Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Lebanese attack: Who's to blame?
I hope US politicians are paying attention because we could all learn a lesson from the Palestinians and Lebanon on how to fight a war. The last few weeks have seen a lot of violence directed at Israelis, the most recent being Hezbollah Attacks Israeli-Lebanon Border. Now although these attacks originate from Palestinian territory and Lebanon, apparently it wasn’t the Palestinians or Lebanese who did the attacking of Israelis. Nope; turns out it was Hamas (Palestinians) and Hezbollah (Lebanon) causing all the trouble.
Now some might nit-pick and point out that Hamas is the elected ruling party of the Palestinians. And that Hezbollah has been pretty much in control of southern Lebanon, even winning an Easy Victory In Elections in Southern Lebanon a little more than a year ago. That’s where their genius comes out: those are the political wings of these ruling parties; the Israelis are being attacked by the MILITANT wings of these parties. For example:
“Lebanon's prime minister said his government did not condone Hezbollah's cross-border attack, and he condemned the Israeli retaliation.”
I’m sure he would have said something to the Hezbollah leadership but he didn't want to interrupt their press conference:
“Hezbollah Secretary General Hasan Nasrallah said the ambush was aimed at forcing the release of prisoners in Israel. He said the two Israeli soldiers would be released only through a prisoner exchange.
"What we did today . . . is the only feasible path to free detainees from Israeli jails," Nasrallah told a news conference in Beirut.
(Just a reminder: Beirut, the Lebanon capitol, is not in southern Lebanon.)
Anyway, I think it would be a great idea if we could have militant wings of our parties fight our nation’s wars. Can you imagine President Bush shrugging his shoulders at a news conference as he disclaims any responsibility for an incursion into North Korea or Iran:
“Hey, what can I do - we have no control over the militant wing of the party”
Maybe give that smirk that drives the liberals crazy. Howard Dean would go nuts...and then promise to have a Democratic counterpoint in each state.
Other Notes: According to the Post, my new favorite reporter, Scott Wilson (one of several on today’s byline) is reporting from Shtula, Israel. But apparently he just can’t seem to find any Israelis to talk to. Today Lebanese terrorists attacked Israeli soldiers, capturing some and killing others. So of course everyone’s first interest is naturally the effect of all this on the southern Lebanese people who stand behind these terrorists. I’m presuming it’s Mr. Wilson who so eloquently captures their plight:
“Scores of suddenly stranded Lebanese wandered back roads looking for a way home -- their faces grim and worried, their belongings stuffed into plastic bags. Sirens wailed in the background…
“But the sense of unease and fear was mixed with resignation from people who have known peace only rarely. Many also said they were elated at the capture of the soldiers by Hezbollah, which for years has effectively controlled this region.
"Look, we're used to it -- 25 years, 26 years it's been like this," Hassan Qaryani, a 21-year-old butcher from Burj Rahal, said of the airstrikes. The kidnapping, he said, was "like a crown on my head . . . as soon as I heard the news I was overjoyed. It was like Italy winning the World Cup.
“In the southern suburbs of Beirut, people handed out candy in the streets and set off fireworks. Fireworks also were set off on the airport road, snarling traffic.”
What a plucky people!
Also today: an online ‘debate” between a “Palestinian Journalist and Israeli Commentator: PostGlobal: Who's to Blame for Gaza, Lebanon?
One comment of note:
“Philadelphia, PA: Why was Gaza not returned to Egypt when the 1979 peace treaty was signed? Didn't Egypt control that area from 1948 - 1967? Is it that Israel saw value in maintaining control or did Egypt refuse to take control?
Yossi Melman: Because Egypt didn't want it back”
I think that fairly sums up the one-sided “peace treaty” that was Camp David: whatever Egypt wanted. It’s good to remember that Egypt got Sinai back as a result of the treaty and that’s been pretty much the only part of that treaty that’s come to fruition (I mean besides all the Nobel Peace Prizes). Jordan and Egypt were to have worked with the Palestinians and Israelis on resolving the Gaza and other land issues…and well, we can see how that’s worked out. In retrospect, Egypt not taking back Gaza has proved to be a remarkably prescient move of headache-avoidance for them.
Now some might nit-pick and point out that Hamas is the elected ruling party of the Palestinians. And that Hezbollah has been pretty much in control of southern Lebanon, even winning an Easy Victory In Elections in Southern Lebanon a little more than a year ago. That’s where their genius comes out: those are the political wings of these ruling parties; the Israelis are being attacked by the MILITANT wings of these parties. For example:
“Lebanon's prime minister said his government did not condone Hezbollah's cross-border attack, and he condemned the Israeli retaliation.”
I’m sure he would have said something to the Hezbollah leadership but he didn't want to interrupt their press conference:
“Hezbollah Secretary General Hasan Nasrallah said the ambush was aimed at forcing the release of prisoners in Israel. He said the two Israeli soldiers would be released only through a prisoner exchange.
"What we did today . . . is the only feasible path to free detainees from Israeli jails," Nasrallah told a news conference in Beirut.
(Just a reminder: Beirut, the Lebanon capitol, is not in southern Lebanon.)
Anyway, I think it would be a great idea if we could have militant wings of our parties fight our nation’s wars. Can you imagine President Bush shrugging his shoulders at a news conference as he disclaims any responsibility for an incursion into North Korea or Iran:
“Hey, what can I do - we have no control over the militant wing of the party”
Maybe give that smirk that drives the liberals crazy. Howard Dean would go nuts...and then promise to have a Democratic counterpoint in each state.
Other Notes: According to the Post, my new favorite reporter, Scott Wilson (one of several on today’s byline) is reporting from Shtula, Israel. But apparently he just can’t seem to find any Israelis to talk to. Today Lebanese terrorists attacked Israeli soldiers, capturing some and killing others. So of course everyone’s first interest is naturally the effect of all this on the southern Lebanese people who stand behind these terrorists. I’m presuming it’s Mr. Wilson who so eloquently captures their plight:
“Scores of suddenly stranded Lebanese wandered back roads looking for a way home -- their faces grim and worried, their belongings stuffed into plastic bags. Sirens wailed in the background…
“But the sense of unease and fear was mixed with resignation from people who have known peace only rarely. Many also said they were elated at the capture of the soldiers by Hezbollah, which for years has effectively controlled this region.
"Look, we're used to it -- 25 years, 26 years it's been like this," Hassan Qaryani, a 21-year-old butcher from Burj Rahal, said of the airstrikes. The kidnapping, he said, was "like a crown on my head . . . as soon as I heard the news I was overjoyed. It was like Italy winning the World Cup.
“In the southern suburbs of Beirut, people handed out candy in the streets and set off fireworks. Fireworks also were set off on the airport road, snarling traffic.”
What a plucky people!
Also today: an online ‘debate” between a “Palestinian Journalist and Israeli Commentator: PostGlobal: Who's to Blame for Gaza, Lebanon?
One comment of note:
“Philadelphia, PA: Why was Gaza not returned to Egypt when the 1979 peace treaty was signed? Didn't Egypt control that area from 1948 - 1967? Is it that Israel saw value in maintaining control or did Egypt refuse to take control?
Yossi Melman: Because Egypt didn't want it back”
I think that fairly sums up the one-sided “peace treaty” that was Camp David: whatever Egypt wanted. It’s good to remember that Egypt got Sinai back as a result of the treaty and that’s been pretty much the only part of that treaty that’s come to fruition (I mean besides all the Nobel Peace Prizes). Jordan and Egypt were to have worked with the Palestinians and Israelis on resolving the Gaza and other land issues…and well, we can see how that’s worked out. In retrospect, Egypt not taking back Gaza has proved to be a remarkably prescient move of headache-avoidance for them.
Comments:
<< Home
Didn't know where else to put this...
You commented recently on a post at SoccerDad entitled "Government Entitlement" which discussed I post I'd written at JAJC. You basically mocked me for being a liberal, which is ironic as I'm generally a staunch conservative, but that's a different story...
The sanctimonious crap that comes out of the nanny-staters' mouths when they try to justify their taxing actions is more harmful to my (mental) health than anything Big Tobacco produces to put into our mouths. I'm not a smoker (well, beyond the occasional cigar) but still resent the combined efforts of Federal & state authorities to demonize and pillage the smokers because I don't for a moment believe they have the smokers or the non-smokers best interest at heart - it is truly all about the money for them.
Of course, as a Marylander, my view on government may be skewed - it has been years since I would describe my state and local governments' dedication as intended towards "improving the lives of the people." (Mike Millers? Yes! Parris Glendenings? Yes! just not the people's)
I'm actually against just about any taxes, if you'd read through some of the other posts at JAJC [which is a mixed back of 4 conservatives and 2 liberals]. The sin tax post was too highlight a tax that I think does have good economic and social reprecussions - I think if you'd read through the original post, you'd actually enjoy it a bit more. You also may enjoy JAJC in general (or my own blog, SerandEz) if you gave them a shot. JAJC's standards do request that rhetoric be kept out of the discussion as much as possible, (though a little humor or bias is understood,) but I doubt you'd generally have a problem with it. I find that the far-left bloggers - especially Kos fans - have the most problems with it.
You commented recently on a post at SoccerDad entitled "Government Entitlement" which discussed I post I'd written at JAJC. You basically mocked me for being a liberal, which is ironic as I'm generally a staunch conservative, but that's a different story...
The sanctimonious crap that comes out of the nanny-staters' mouths when they try to justify their taxing actions is more harmful to my (mental) health than anything Big Tobacco produces to put into our mouths. I'm not a smoker (well, beyond the occasional cigar) but still resent the combined efforts of Federal & state authorities to demonize and pillage the smokers because I don't for a moment believe they have the smokers or the non-smokers best interest at heart - it is truly all about the money for them.
Of course, as a Marylander, my view on government may be skewed - it has been years since I would describe my state and local governments' dedication as intended towards "improving the lives of the people." (Mike Millers? Yes! Parris Glendenings? Yes! just not the people's)
I'm actually against just about any taxes, if you'd read through some of the other posts at JAJC [which is a mixed back of 4 conservatives and 2 liberals]. The sin tax post was too highlight a tax that I think does have good economic and social reprecussions - I think if you'd read through the original post, you'd actually enjoy it a bit more. You also may enjoy JAJC in general (or my own blog, SerandEz) if you gave them a shot. JAJC's standards do request that rhetoric be kept out of the discussion as much as possible, (though a little humor or bias is understood,) but I doubt you'd generally have a problem with it. I find that the far-left bloggers - especially Kos fans - have the most problems with it.
Wilson got around to covering the plight of Israelis.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201704.html?nav=rss_world/mideast
Post a Comment
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/12/AR2006071201704.html?nav=rss_world/mideast
<< Home
