israel again. And while Israelis are upset with how Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has run the war, they seem to agree with what he told aides this week -- that given the weaponry and competence of Hezbollah and the damage already done to Israel, ''I thank God the confrontation came now, because with every year their arsenal would have grown.'' Abroad, Israel is criticized for having overreacted and for causing disproportionate damage to Lebanon and its civilian population and even for indiscriminate bombing. But within Israel, the sense is nearly universal that unlike its invasion of Lebanon in 1982, this war is a matter of survival, not choice, and its legitimacy is unquestioned. Even the bulk of the Israeli left feels that way. There is no real peace camp in Israel right now, says Yariv Oppenheimer, the secretary general of Peace Now, which has pressed hard for a deal with the Palestinians and on June 22, before this Lebanon war, called for a halt to air raids over the Gaza Strip. ''We're a left-wing Zionist movement, and we believe that Israel has the legitimate right to defend itself,'' Mr. Oppenheimer said. ''We're not pacifists. Unlike in Gaza or the West Bank, Israel isn't occupying Lebanese territory or trying to control the lives of Lebanese. The only occupier there is Hezbollah, and Israel is trying to defend itself.'' In the daily newspaper Haaretz, a cartoon satirized the group, showing a Peace Now advocate, balding with a ponytail, in a coffee shop saying, ''It won't end until we wipe Beirut off the map.'' After the war, Mr. Olmert and his defense minister, Amir Peretz, will face hard questioning, particularly from the center-right, about why there was such an early and naive dependence on air power and why the ground war began so tentatively, especially in the face of so many rocket attacks on northern cities. But as the fighting against Hezbollah has proved difficult and hazardous, most Israelis have come to believe that it is important to press ahead with the war and try to secure a visibly successful outcome rather than risk leaving Hezbollah emboldened enough to threaten Israel again. Ehud Yaari, an Arab affairs analyst with Israeli Channel 2, sees popular opinion reflected in his mother. He is from Metulla, in northern Israel. His mother, 85, grew up in southern Lebanon and knows it well, and knows what it is like to be shelled. ''She calls me all the time to ask me how come the army is still having a fistfight with Hezbollah in places 500 meters from the border,'' Mr. Yaari said. ''I think she's very typical. There is a feeling that Olmert was right to respond with force on July 12, but he should now do it properly, and that the harder it is, the more important it is to continue it, so Hezbollah can't regroup and rebuild themselves.'' With the diplomacy so unclear, and no end to the fighting in easy sight, the Israeli government sees the best chance of a conclusion favorable to Israel, and to the government's political reputation, coming from aggressively moving farther northward into Lebanon to try to reduce Hezbollah's ability to fire its extensive stockpile of short-range rockets at Israeli civilians. Continuing blows to Hezbollah will inevitably weaken it further, the Israelis feel, and make it more likely to bow to international pressure to allow a robust multinational force to patrol Lebanon south of the Litani River and prevent Hezbollah from regrouping there. Mr. Oppenheimer of Peace Now said the only dispute in his group was over timing and tactics. Some feel Israel hit Lebanon's infrastructure too hard in the beginning, trying to punish Lebanon to hurt Hezbollah, and in the process hurt too many civilians, he said, but now the army has shifted its sights more directly at Hezbollah. The real debate, he said, ''is whether this is the right time to stop the fighting and get a good agreement that accomplishes our goals, or do we have to keep hitting Hezbollah harder in order to get a good agreement.'' In this debate, too, he said, Peace Now ''is together with the mainstream of Israelis.'' On Wednesday, he said, Peace Now will publish an advertisement -- not calling on the government to stop the war, but to ''take seriously'' the new Lebanese offer to deploy its army to the south. Similarly, Yossi Beilin, the leader of the dovish Meretz Party, said the left must hold to the principle that the Jewish people have the right to ''a democratic and secure state.'' In an opinion column in Haaretz, he wrote that the war in both Gaza and Lebanon to secure the release of captured Israeli soldiers is legitimate, ''but that is not reason enough to support all aspects of the war,'' including the government's falling ''into the trap set by Hezbollah of an extended war of attrition.'' Once the war is over, Mr. Beilin said, ''the right will turn against the government, because they'll say the army didn't go far enough. But a big land operation could push us into a long battle that will be very costly.'' There have been weekly demonstrations against the war from smaller, more pacifist groups, but they have rarely drawn more than a few hundred supporters. Yaron Ezrahi, an Israeli political scientist, sees two other reasons for strong popular support for the war. After years of seeing its army deployed to occupy the West Bank, ''pride in Israel's people's army has been eroded because of the checkpoints, the shooting of civilians, the confrontation with women and children,'' he said. ''Suddenly you have a war against an unambiguous enemy and the army is defending the Israeli public.'' Second, he said, Israelis see Hezbollah as a proxy for Iran, which wants to destroy Israel. ''It's unifying,'' he said. ''People see it intuitively as part of the war against Iran.'' The fiercest critics of Mr. Olmert and Mr. Peretz, the head of the Labor Party, have come from the right, especially from the Likud Party that Ariel Sharon and Mr. Olmert left behind when they formed Kadima, now the ruling party. The Likud leader, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been a loyal supporter of the government and the war, but most expect him to be scathing about the government's performance after the conflict is over. But there are even strong murmurings within Kadima that neither Mr. Olmert nor Mr. Peretz was experienced enough in security matters to ask the military leaders tough questions about war plans, especially given a chief of staff who is, for the first time in Israel's history, from the air force, and a chief of military intelligence also from the air force. Gerald M. Steinberg, who directs the Program on Conflict Management at Bar-Ilan University, says Mr. Olmert and Mr. Peretz have been badly damaged. ''This is not the disaster of the Yom Kippur war'' in 1973, when Golda Meir was pushed out of office after Israel was judged to have been taken by surprise, he said. ''But there is a strong sense of hesitation, of the lack of military leadership needed in times like this.'' Once the war is over, Mr. Steinberg said, regardless now of the outcome, ''there will be investigations, and serious questions in Parliament and out, and you could have some defections from the current government.'' Yuval Steinitz of Likud, head of the parliamentary subcommittee for defense preparedness, is already loaded for bear. ''Doubts?'' he asked. ''That's an understatement. People are talking of failure. ''The bombardment of Israeli cities was supposed to be over after 48 hours. The fact that only now the government is ready to even start the real ground campaign is overwhelming.'' Israeli defense doctrine, formulated by Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, is that tiny Israel should immediately carry the fighting ''deep into enemy territory to protect its civilian rear,'' Mr. Steinitz said. ''This didn't happen, and against who? Hezbollah, which is the size of a Syrian division without any air defense. So what would we do against Syria?'' Dan Schueftan, deputy director of the National Security Studies Center at the University of Haifa, said that ''what will determine Olmert's future is not one good or bad day, but the outcome and how it affects the larger issues.'' ''It's not just rooting out Hezbollah,'' he said. ''The real issue is Iran and the nuclearization of Iran.''

The diplomacy at the end is crucial. ''Olmert comes out well if at the end of this, the United States, France and Egypt will have greater sway over the Lebanese government than Hezbollah,'' Mr. Schueftan said. ''If Iran and Syria can no longer use Hezbollah as a proxy, Olmert comes out well.''

 

Friend:

You've provided a weblink to "Dear Brethren, the War with Israel Is Over," by Yousseff Ibrahim, which originally was published in the July 7 New York Sun (i.e., five days prior to the latest Israeli onslaught against Lebanon), and is here archived by the Scholars For Peace in the Middle East website.

You also raised the fundamental issues of bigotry and hatred.

You depicted Hezbollah as a menace of truly sinister dimensions.  Though clearly not in the eyes of the inhabitants of Lebanon, some 70 percent of whom told the Beirut Center for Research and Information between July 24 and July 26 that they supported Hezbollah's capture of Israeli Defense Forces soldiers as a way of forcing the Israeli Government to release the Lebanese nationals that it holds in prison.  (Denominationally, levels of support expressed by this admittedly limited wartime survey broke down into 96.3 percent of the Shiite respondents, 73.1 percent of the Sunni, 54.7 percent of the Christians, and 40.1 percent of the Druze.)  Overall, 87 percent of the respondents said they supported Hezbollah's resistance to Israel.  "This poll shows there is national support for the resistance across all sects," concluded the Center's director Abdo Saad-Ghorayeb.

Besides, are you cognizant of the scale of people illegally held by Israel?  See the entry for "Israel" in the International Committee of the Red Cross's Annual Report 2005, June 1, 2006.  Especially p. 313, col. 3.  There you will find the Red Cross reports having visited not less than 12,192 of the people illegally detained by Israel in 2005.  Of which only 11,200 were Palestinian nationals.

You mention the crucial matter of the “daily number of missiles landing in Israel….”  And you state that, “Compared to that, Israel is being very light handed.  Too much so in my opinion.”

But are you cognizant of the cumulative scale of the Israeli assaults on Lebanon?  As Human Rights Watch's Peter Bouckaert wrote in the International Herald Tribune ("For Israel, innocent civilians are fair game," August 3): 

Not only has Israel failed to distinguish between military and civilian targets; its own officials suggest that they have decided any civilian still in the south is fair game. Last week, Justice Minister Haim Ramon reportedly said, ''All those now in south Lebanon are terrorists who are related in some way to Hezbollah.''

 (Also see Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks against Civilians in Lebanon, Peter Bouckaert and Nadim Houry, Human Rights Watch, August 3, 2006.)

How about in the cumulative scale of the IDF-violence across the rest of the immediate region?  (The situation in the Middle East, including the Palestinian question (S/PV.5472), UN Security Council, June 21, 2006; and Briefing by Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Ibrahim Gambari (SC/8760), June 21, 2006.)

You also mention that, “All this destruction [and] all this suffering, on both sides, would have never happened if the Arabs just accepted the right of Israel to exist.”

Like I said near the outset: You raised the fundamental issues of bigotry and hatred.

But then what did you do with them?

David Peterson
Chicago 

I do not think so. have you read/listened to any of the songs being taught to children in both cultures? have you looked at textbooks from both cultures? have you read the Koran? do you know what it teaches about non-muslims? about spreading Islam? what about Islam treatment of women? have you ever tried to imagine the entire world ruled under Islamic law? Now, I have no problem with anyone practicing their religion however they see fit, as long as they practice "live and let live", i.e. respect other humans/the environment/animal rights etc, But when it comes to a religion preaching hatred, killing, beheadings, jihad, etc. I have a little bit of a problem with it... Why do you think the Hizbollah amassed tens of thousands of missiles? Why do you think they stored them under mosques, hospitals, and civilian houses? Do you know that the "mosque under construction" was built on top of one of the largest, most fortified bunkers/war rooms ever built? so much so, that it required several bombing waves and it is still not completely destroyed? Are you aware that the daily number of missiles landing in Israel is more than four time as many as were lobed by the Germans on England? and do you recall what the allied forces did to the German cities in retaliation? or the Japanese cities? and the German/Japanese civilians did not hide missiles in their houses... Compare to that, Israel is being very light handed. Too much so in my opinion. All this destruction all this suffering, on both sides, would have never happened if the arabs just accepted the right of Israel to exist. http://www.spme.net/cgi-bin/articles.cgi?ID=798

Friend:

Let us agree that  “Hezbollah's firing of rockets at civilian towns is a war crime.”  (Or some such crime, whether it be a crime of war, a violation of international humanitarian law, and so on.  Indeed.  I'm sure they are also crimes under Lebanese law.)  What, then, are the Israel Defense Forces' shelling and aerial bombardment of civilians targets within Lebanon—not to mention the Gaza Strip and the West Bank?

Point 1. By the middle of 2000, Israel had withdrawn from Lebanon, and not the other way around.  Correct?  That is to say, Lebanon, never having invaded Israel, and never having maintained an army of military occupation inside Israel did not withdraw from Israel.  Agreed? 

Point 2. UN Security Council resolutions and presidential statements (a very imperfect, lopsided, and indeed unrepresentative sample of opinion globally, by the way, as the Council is constitutionally biased in favor of its Permanent Five Members and, worse, in favor of the Super Permanent One, whose power distorts the Council's record to no end) include expressions of “grave concern” over the “presence of armed militias in Lebanon, which prevent the Lebanese Government from exercising its full sovereignty over all Lebanese territory.”  Right?  And similar phrases repeated many times over the years.   For example, UN Security Council Resolution 1559 (S/RES/1559) “Calls for the disbanding and disarmament of all Lebanese and non-Lebanese militias,” as well as “Supports the extension of the control of the Government of Lebanon over all Lebanese territory….”

Points 3-5 rely too heavily on disinformation to draft a short response.  But—to take certain short-cuts: Since June, 2000, has the Israeli state ever threatened Lebanon's national territory?  Is the Israeli state better armed than the otherwise civilian population and its militia-formations in south Lebanon?  And does the Israeli state receive financial, military, and political support from the United States of America?

Now.  Fast forward to June 24, 2006.  When “IDF special forces entered the southern Gaza Strip before dawn Saturday and captured two Hamas terrorists who were planning an attack in the near future.  Capt. Tal Levram spokesman for the Southern Command called the raid known as ‘Desert Storm a surgical operation' and said no shots were fired in arresting brothers Osama and Mustafa Muamar.  The troops withdrew from the area immediately after the operation the army said.”  ("IDF arrests Hamas members in Gaza," Josh Brannon, Jerusalem Post, June 25.)

Have UN Security Council resolutions and presidential statements, reports of the Secretary-General, and the members of the so-called international community ever stressed or reiterated the critical importance of, and the need to achieve, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East, based on all its relevant resolutions, including 242 (November 22, 1967) and 338 (October 22, 1973)?

Or do some of us enjoy the freedom to pick-and-choose resolutions to meet the needs of the moment?  

David Peterson
Chicago

Friend: 

According to an imperfect (though the best I have) transcript of a July 25 interview over Al Arabiya TV with Lebanon's Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri—a man sometimes referred to as a “de facto negotiator for Hezbollah,” which is generally the way he is portrayed in the English-language media, Berri said:

 

  I would like to ask a question (--inaudible--) emergency forces (--inaudible--) they say that these forces must be placed in Lebanon just for the sake of discussion now - I am not going into details. I just want to tell you about the opening which I wanted to (-- inaudible--).
  I would like to ask a question. Why haven't they (multi- national forces) been placed on the Israeli side?
  Who was violating the Blue Line more?
  I would like to start counting from here, from the year 2000 until now, let's say that the Lebanese violated the line more than 100 times, although it is less than 100. Just before the war the number of violations by the Israelis was 11,782 times - by air, land and sea. I am not talking about the assassination attempts that took place in Sidon and in (--inaudible--).

 Of course I can't vouch for Berri's numbers.  (See, e.g., the third section of "Lebanon War: Question and Answer," Stephen R. Shalom, ZNet, August 7, as well as Shalom's endnote #4, which lists all of the relevant UN documents.  Unfortunately, the hyperlinks don't work.) 

But the main point is the monumental disparity between the scale of the Israeli state's violations of Lebanese national territory over a very long period of time, for which there is a clear and indisputable chain-of-command, on the one hand, and the scale of the Hezbollah violations of Israeli national territory over the same period of time, on the other.   

And as Nabih Berri asks, Why haven't the troops of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL having suffered approx. 80 deaths from live-fire over the years) ever been placed inside Israeli territory?  After all, it was the Israeli state's 1978 invasion of Lebanon that prompted the creation of UNIFIL in the first place.

 

David Peterson
Chicago

 

 

Hezbollah does not attack Israel ---> Israel does not attack Hezbollah which unfortunately is in Lebanon. No attack ---> no suffering for Lebanese. Hezbollah attacked Israel UNPROVOKED with rockets aimed at civilian towns (in ADDITION to capturing two soldiers). What gives them the right to start this WAR CRIME (I guess you will tell me that firing rockets randomly at civilian targets when done by Hezbollah is not a war crime). Sorry, but Israel must defend itself, and sadly and unfortunately civilians get killed. If Israel intentionally targeted civilians there would be 100,000 dead. I see only 100's dead in 4 weeks, maybe 20 a day. All this with 250 F-16s and 10,000 troops? Israel must have a weak army then to only intentionally kill 600 or so Lebanese. ONLY Hezbollah INTENTIONALLY aims to kill Israeli civilians.

Where to start?

Amadinejad has numerous quotes well publicized attacking JEWS not just Israel. If you need references I will show you. I NEVER said criticizing Israel is anti-semitic. I have many complaints about the countries actions. But criticizing ONLY Israel IS anti-semitism. Again, please tell me why dozens of US resolutions against Israel, none against Iran, Russia, China, Turkey -- you even admit they have committed atrocities.

In both 1956 and 1967 Egypt STARTED wars by blocking Israel's only port in the south with warships. After much diplomatic action, and following many threats by Egypt, mobilization, Egypt kicking out UN observers on the Suez, Israel retaliated in 1967. I guess you are going to tell me this is not a serious act of war. I guess if the port of New York were blockaded by Iran (hypothetical), you would say the USA has no right to retaliate. SO DO NOT DENY EGYPT STARTED THESE WARS !!!

Check your history book: there is no dispute that the PALESTINE MANDATE held by the British INCLUDED today's Jordan. Check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_of_Palestine and numerous other primary sources. This fact is conveniently forgotten. The partition plan comprised ONLY 13% OF MANDATORY PALESTINE. The Jews did not get much, so to say the Jews have no right to this sliver is wrong. Israel WAS created by the will of the people, namely the Jews who lived there. Show me where I am wrong here.

When Israel captured the West Bank & Gaza in the DEFENSIVE 1967 war, they offered the territories to the Arabs in return for peace. The response? The famous Khartoum Resolution that said "No Peace with Israel, No Recognition of Israel, No Negotiations with Israel." (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khartoum_Resolution) Do you deny that this happened? Please then explain this Arab rejectionism. Or do the Arabs NEVER get criticized. Oh yes, they have treated Israel so well over the decades, they have really shown peaceful intent.

Oh yes, we also forget that Arafat rejected the Clinton led peace plan which at the last offer gave the Palestinians almost all that they asked for. Yes, of course you are going to tell me that is was not enought and that is why Arafat unleashed terrorism again. EVEN SAUDI ARABIA criticized Arafat for rejecting this plan. I quote Prince Bandar of Saudi Arabia who was assisting Arafat in the negotiations:

"Since 1948, every time we've had something on the table we say no. Then we say yes. When we say yes, it's not on the table anymore. Then we have to deal with something less. Isn't it about time we say yes?" When Bandar learned Arafat had rejected the deal he added: "I hope you remember, sir, what I told you. If we lose this opportunity, it is not going to be a tragedy. This is going to be a crime." READ THIS ARTICLE for more detail: http://www.saudi-us-relations.org/international-relations/prince-bandar.html

So I think you conveniently ignore certain facts to hammer home your one theme: IT IS ALL ISRAEL'S FAULT ALL THE TIME. Has Israel made mistakes? Of course BIG ONES, just like any country. Check your facts and then get back to me.

 

Very cute statement. I wonder how long it took you to think that one up? It is also one of the most blatantly racist and obviously bigotted statements made on these blogs anywhere in my opinion. There are many many things that would prevent an Arab massacre of Jews - chief among which would be the Arabs themselves, if Isra4el truly laid down their arms. But on a more realistic note, no one is asking the Jews to lay down their weapons. They are only being asked to use them strictly for defensive purposes (REALLY defensive purposes, not vicious unprincipled agressision dressed up like defense). Victor http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Apologies for not signing my name. This is Victor and I just submitted the above...

Iamgladtosee, you wrote: it is no wonder that the UN is clearly anti-semitic.. what a stupid statement of yours, listening to you UN delegates wake-up in the morning and condemn Israel because they are Jews and not because they are responsible of atrocities.. many arabs gave Israel the right to exist, take Arafat as example, he was the first one to do so, palestinians are still having less, less than nothing.. i give you a clue about israel democracy ok ? it keep electing terrorists, in many ways they are very similar to hamas (actually hams is better) except Israel benefit of the help of the US war machinery and profiteers. In your opinion its ok for Israel to have help, but no Palestinians because resistance does not help american imperial ambitions in the ME.. What you are doing there , in palestine and lebanon a palestinocide, that is, murdering arabs for zionist supremacy

I just noted that Israel has given advanced warning to all residents of Tyre to cease travelling about as any moving vehicle will now be attacked. I have to say that if they were to give me that warning, I would talk to all my neighbours and make it a point for all of us to spend as much time on the road as possible over the next few days. A city full of moving traffic would be really difficult for Israel to deal with, and would make them look SO foolish if they tried to destroy ALL moving vehicles. What gives them the right to make such an announcment? What gives them the right to bomb wherever they wish? What gives them the right to destroy the entire infrastructure of a country trying its best to survive under a very difficult political situation? What gives Israel the right to displace hundreds of thousands of civilians of another sovereign state leaving them without homes or the means of livelihood? What gives Israel the right to destroy homes and livelihoods at their discretion? How many Israelis have been denied decent jobs and livable wages by Hamas, or Hezbollah or the Palestinians? What gives Israel the right to kill innocent women and children - intentionally? And they do it intentionally in hopes that the people will get so angry with Hezbollah that they will turn against them for the sake of peace - a typical tactic employed by the Dark One as well all over the globe. How many Israeli political prisoners do Hezbollah currently hold without benefit of trial or likelihood of release - 2? How many Hezbollah, Hamas and Palestinian political prisoners do Israel currently hold without benefit of trial or likelihood of future release - thousands! How many Israelis are subject ot arrest without cause in the middle of the night? How many Israelis have to fear that a group of Palestinians will arrive at their door and demand to move in and take over their home without cause? How many Israeli families have been destroyed or permanently separated by Hamas, Palestinians or Hezbollah relative to those by Israel? How many Israeli homes have been bulldozed and the families living there forceably removed by Hamas or Hezbollah or the Palestinians? How many Israelis have been attacked with the murderous cluster bombs which afterward lay about in wait for children to pick them up to play with with? How many Israelis have been attacked with arms made of depleted uranium which cause untold numbers of respiratory diseases, birth defects, leukemia, and who knows how many other permanent ill effects upon the civilian population? How many Israeli homes have been destroyed point blank by a tank? How many Israelis have have been bombed from the skies with 500 lb or larger bombs? How many Israelis have had leaflets dropped from the air warning them upon penalty of life not to travel in their vehicles and purposefully instigating fear in the civilian population? How many Israeli highways have been destroyed? How many airports? How many fuel depots? How many Israelis have had to endure the constant presence of unmanned drones flying over them and spying upon their every movement? How many Israelis have had to fear a sudden and deadly missile attack from an attack helicopter? How many Israelis truly live in fear of an occupation army marching theough their country at will and destroying whomever and whatever they wish with nothing to stop them but a few brave souls who won't bend to their criminal aggression? How many Israelis live in fear of nuclear weapons pointed at their land? How much damage can Hezbollah REALLY inflict upon Israel at any given moment, even with years of planning? It has no mechanised army. It doesn't field thousands upon thousands of the best armed armed soldiers in the world. It doesn't have the most feared Air Force in the world - in fact, it has NO Air Force! It has no navy from whose ships it can launch cruise missiles. In fact, it has no cruise missiles even if it had the navy! Sure it can lob limited range missiles across the border, but these are capable of only limited damage and have caused little injury and loss of life compared to the Israeli armada destroying the country of Lebanon, and armed on a continuing basis by the Dark One. The fact is that the ability of Hamas or Hezbollah or the Palestinians to do deep and lasting damage to Israel is EXTREMELY limited, and consist mainly of suicide bombings and occassional cross border raids. In no way can Hamas or Hezbollah or the Palestinians be considered dangerous enough to destroy Israel or its army or its people or its infrastructure, given the exceeding strength of Israel's defense forces. I'm not minimising the seriousness of losing even one Israeli mother, or child, or father. But you don't totally destroy a neighboring country and instill abject fear in its entire civilian population because SOME of their population continues to be a limited threat. It really doesn't matter WHOSE goddamned fault this whole affair is! You can point fingers at each other all you want. The fact is that what is happening now in Lebanon at the hands of Israel is FAR disproportionate to the crimes committed against them (and, yes, there have been crimes committed on BOTH sides) and the potential for damage that Israel could EVER expect, given its defensive strength, from Lebanon or anyone operating out of Lebanon or Gaza, or Syria, or Iran, or any other country! Israel - CEASE FIRE! GO HOME! Let those poor people put their lives back together. And get out of Gaza! Take your grievances to the UN for God's sake! Frankly, I see the Dark One here behind the scenes here. Out of one corner of his mouth he asks for a ceasefire. Out of the other side he asks Israel how many more bombs do they need and how quickly.

Israel never ended their occupation in Gaza. Israel is attempting to use the troop pullout to delegitimate others' grievances against them, but in actuality the injustice in Gaza persists, and this is the cause of violence. Shalom's new Q and A answers this claim.

The problem is with the political state of Israel, not with Judaism. Anti-Israel is not anti-Jew, so please get off it. These are two issues. Several things prove this. One, historically Jews fared much better living with Muslims than with the Europeans. Two, I think Egypt's withdrawal from the Israeli-Arab conflict, even though it was very damaging to the Palestinian cause, has shown these are political considerations, not a mindless hatred of all things Jewish. If it was just racism you would expect them to never give up the campaign to eliminate all Jews. Three, Iran has Jewish communities that have not been wiped out, despite Amadinijad's heated rhetoric. His problem is with Israel. And Hamas' refusal to recognize Israel is not a pragmatic plan to wipe out Israel, for which they have no ability to do so, but rather a political statement about Israel. Four, you have to separate out the anti-semitism that arises from a Jewish state carrying out a brutal, unjust occupation and war and that which is pre-existing and supposedly unchangeable. In other words, even current levels of anti-Semitism are brought about by Israel, not by Jews as Jews. Israel's actions have only increased anti-Semitic racism. If you had any real concern about anti-Semitism you would address this cause of it. Your scare tactics, convincing Jews they are only safe in Israel, exacerbates the problem. Israel has been a total disaster for Jews and their interests.

Last, it is unreasonable to think that the Arabs and Palestinians should have accepted the partition plan. The simple fact is that Israel was created against the will of the people who lived there, and that's why they were driven out and refugees not allowed to return. Only in hindsight, after watching 60 years of continuing Israeli aggression, does this proposal seem like a good deal. And Israel did not get 13%, it was 55% of Mandatory Palestine, this when their claim to anything (as a state) was nill. You cannot say that Palestinians should have accepted Jordan and use that to dilute what Israel took. They took what they took. Jordan is not Palestine.

Only the '73 war gives an example of Arabs attacking Israel. And even then it was after Israel rejected Egypt's peace plan, and they only attacked the occupied territories in the Sinai and Golan Heights.

This stuff isn't a mystery. Stop blocking the creation of an independent viable palestinian state, stop holding prisoners, stop violating Lebanese sovereignty, give the Shebaa farms back (which israel has NO claim to), give up maps to the minefields, and you will end the violence. This is in everyone's interest (except those intent on seeing Israel's racist colonial state expand).

Well I am glad to see others condemn other nations, you will admit that the UN does not have such a good record doing so, you will admit that Israel is condemned dozens of times while Russia, China and Turkey have NEVER been condemned. With 50+ muslim nations and sympathizers, it is no wonder that the UN is clearly anti-semitic.

I NEVER said Palestinian Arabs have no claim to the land. BOTH JEWS AND ARABS have a legitimate claim to the land. The partition plan by the UN was voted on 33 to 13 (10 abstentions), and the arab nations even proposed to query the International Court of Justice on the competence of the General Assembly to partition teh country and lost. The partition plan was as legitimate as it gets, and the Arabs side clearly rejected it.

Note that the part granted to Israel comprised only 13% of mandatory Palestine (don't forget Jordan, which was part of the original Palestine mandate, included in the Balfour declaration, and handed out to the Arabs, comprising about 77% of Palestine). My point is I strongly believe Palestinians have a claim to the land, but so do Jews. There was a good plan put in place to split the land, rejected by Arabs, and they have been trying to destroy Israel ever since, starting wars in 1956, 1967 (before West Bank and Gaza were occupied, so these wars had nothing to do with occupation), 1973.

Yes, Stern Gang may have contacted the Nazis to fight the British but this was a fringe group disavowed by the Jewish Agency leadership. If you know the story of the Altalena, you know that the Jews had a mini-civil war to purge itseld of fringe fanatic elements. The Palestinians need to do this today, but too bad terrorist Hamas is in power. On the other hand, the primary leadership of the Palestinians at the time was in bed with the Nazis, never was and never has been disavowed. In fact, Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas call for the same thing, not merely the destruction of Israel but the killing of Jews wherever they may be.

It seems that YOU delegitmize Israel's right to existence and pretty much assume Israel is ALWAYS wrong. I think both sides have claims and partition always did and still does make sense. Only when Arab leaders decide that Israel has a right to exist can there be peace, just like with Egypt and Jordan. Sadat and Hussein said as much, and Israel gave back territory for true peace. In contrast, Hamas and Hezbollah still publicly call for the destruction of Israel (and notably JEWS worldwide). Thus, when Israel left Lebanon and Gaza, this really did nothing for peace, as Hamas and Hezbollah still rejected Israel.

 

Ihaveproblemwith, (fault of signatures) your alternative would be to get ride of all the palestinians and opressing people who dare to resist. cyrano

This man is not a spokeperson of the Lebanese government. Just because he made an allegation doesn't make it true. If his allegation has substance to it why didn't the Lebanses goevernment make any formal compliant to Israel or the U.N? David Peterson documented about only 529 violations, as opposed to 11000 claimed by Berri, and we don't know what the context was. We also don't know the number of Hezbollah's incursions into Israel, which existed even by Berri's own admission and there is probably some lowballing in his account of about 100 such incidents. Did the minister clarify what role did Hizbollah play within the formal structure of the Lebanese state? Are we to assume the Hezbollah was acting on behalf of the Lebanese government in engaging Israel in border conflicts? I don't think that was how the minister wanted his point to be taken.

If you are asserting the left's reaction to the above situations was to not care, that's simply incorrect. If you've spent any time here (which I assume you haven't-- a drive-by spamming) you'd know that Turkey's violent repression of the Kurds, Russia's barbarity in Chechnya, the slaughter in East Timor, all of this has been opposed, because it has affected people, not because they were or weren't Jews. Yes there is racism against Jews, but not as much as against Arabs, and either way, this has no justification in providing cover for the immoral actions perpetrated by Israel against other peoples and states and against those within its borders who don't fit the religious/ethnic bill.

Your attempt to erase Palestinians' claims to their land by associating a leader or two with Nazism is ridiculous. Even if true it would mean nothing. People's rights are not determined by elites' machinations. This is obviously true since the Zionist terrorist Stern Gang offered to help the Nazis, yet I don't see you using that as justification for expelling Jews out of Israel. In the same way, Palestinians are not their leaders, who have a long history of betraying them, including in the present (I'm thinking of Abbas primarily). Besides, during WWII Palestine accepted more Jewish refugees than any other country in the world, and 12,000 Palestinians enlisted with the British to fight the Nazis and Axis Powers.

Also, Israel's creation was not authorized by the UN. You forget that the UN partition resolution that gave Zionists most of Palestine, even though they "owned" only 7% of the land, was a provisional arrangement -- which obviously turned out to be infeasable -- and was a General Assembly resolution that was non-binding. If Israel accepted the UN's authority they were to return for determination of Israel's borders, if Israel was even sanctioned. They rejected this, which meant they also rejected the UN's authority to impose Israel on the Palestinians. That resolution also called for the creation of an Arab state alongside Israel, which Israel of course rejects, thus rejecting the resolution on a second count. Moreover, Israel rejected the UN's call for Palestinian refugees to have either the right of return or compensation, if Israel was established. The truth is that Israel declared itself into existence.

Thanks David for the links and info. It (again) makes clear that Israel is not a helpless victim being attacked for no reason, though its defenders sure are good at playing the part.

Yes, the world would actually care about Darfur, Kurds, Tibetans, Chechens, Timorese, etc. if they were fighting JEWS. If the Palestinians were trying to get a state somewhere in Africa, they would all be dead by now, and the world wouldn't have cared. Did they care when Kuwait kicked out tens of 1000s of palestinian workers after the 1st gulf war for supporting Saddam? No of course not....but oh the condemnations when Israel closes its borders to Palestinian workers because they fear suicide bombers. Does anyone remember when Jordan killed many Palestinians and kicked out the rest (into Lebanon !) in Black September in 1970 when fighting the PLO? No of course not. I would say Arabs have killed at least 100 times more Arabs than Israel has ever killed...but these Arabs are not important because they were not fighting JEWS.

I have no problem with insisting Israel should withdraw to its pre 1967 border. But some pro Palestinian fanatics here go further in their demands. They seem to consider all of Israel "occupied land". It is one thing to stand up for the underdog, quite another to rewrite history to suit the political fashion of the so called "left"(who doesn't mind cheering women stonging, gay slaying Islamists as long as they hate the U.S, reminds me of European Stalin apologists among the left in the earllier half of the 20th centry) The origin of the Palestinian -Israeli conflict was a crash of nationalism,--Zionsism v.s Arab nationalism. It was ugly and bloody on both sides. Both visions were exclusionary. But if you read some of the blogs here you would get the impression that the Palestinians would have created a modern multi-cultural paradise with the Jews as brothers until the evil Zionists ruined it. They would never acknowledge the Grand Mufti Husseni indeed was a Nazi collaborator and there were muslim SS units(The Zionists should also acknowledge the Stern Gang also made overtures to the Nazis, though nothing come of it) You can't blame the Jews for being "rejectionists" when there are people on this very site still questioning the right of Israel to exist. David Peterson's "humanism" has always been selective. Somehow he dismisses Dafur as a media creation where much worse human rights abuse is occuring and keep flogging the Palestinian issue. The Palestinians are not the only displaced people. Where are leftist indignations over the persecutions of Kurds by Arabs? Look at the map to see the amount of land under dispute to get a perspective about the absurdity of this whole conflict. It is all about scoring political points. Anything to give the U.S,--and by extension Israel,--a black eye.

If it hadn't been for Zionism, another few million Jews would be dead. Sounds like this would not bother you too much. The Arabs in British Palestine (including their leader, Haj Amin Al Husseini) was a friend of Hitler and visited him in germany during WWII. He of course wanted the Jews in palestine dead. The UN decided that the best course of action was to divided Palestine into 2 states. Several Arab nations rejected this and launched attacks on the newly formed Israel expecting a quick victory (by the way, if you EVER talk about UN resolutions, remember the one that CREATED an Arab and Jewish state in 1948 that the Arabs rejected, they are still sorry for this decision). The occupation of Gaza and West Bank was due to a DEFENSIVE war (if you don't agree lets discuss) fought in 1967. When Israel tried to return these lands for peace, the reaction was NO RECOGNITION NO NEGOTIATIONS NO PEACE. Then in 2000 Arafat rejected a plan led by Clinton to create a palestinian state.

 

Eveniftrue, You are over dramtizing the threat hizbollah poses..

Eveniftrue, Isarel is a contry that occupy another people, if it hadn't been for zionism who knows how secular and palestine would be secular and democratic today.. welcome back david..

First, just because Lebanon complains, does not mean it is true. "Violations" are primarily related to recon work. Why do you think Israel needed to do this? I will tell you:

1. Israel left Lebanon in 2000. The UN certified the withdrawl as complete. Lebanon was occupied no more. Even the sudden Hezbollah claim on Shebaa was rejected.

2. UN resolutions called for disarmament of militias in Lebanon, and control of the border by Lebanese troops. This resolution was violated.

3. Hezbollah proceeds to spend 6 years building up troops, missiles, etc. all with the help of Iran and Syria.

4. Iran is on record numerous times calling for the destruction of Israel. No mincing of words: The president effectively calls for genocide and means it.

5. Hezbollah is effectively Iran's militia ready to attack Israel. Would you be afraid?

Fast forward July 12, 2006. Hezbollah fires rockets into Israeli towns, injuring civilians. These rockets are only intended to kill/injure civilians, like all the other 3000 rockets. A WAR CRIME by any definition. At the same time they capture 2 Israeli soldiers.

Does Israel need to apologize for preparing for its defense? Even if you don't agree, is this justification for Hezbollah War Crimes?

Even if you think Israel's response was wrong, AT LEAST ADMIT that Hezbollah's firing of rockets at civilian towns is WAR CRIME.

Nabih Berri, a Shiite minister in the Lebanese government with the Amal party, was giving an interview the other day, I think on al-Jazeera, and he mentioned that Israel had engaged in over 11,000 violations of Lebanese sovereignty since their withdrawal from most of south Lebanon in May 2000. He compared that number to just over 100 such violations of Israel's sovereignty by Hizballah forces. Good to see that the Lebanese government kept track of some of those violations. But what good has it done? The UN would not even give it an immediate ceasefire and the US and France agree to a draft resolution that allows Israeli troops to remain on Lebanese soil and for the troops to replace them to be on the Lebanese side of the border. I could go on and on about the hypocrisy and double standards but its quite obvious, isn't it?