Timeline
I have to admit, I wasn't paying as much attention to Israel as I should be lately. The Gaza incursion was pretty big, but it still seemed business as usual. Isreal killing Palestinians, Palestinians killing Israelis. Rockets, civilians killed, demands that prisoners be let go, you know, normal everyday stuff.
But when I read that Olmert was sending troops north and making incursions into Lebanon engaging Hezbollah openly, I got worried.
When I saw the pictures of Beirut international airport getting bombed, I realized this was quite serious.
In case you are missing some of the key details, here is a good timeline
(Courtesy of Times on Line)
But when I read that Olmert was sending troops north and making incursions into Lebanon engaging Hezbollah openly, I got worried.
When I saw the pictures of Beirut international airport getting bombed, I realized this was quite serious.
In case you are missing some of the key details, here is a good timeline
(Courtesy of Times on Line)
posted by Praguetwin at
10:50 PM
12 Comments:
I think everyone was hoping the dust might settle after the election. There was even some suggestion of compromises.
With the US (who must carry the can on this) busy elsewhere it must have been to great an opportunity.
It is a real concern, our mixed troops over theer might find themselves in the middle of sometyhing really nasty.
By
Cartledge, at 1:53 AM
The Shit is hitting the fan, but it is what needs to be done
By
Rightwing Guy, at 2:09 AM
I agree with right-wing guy, Hezbollah is seizing the moment and doing what needs to be done.
By
Anne Rettenberg LCSW, at 3:00 AM
Good job Elizabeth, let right wing guy know where your alliances and heart are!
By
Anonymous, at 6:31 AM
I can't beleive that after WWII people still beleive in final solutions.
Final solutions never are, and I pity those who follow the hawks down the road of misery and death.
Arch, I don't think Elizabeth is trying to hide her alliances from anyone.
I, for one, think both sides are acting poorly.
By
Praguetwin, at 9:22 AM
I'm afraid mt heart isn't in souless destruction of life. I don't support the terrotist concept at all, whether Hezbollah, Hamas, Israel or some US actions.
Acceptance of this tradgedy as 'needs to be done' is utter simpicity, ignoring a complex of fact.
By
Cartledge, at 4:52 PM
Well said D.
By
Praguetwin, at 5:24 PM
PT
No, you are right about Elizabeth not hiding her alliances. I am only congratulating her on her honesty in indicating that she supports the actions of Hezbollah.
PT & Cartledge
And yes, “final solutions never are”. Evil has ebb and flow and decent peoples must at times rise to quell it. The history of attacks against Israel are long and well documented.
In the words of the oft quoted Albert Einstein:
" The world is a very dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who do nothing about them."
By
Anonymous, at 5:25 AM
Arch Stanton,
"The history of attacks against Israel are long and well documented."
The history of the attacks made by Israel are also long and well documented; that doesn't make either side right.
Israel is trying to show how tough it is by bullying around her neighbors and a lot of people are going to die because of it. Searching for a first cause here is rather futile, unless you want to trace it all back a few thousand years.
These old blood feuds are NOT going to stop because Israel is bigger and badder and more powerful than her neighbors; they will stop ONLY when both sides decide they need and want peace.
Peace isn't something that just happens. And it's not something that happens by wiping out an entire race of people. That isn't peace, it's genocide.
By
Mark, at 10:45 AM
Stephanie
Any attacks made by Israel on the Palestinian people were generally speaking, retribution as a result of Palestinian terror. Sure there was the time when the Israeli air force took out an Iraqi reactor, but lets face it, you and I both know why Saddam was building it and its not such a bad thing to be gotten rid of is it?
I do feel truly sorry for the innocents killed on both sides of this conflict, but will shed no tears for “innocents” who harbor or support in any way organizations or people who are willing to commit atrocities on non military civilian targets, and as this is the way of Hammas and Hezbollah and their supporters they have earned the position they are in today.
It should also be remembered that Israel’s activities are the result of actions on the part of Hezbollah and NOT originating simply from the whim to bully. This was clearly ascertained at the U.N. today. Furthermore Israel’s desire for peace was clearly demonstrated when it decided to withdraw from the occupied territories. What did it get for this olive branch? A closer proximity to people who have sworn to wipe out Israel. The only way Hezbollah will ever as you say, “need or want peace” is either when they have their back against the wall or they have accomplished their mission of destroying Israel.
Which race of people is Israel trying to wipe out?
By
Anonymous, at 1:30 AM
Arch Stanton,
"Any attacks made by Israel on the Palestinian people were generally speaking, retribution as a result of Palestinian terror."
And from the Palestinian side the attacks they instigate are retribution for the oppression of their people in the face of a superiorly equipped (by the US) military force. There's two sides to every conflict; and the only way to win the peace is to be willing and able to see both sides.
I don't say this to excuse terror in the least. Terror is wrong. So is war. Whether one is more wrong than another... It's really hard to determine when people die either way, but yeah, I would generally say terror tactics are "more wrong." (And, no, I'm not a pacifist, but choosing your wars wisely is important.)
I will use this example: Ireland used terror tactics to win their freedom from England, via the IRA. Not all citizens were members. Not all citizens supported the methods used by the IRA, but many (perhaps even most) did support the goal the IRA had, i.e. independence from England, and thus were reluctant to turn them into the authorities. The English painted the IRA in a very poor light, just as bad as the Palestinian militants are painted, but that didn't make the IRA evil.
They were misguided and criminalistic, certainly. They were ruthless and lethal, admittedly. And some were merely mobsters, in it for gain, not freedom. But, most of them were fighting for a cause that Americans fought for and won; they wanted to win, too, but no superior force came to their aid as came to ours.
The Palestinian militants are not so very different from the IRA. They are ruthlessly bloody, admittedly. But their cause is just. That doesn't excuse their actions, but it also excludes the Israelis' justification for theirs. Terror tactics are wrong. But, oppression is also wrong, and that's what the Israelis are doing. They are intentionally oppressing the Palestinians, and the Palestinians are justified for wanting to stop this, but their methods for doing so are not the best way to go about it and are not justified.
In order to win the peace, another way of ending the oppression needs to be found. Anything less than that is doomed to fail. For the Irish and the English this happened in the form of a treaty, that was worked on (on the Irish side) by the political wing of the IRA. The Palestinians were in that position before this all started -- they were starting the process by acknowledging Israel.
And then this happened.
Whether the acknowledgement was a ploy on the part of Palestine, or the capture and ensuing "retribution" was somehow orchestrated by Israel (or an outside player)...I don't know. This whole mess seems a bit too convenient in the way it puts Palestine on the defensive again for me to trust the way the media is playing this out. It seems all too convenient for Israel to be mere coincidence. Or, too convenient for Islamic militants (outside Palestine) who like to use the Israelis oppression of Palestine as a clarion call for new recruits (which they consistently do, despite their unwillingness to offer tangible assistance to the Palestinian people in the form of food, clothing, shelter and medical supplies, or the resources necessary to get such things). All in all, it doesn't make sense for the Palestinians to have instigated this. They gain nothing and lose their opportunity to be respected by the world-wide political community. I'm not usually one for conspiracy theories, but there's got to be more going on here than it seems.
"...who harbor or support in any way organizations or people who are willing to commit atrocities on non military civilian targets..."
So, Israel destroys entire villages and they are somehow NOT "willing to commit atrocities on non military civilian targets"? Come on. Justify it however you want, but by supporting Israel (as affect-less as that may be for both of us), throwing your weight behind them, you are putting your support behind an organization that willingly commits such atrocities.
"Which race of people is Israel trying to wipe out?"
None that I know of. That was you!
A portion of your comment from another post:
"If things go well (as well as things can go when it gets bloody) Israel when all is said and done will have wiped the scourge of the earth – Hezbollah – from the map."
How many people would have to die to wipe the "scourge" of Hezbollah from the map? Only the current members? No, that wouldn't stop them. Their friends? Nope, more would still demand their retribution. Their children and their friends children? Nope, there'd still be more to join up in their stead. Nope, in order to wipe the "scourge" of Hezbollah from the face of the earth through military action is through genocide.
The best war can do to win the peace is to put the two combatants in a better position to negotiate. War wins retribution. Compromise wins peace. It's really very simple.
By
Mark, at 8:49 AM
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
By
Praguetwin, at 11:26 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home