Wednesday, July 26, 2006

Now what?

Yes, Hezbollah was wrong to cross Israel's border and kidnap an Israeli soldier. And Israel was wrong to overreact as it did. Now what?

For once I agree with Bush that it's not a good solution to return to the state as it was prior to these two acts. Israel withdrew from Lebanon, but Lebanon is still a source of terrorist acts against Israel. What would the world recommend any country do when terrorists attack it from across its border and the neighboring country is unable to stop them? What should we do if terrorists fired rockets into San Diego from Mexico and the Mexican government could do nothing to stop them? What should Mexico do if terrorists fired rockets into Mexico from San Diego and we did nothing to stop them?

It seems like the only reasonable solution, and one that all countries that wish to eliminate terrorism should support, is for an international peacekeeping force to occupy Lebanon and suppress the terrorism until Lebanon is strong enough to do it for itself. Of course if that guarantee is made, Israel must stop its campaign against Lebanon. The whole thing sounds nasty, but I don't know what else to suggest.

One of the basic premises of political theory is that the state has a monopoly on force. When that premise breaks down, it seems legitimate for an international agency to take over where the state failed. If that doesn't happen, then what? Everyone should stop fighting and live in peace with each other anyway. A cease fire. Is that going to happen? I doubt it.
  • If I were in charge of the Israeli government, I would stop the bombing. It's terrible. Besides, the only real solution without an imposed force is economic prosperity. This isn't getting there.
  • If I were in charge of Hezbollah, I would stop attacking Israel and devote my considerable efforts to helping Lebanon build a successful state and society. Isn't that what my constituents really want? This isn't getting there.
Both Israel and the majority of the Lebanese people want a peaceful and successful Lebanon. Sounds so simple. Why aren't we all working toward that end? Since I'm not in charge of either Israel or Hezbollah, I can't make it happen. So now what?


Anonymous said...

>Both Israel and the majority of the Lebanese people want a peaceful and successful Lebanon.

Obviously not true, if Israel wanted a peaceful and successful Lebanon they would not bomb civilian infrastructure as they do or Red Cross ambulances and UN observers, or occupied territories people.

Wake up!, this is a genocide and genocides do not want their victims to succed.

Israeli children writing in bombs that will kill Lebanese children and Israeli tanks with captured Lebanese flags show thay are against Lebanon existence.

Anonymous said...

Now wat?.

Israel withdraw from all occupied territories
a palestinian state (better would be to dissolve Israel and create a modern not medieval but laic state in the whole area)
release of prisoners taken by Israel, end of torture, selective assesinations, etc.
process Israel for war crimes and costs of lebanon rebuilt
end of US sending arms to Israel

this I think would allow disarm of the resistance and impose an international peace force. or not?

Blue said...

If the only resolution that will satisfy you is the destruction of Israel, how can you expect Israel to do anything other than resist. Wouldn't you resist if somone would not be satisfied until you were destroyed? Think about it.

Anonymous said...

you did not understand and I did not use the term "destruction", you are taking a pro Israeli stance

the replacement of israel or it transformation in a laic state is what I meant, but this is a very difficult ideal, or are you against the separation of state and church?

a palestinian state, something Israel has not shown any interested in, is what I proposed

anyway, we agree on the need for peace and futre steps towards it.

Anonymous said...

An interesting read. I wish I knew more about judaism and religions in general.

Orthodox Jews Against Zionism

CB: Why do you feel that the Jewish community is threatened by Zionism?

RDW: Simply it really is the antithesis, the diametric opposite of what Judaism is. Judaism is a religion of thousands of years. We know the forefathers; Abraham, Issac and Jacob, and that the Jews made a bond with God on Mount Siani to watch the Torah, to uphold the Torah. And Zionism was started a mere hundred years ago in the 1890s; they came and they decided to transform the whole concept of spirituality of God; they decided to make this into a new thing into a nationality of national aspirations, of materialism, to have a piece of land, a proud nation amongst nations, and to transform spirituality into materialism into a nationalistic goal a political goal.

Aslan said...

What if the British carpet bombed Dublin as a response to Sinn Fein or IRA terrorist! acts?
I understand the state of Israel has a legitimate point and that is they don't want to be under
constant threat from their northern borders. But the way they handled the situation is totally stupid.
By killing civilians, by indiscriminately bombarding towns and cities by destroying bridges roads power plants
TV stations they are pushing the moderate Lebanese to fundamentalism. they are recruiting for Hezbollah in a way
that Hezbollah can only dream of.

stepping back and looking at the big picture i think both sides prefer aggression and war to any
negotiations. why? Hezbollah can legitimise its existence as the only force that can fight head to
head with the Israelis. And Israel wants this because they are a nation of war. they started with
war the lived and developed with wars. wars help them get big fat cheques from west. perhaps this is
their way of being smart in middle east.

Finally Bush loves this war because it took Iraq off the TV screens for a while, nobody even noticed
his Vito on stem cell bill and its almost election time and Republicans are happy to talk about something
not really important for Americans because that helps the incumbent Republicans