Ok, that's it, BLOWING UP A COUNTRY DOES NOT STOP TERRORISM

[jsamuel]

Both Hillary and Feingold have expressed support for the Israeli invasion of Lebanon. While I can understand, on principle that Israel has a right to defend itself, the problem is that their METHODS are WRONG.

Hillary went as far to say that we would invade Mexico or Canada in a similar situation. Well let me remind everyone of two little countries... Iraq and Afghanistan.

This false choice of either invading a country or taking the hits from terrorists has to stop in American and world politics. The simple fact is that by invading/blowing up a country, it does not defeat terrorism, instead it only makes it stronger. I think anyone only has to look as far as Iraq and even Afghanistan to see this truth laid bare.

So, by supporting invasions to stop terrorism, we are SUPPORTING TERRORISM by giving it the avenues for growth.

[Cerridwen]

1. Bravo!

Yay!

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[stepnw1f]

2. Instead, It Creates More Terrorism

violence creates more violence.

It's like a moron using a candle to light his way through a gun-powder keg room.

[CuteNFuzzy]

6. Not only that

Israel's current aggression can fairly be called fighting terrorism with terrorism

[whosinpower]

3. Of course, but you are missing something

Israel knows all too well what the consequences of its actions are. They KNOW. It is part of the plan for a generational war, and now that the Americans are in the backyard, so to speak -- they will not stop until Syria and Iran have been overthrown. THAT IS THE GOAL.
They are just using terrorism as a tool to further the agenda. They NEED it.

Even if the Israeli soldiers are turned over - they won't stop.

Not unless the international community takes a firm stand and sends in peacekeepers to Lebanon to stop all fighting and broker a peace treaty. And America is against this.

[lonestarnot]

49. Not true. Hand 'em over Hez. and let's see what happens.

[mmonk]

4. Here here. A sane post.

[jsamuel]

5. thanks

it also sunk fast :P

[TheWraith]

7. Kicked and recommended. NT.

[BuhByeChimp]

8. Then what do you propose?

Do you suggest they just accept the situation and just live with periodic attacks on its citizens?

Another lesson we have learned is that ignoring it only provokes a stronger attack and the international support for helping Israel outside of the U.S. is virtually nil.

[leesa]

9. Duh. Negotiation. Israel is holding thousands of their citizens without

charges or trial. Israel has illegally seized land that belongs to other people. Israel slaughters Palestinians daily. They need to STOP this behavior if they don't want terrorist acts done against them.

[BuhByeChimp]

11. talk about moral equivalency...

Your saying murdering Israeli citizens is the moral equivalent of Israel alledgedly illegally seizing land?

[Warren DeMontague]

75. Here's a constructive project: Find the name of the top guy Israel is

"holding" that Hezbollah wants released in return for the kidnapped Israeli soldiers.

Then find out what he's being "held" for, supposedly without charges or trial.

I'll wait.

[jsamuel]

16. whatever the possible solutions are, my main point is solid

invading and blowing up a country does not stop terrorism

if we can't think of other solutions, we need to think harder

[BuhByeChimp]

40. Very true.

I'm in complete agreement on this.

[Bretttido]

19. You just did EXACTLY what this post railed against.

You created a false choice: That Israel must either go all out and attack Lebanon, or they must do nothing. These are not the only two options!

[BuhByeChimp]

31. I see your point, but I was asking for an obtainable solution

[JuniperLea]

20. It's called "diplomacy"

I'll say it slowly... dip lo ma cy. A little known and far too long ignored measure. I'll break it down: Talk about peace and what each country involved can do to bring it about.

[BuhByeChimp]

35. Ok, that is a useless answer.

Diplomacy has been going on for quite some time and look where its at now.

I'm asking for a little more detailed solution, can you provide a little insight or just more useless rhetoric?

[JuniperLea]

42. No, no, no... you're talking about

All the lip service. I'm talking diplomacy. Not the same. Rhetoric my ass.

You get together, you talk about each other's needs and you make concessions and you meet in the middle. It's not been done for a very long time. The details can't come until some serious discussion takes place.

[JVS]

10. Not even if you blow it up harder than any country has ever been blown up?

[Hippo_Tron]

12. Neither does negotiating with terrorists

As ineloquently as our idiot-in-chief said it yesterday, the truth is that the only way to stop this is to have Syria to get Hezbollah under control. That seems pretty simple except for the fact that we have no leverage over Syria. It might help if the US's diplomatic credibility hadn't been completely ruined by this administration.

[theanarch]

23. no...

...i'm all for a reasonable "right of self-defense", even if it's as clumsily invoked as Olmert did yesterday ("Israel will not agree to live in the shadow of the threat of missiles and rockets against its residents"). The problem here, it would seem, is when the flip side of that arguement is invoked: Palestinians not agreeing to live in squalid concentration camps, to be starved, kidnapped, tortured, or killed by an arrogant, trigger-happy army of (ILLEGAL) occupation, that steals the PA's tax revenues, and the people's water and best farmland for the benefit of (ILLEGAL) colonists, all under the threat of bulldozers, security fences, tanks, attack helicopters and warplanes, cruise missiles and an (ILLEGAL) arsonal of nuclear weapons. The problem has ALWAYS been Israel's expansionist policy, pursued without respite by EVERY Israeli government, whether Labour, Likud, and now Kadima (aka, Likud Lite).

[Jacobin]

38. Um, the Chimpster just ran Syria OUT of Lebananon two months ago

and now Syria's supposed to fix it?

:crazy:

Likud-NeoCon thinking makes me crazy

[leftchick]

66. yes indeed!

what the fuck is Syria going to do? Damn I can not believe the illogical stuff I read here sometimes.

[Hippo_Tron]

71. Yea, that's pretty much what I'm saying

Shrub has basically put us in a position where we can't do anything about this.

[cigsandcoffee]

13. Why do you think Feingold supports the invasion?

Could it be that he has fairly reached different conclusions from you, or do you think he's beholden to somebody or been paid off?

How could he be so obviously wrong while you're so obviously right? What's his angle?

I think he may not be wrong at all, but that's just my humble opinion.

[jsamuel]

15. ok

[mmonk]

25. Any evidence to Feingold's position?

I've haven't seen any (though some say we're not getting attacked here because we've invaded two countries now). It would be different if they were attacked by nationstates. Then it might be a proper response. I'm not saying it couldn't work sometime, but creating more enemies seldom decreases the chances. And the problem is they have long memories in that part of the world. Too long. That's why it never seems to end. Things become more lawless it seems.

[jsamuel]

28. lbn thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=2392217&mesg_id=2392217

[mmonk]

34. Thanks for that.

He does ask for restraint.

[jsamuel]

37. yes he does, it is very different than what Hillary says

[shance]

14. Blowing up a country IS terrorism.

n/t

[mom cat]

22. You beat me to it! ... I was just thinking that.

[malaise]

26. Me three n/t

[mom cat]

50. Hug

:hug: Looks like if the US and its allies do it, its not murder.

[michael_1166]

17. If I'd be a lebanese mother whose kids just

have been killed by some Israeli bombs, I'd seriously consider turning myself into a bone bomb. Wouldn't you too? That's what Israel doesn't get: The only thing you create with bombing the shit out of people is you create more hate - people turning themselves into bombs just because they have no life worth fighting for anymore.

The state of Israel has turned mad. They'll reap later what they sow now, it's the law of nature, karma, whatever.

[tnlefty]

24. Or an Iraqi child, a Lebanese child, a Palestinian child, this will go on

for another generation or two.

The seething hatred of adults will most likely pale in comparision to the anger and resentment of the children who have lost parents, siblings, etc. The whole spectre makes me sick.

[Bretttido]

18. Bravo!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

[magellan]

21. Total agreement from me

I posted similar earlier today.

[lonestarnot]

27. So what, you just continue to take what they dish? I think not!

8 Israeli soldiers killed 2 abducted in an unprovoked confrontation is not something you just forget or is it?

[jsamuel]

29. no, and I said that Israel has a right to defend itself

however, we both know this invasion is based on the idea of "stopping future terrorism" and yet all we know tells us by doing this, they are just encouraging more.

Think harder, find better solutions. Otherwise, history will continue to repeat itself.

[lonestarnot]

33. You haven't given the action time. It is still ongoing.

They may very well be "crippled" as Hezbollah in Lebanon.

[jsamuel]

36. We've given this same failed policy time... time and again, and it never

never, has worked.

[lonestarnot]

39. You are probably right, but what is your suggestion for solution?

[Critters2]

60. Last I saw, 210 Lebanese have been killed

10 Israelis=210 Lebanese

Does the word "proportionality" mean nothing?

I mean, who's doing the dishing out, and who's doing the taking it?

[SlipperySlope]

30. You are right

Blowing up land doesn't do anything. You have to stop the people instead.

[bloom]

32. Seriously - all I can figure

is that it is the plan of the United States to go to war with Syria and Iran and this is the pretext to do it.

It sounds like israel has no plan to make peace with the Palestinians ever. And if anything - that whole thing is being dragged out - for whenever a convenient pretext is needed for something. There is no way that the Israelis are so stupid that they think that they can treat people like total crap - be violent toward them, bulldoze their homes - and that there won't be any violence in return.

[KurtNYC]

41. Israel is not trying to "stop terrorism"

They are trying to eliminate Hezbollah -- a Shiite guerilla army, funded largely by Iran ($100 million/year), which uses conventional military weapons. Without Hezbollah there is a chance for peace in the region. They were ordered to disarm and they didn't. Now they are playing the spoiler role in the region.

Lebanon is a pluralistic society which rejected the theocratic goals of Hezbollah. Israel is likewise a pluralistic society. Hezbollah wants Islamo-fascist theocracy and will continue to be a problem in the region unless they are dealt with by both Lebanon and Israel.

[jsamuel]

43. assuming what you say is 100% accurate

Why couldn't Israel work with their close friend Lebanon in routing out Hezbollah WHILE WORKING WITH Lebanon instead of invading it?

[lonestarnot]

45. Because the Lebonese army is too weak.

[jsamuel]

47. and that is where Israel could help out

supplying support to the Lebanese government/military. Limited of course.

[lonestarnot]

48. What's the diff. who kills them?

[jsamuel]

51. ??? You don't see the difference between Lebanon going after it's own

extreamists with Israel's help and Israel invading Lebanon?

[lonestarnot]

52. You leave out the details, therefore creating a false illusion of

an "unprovoked invasion."

[jsamuel]

54. no I didn't

please stay on topic

[lonestarnot]

59. You said,

"You don't see the difference between Lebanon going after it's own
extremists with Israel's help and Israel invading Lebanon?" They had a reason to go after Hezbollah, thus a reason to invade Lebanon. You leave that out. I am on topic. No difference who kills them, they will be dead in any case, and as I stated in previous post, Lebanese Army is too weak to get rid of them or they would have already done so. If they attempted this, the government would crack and Hezbollah would have just taken over the country, another Afghanistan.

[jsamuel]

68. False choice: Reason to go after Hezbollah does not = reason to invade Leb

anon

I already described that as a false choice in the OP.

I said Israel could help Lebanon's weak military. Israel's military would help Lebanon to take down Hezbollah. Both together would not be too weak. They would overwhelm Hezbollah from the inside. The Lebanon government would be boosted with support from Israel and the international community. Lebanon would become more stable.

I had already refuted all those points before.

[lonestarnot]

70. Yes, and who is to say that is not going to happen?

[lonestarnot]

44. Well aren't these the same thing?

[xxqqqzme]

55. then why do Hezbollah members sit in parliament?

They have been elected by the Lebanonese people same as Hamas was elected - Israel rips up centuries old olive trees; crushes homes; and destroys water wells and THATS not terrorism? Israel's actions alone guaranteed Hamas and Hezbollah would gain power.

[zulchzulu]

46. There you go being anti-semetic again...

Kidding...

:sarcasm:

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

53. Israel's situation in the midst of hostile neighbors is very

different from our own position.

I'm not saying I support what they're doing. In fact I'm not following the mess closely.

One other point to recall when talking about expanionist Israel tendencies is that on the very first day of Israel's existence made possible by the UN, Israel was attacked by multiple countries in the region.

In their response to those attacks, they took a certain amount of land.

Again, what I'm saying is only in the words I'm using.

I'm not approving or disapproving of any action or policies.

I just think these facts are important to any perspective on the ME.

[jsamuel]

56. yes, I know those facts

that was not "terrorism", those were invasions

but everyone nowadays seems to forget the difference

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

57. Yes there is a difference. BTW, I was responding to the thread

as a whole, not merely to your OP.

Some of what I wrote was prompted more by other's posts.

[jsamuel]

63. ok ;)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

58. Well those tactics are certainly working well in Iraq.

Aren't they?

Will we now hear Israeli and American politicians urging the IDF to "Stay the course"?

[killbotfactory]

61. Israels actions seem like they want to escalate the conflict

not stop it.

In Lebanon, we have a new democracy that doesn't have the power to reign in the armed wing of Hezbollah (which is funded and supported by much larger powers) without risking a civil war in which it is a real possibility that Hezbollah will be the victors. So what does Israel do in response to Hezbollah's actions? Attack the entirety of Lebanon for the actions of an uncontrollable faction in the south. This does not make any god damned sense.

[MannyGoldstein]

62. It Worked Well in WWII

It worked well in WWII... the Germans and Japanese have been peaceful and prosperous since their fascist cancers had to be obliterated.

That being said, we should recognize that war is a last-ditch measure, only to be undertaken when other means have failed. It is a failure on the part of both sides to have done the right thing.

A very, very sad situation.

[jsamuel]

64. you talk of invasions and nation-states

I am talking about terrorism.

[MannyGoldstein]

65. From Acorns Come Mighty Oaks

The Nazis started as terrorists. They were tolerated, coddled, and used as a political convenience.

The rest is history.

[ShortnFiery]

69. "Terrorist" is merely a new LABEL for "Our Evil & In-Human Enemy" eom

[porphyrian]

67. You know they'll keep trying it, just in case. - n/t

[jsamuel]

72. kick for evening crowd

[progressivebydesign]

73. That right to "defend" itself. Hmmm...

Yes, if someone kidnaps a few soldiers, you should take appropriate action, for sure. Some sort of rescue mission and police action toward the people holding the soldiers. But blowing up country that is trying to struggle in democracy? That DOES breed terrorists.

But see.. every time one of us makes that case.. that this type of overthetop aggression does breed terrorist, we are called names. we are called appeasers and worse. But terrorism usually springs from an oppressed group who does not have a country or military to fight their wars.

[theanarch]

77. i am given to understand that...

...the definition of a "terrorist" is a man who has a bomb, but no air force.

[bdamomma]

74. this pre emptive shit must end

diplomacy is the only way, to get all parties to talk, but again, we are dealing with the bush regime, and they just want death and destruction. You all know that bush is behind this all, and still talking about Syria, these people are truly insane. Our creditibility is just gone, and look how quickly Condi is getting her ass out there, she does what her boss tells her to do. It is a very bad situation.

[hopeisaplace]

76. It's like watering a flower. I agree. Violence breeds violence.

So when all the weapons are wiped out. My guess is, and remember
it's only a little-ole-nobody guess,..they'll buy more.

[jsamuel]

78. yep, and with more recruits