Printable View
I'd just like to take a moment out of this threat to point out that an alternate, tangent thread has been created in this same section of the forum. I believe most of the off-topic stuff was moved there. One of my posts included.
*mutters about thinking it was deleted and getting grumpy*
Quote:
Originally posted by Jidoe
I'm assuming all of you heard about the recent developments in the Middle East.
Personally I'm wondering if the whole region is going ti be drawn into a whirlwind of violence. I feel the axis of evil Iran-Syria-Hizbulla-Hamas must be stopped - and now is the time.
Any thoughts on the matter?
well if the "axis of evil" is to be stopped,
lets do it right not half fast.
and if it going to be done,
the U.S will most likely be on the Israel's
side as they are a close ally.
As can be seen well, the US and Britain are definitely on Israel's side and the G8 also published an announcement against Hizbulla's attacks. I tend to believe there is (as time goes by I guess it will lessen) a huge support for Israel's actions against the biggest terrorist army in the world.Quote:
Originally posted by xaxer
well if the "axis of evil" is to be stopped,
lets do it right not half fast.
and if it going to be done,
the U.S will most likely be on the Israel's
side as they are a close ally.
I think the general consensus is that you are doing everyone a huge favor.Quote:
As can be seen well, the US and Britain are definitely on Israel's side and the G8 also published an announcement against Hizbulla's attacks. I tend to believe there is (as time goes by I guess it will lessen) a huge support for Israel's actions against the biggest terrorist army in the world.
I tend to think the recent shift from "We will not stop until Hezbollah is dismantled" to "We won't stop until we get our soldiers back" is more political than practical. I suspect that the soldiers are either dead or will not be returned regardless of Israel's stance, and that this conflict will continue. I still do not suspect it will not escalate past regional interests.
I think the middle east will always have tension, war and/or terrorism. Even if Israel just 'gave up' land, country, claim to all 'arab territory'... The Israeli people would still suffer attacks, bombings, terror, etc...
In my opinion, it is impossible to have true peace in the middle east. The MEAM (middle east arab/muslim culture as Ari coined) is simply not able to grasp or accept the very western idea of 'peace' as we think of it. I agree, also, that cease fires or all forms of temporary peace have VERY different meanings to westerners and MEAMs...
The only way for Israel to gain anything resembling peaceful existance is to establish that surrounding powers MUST respect their strength. Establish in the minds of the aggressors (leaders down to fringe citizen supporters and terrorist cells) that they will NOT defeat the Israel army OR it's people. As long as there is belief that the Israel government and all of it's people can be eradicated, the hostile and fanatical organizations in the middle east will seize each and every opportunity to achieve that goal that is presented.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
On a personal note, I see the fanatical sects and organizations that execute the bombings and attacks that have broken every peace struck in the middle east as madmen. The only way to stay the hands of madmen is to make the risk outweigh the reward. I, personally, can not see a way to do this. Even with, for example, the suicide bombings so common in MEAM culture... they believe that their effort is divinely rewarded. That, their actions make them a holy hero... How can you defeat an enemy that sees 'defeat' as victory?
I agree with Israel's moves. I think that they are in the very awkward position of having two sets of rules to play by. On one hand, they must satisfy 'western' expectations of seeking peaceful ends... on the other, accept the fact that doing so allows opportunity for greater harm to their soldiers and people...
And evidence of the hypocrisy of the elitist, idealistic West is that they do not apply these same judgements to the MEAM nations and people who are initiating the violent and terrorist action in the first place. No, they are to be coddled and talked to, while Israel is to be condemned if they dare defend themselves or strike back.Quote:
Originally posted by Wrent
I agree with Israel's moves. I think that they are in the very awkward position of having two sets of rules to play by. On one hand, they must satisfy 'western' expectations of seeking peaceful ends... on the other, accept the fact that doing so allows opportunity for greater harm to their soldiers and people...
Actually, I strongly disagree with everything in that paragraph other than the first sentence. I do not believe Israel is being held to two sets of rules at all. Instead, I think they are operating completely with good sense in mind. They are bordered on two sides by states that sponsor terrorism, and on another side filled with people they could have wiped out decades ago (Palestine, anyone?). The only reason Israel is not ruling the playground is the constant concessions for peace that they have been making for the past decades.Quote:
I agree with Israel's moves. I think that they are in the very awkward position of having two sets of rules to play by. On one hand, they must satisfy 'western' expectations of seeking peaceful ends... on the other, accept the fact that doing so allows opportunity for greater harm to their soldiers and people...
The concessions haven't borne any fruit, and now they are essentially telling everyone else that they run the joint. I believe that Israel is quite aware that their military is BY FAR the strongest in the region (we would know - Americans and Brits trained them), and this is carried out to such a degree that their REGULAR combat brigades all have a Special Forces-style (Sayeret) battalion sized unit attached to them. They have the capability to achieve everything they want, and I hope that they do not bow to outside political pressures.
Darion, I think Wrent's point was that the West tries to hold Israel to a standard of having to show enormous restraint, always turn the other cheek, etc., whereas the set of rules the Arab nations play by is see your enemy, kill your enemy. It seems that the UN and half the nations of the West are more concerned with convincing Israel to stop retaliating than they are with getting Hezbollah to stop attacking/kidnapping in the first place.
I believe that's what he meant by Israel has to deal with two sets of rules.
Israel has to care somewhat about general world opinion since Israel actually has a vibrant, internationally connected economy. Israel has to engage in actual international commerce instead of just drilling for a single, super valuable natural resource, selling it, and then having a ruling elite keep all the money while its people live in squalor.
Israel doesn't have the "luxury" of ignoring the West/world's opinion and simply crushing their enemies. If the situation was reversed, and Ahmadinejad ran Israel, and had all its strength but with a MEAM population, the entierty of the Middle East would be be the nation of Israel.
I didn't fully elaborate, I guess. What I meant in effect was that Israel has basically seized upon an excellent reason to finally ruin their enemies without any international loss of face, and I hope that it isn't neutered politically.
It would be very interesting if that is what happens. If they use this situation to severely cripple Hezbollah (and to a lesser extent Lebanon) and Hamas, keep on rolling into Syria, and bomb the crap out of Iran, I certainly wouldn't object.Quote:
Originally posted by Darion
What I meant in effect was that Israel has basically seized upon an excellent reason to finally ruin their enemies without any international loss of face, and I hope that it isn't neutered politically.