commentary on the middle east...your views please.

[palefrost]

I saw an interesting commentary the other day, by some mideast expert or another. What they said basically was this:

There are 2 simultaneous wars going on here. First, is the obvious one, Israel vs the militant groups in the region. The second involves radical Muslims in their war against moderate Muslims.

The second fight doesn't involve guns, instead it involves influence. And that by fighting the first war, the militants are winning the second. The more incensed the Israelis get and the more they fight back, the more the militants are winning their real war of gaining support for extremism and isolating moderates in the entire middle east region.

Basically, Hezbollah WANTED Israel to do exactly as they have just done. The expert went on to say he thinks it’s no coincidence that they chose now to kidnap some Israelis, right after they just saw Israel re-invade/occupy Gaza for the same thing. In Hezbollah's minds at least, every day Israel bombs Lebanon (and even better if it expands to Syria), the more influence and supporters they gain, and the more moderate Muslims in the region lose influence.

I don't blame Israel for defending itself either, but I don't particularly think its going to help them in the long term. What do you think?

 

[sushimonster]

That is an interesting question. Terrorists are using fear from the real war to scare the people into adopting their way of life.

Scary and very possible.

 

[daria564]

VERY insightful. the more a group is attacked, the more fear begins to take over rational thought, and thus the more extreme peoples' views will become. i think this guy's got it right.

 

[Word2Action]

I think that the fighting the middle east will never be over. The land has had war way before I was born, during my lifetime, and it most likely will be in turmoil long after I am gone. This is sad.

 

[Jim]

It seems, the way I see it, that Israel is attempting to expand its territory further into Palentinian lands and now into Lebanon. Rational countries trying to seek peace don't launch insane air strike campaigns and invade other countries because a few soldiers were abducted.

What Israel is doing goes way beyond self-defense. Furthermore, my understanding is that the captured Israeli soldiers had crossed the Lebanese border before being grabbed by Hezbollah (or whomever; they would have blamed Hezbollah almost regardless of who did it). Armed soldiers crossing a border is an act of war; if this is the case, Israel has no legitimate complaint because they started the conflict.

As an aside, I really don't like to use the word kidnapped when referring to the captured soldiers, and I find it misleading that the media uses the term. A kidnapping is the abduction of an innocent person under normal circumstances. The soldiers captured were on Lebanese territory and had less-than-paeceful intentions. Their capture happened it the course of what was essentially already a war; the Israelis say they were "kidnapped" because it's worse for Hezbollah's image.

I also find it interesting that people are coming down on Hezbollah for launching missile strikes on civilian areas in Israel. Israel's strikes on Lebanon are far more damaging and no more justified.

 

[capitalist_junkie]

And all this rampant fighting sure gives the Middle East a bad name. No matter what artistic/philosophical/scienctific accomplishments they might have made throughout history, it's being overshadowed by the constant warring. I always try to keep in mind that the problems in the Middle East are the result of a few terrorists, and should not be taken as a representative of the entire region.

 

[palefrost]

As an aside, I really don't like to use the word kidnapped when referring to the captured soldiers, and I find it misleading that the media uses the term. A kidnapping is the abduction of an innocent person under normal circumstances. The soldiers captured were on Lebanese territory and had less-than-paeceful intentions. Their capture happened it the course of what was essentially already a war; the Israelis say they were "kidnapped" because it's worse for Hezbollah's image.

I also find it interesting that people are coming down on Hezbollah for launching missile strikes on civilian areas in Israel. Israel's strikes on Lebanon are far more damaging and no more justified.

OOOooo Very good points. You really cant classify them as "kidnapped" can you. Hrm very good objectiveness...i totally see your point. I mean its not like the media would deliberately try and manipulate people into reporting the news to favor one side...

 

[kokotai]

I do think that the fighting in the holy lands has been on going for a very long time however the basis of the fights has been religion and it is always amazing what people will do in the name of religion.

 

[digger]

people like the hezbollah terrorists only want to see israel and america destroyed. we should invade iran and syria when israel invades lebanon to make sure we get all of them. america's never gonna be safe with people like that running around.

 

[vicki2]

I'm interested in the 'kidnapped' versus 'captured' notion. It's funny but every time I've heard the word 'kidnapped' (and I think the British media uses it more than American ones), it has bothered me but I hadn't stopped to think about manipulation. My instincts always kicked in but I hadn't questioned why ...thanks for a good post.

 

[kokotai]

people like the hezbollah terrorists only want to see israel and america destroyed. we should invade iran and syria when israel invades lebanon to make sure we get all of them. america's never gonna be safe with people like that running around.

And this is exactly the reaction that the Bush administration wants you to have.

 

[digger]

they should want us to have that reaction. its what needs to be done. if nothing gets done there will be terrorists everywhere planning and plotting to kill americans. if our government cant keep us safe, whats the point of it?

whats so wrong with agreeing with bush anyways??

 

[OneofaKind]

they should want us to have that reaction. its what needs to be done. if nothing gets done there will be terrorists everywhere planning and plotting to kill americans. if our government cant keep us safe, whats the point of it?

whats so wrong with agreeing with bush anyways??

For me the key problem is we never deal with the root issue.

As much as I am totally against terrorism at times there is a need to actually stop, listen and understand why they take the actions that they do.

 

[digger]

For me the key problem is we never deal with the root issue.

As much as I am totally against terrorism at times there is a need to actually stop, listen and understand why they take the actions that they do.

terrorists kill people and blow things up becasue they want to destroy our way of life and subject as much of the world as possible to islamic fundamentalist rule. the bottom line is that these people need to be killed or captured until there are none of them left, which means we need to go after them in countires like iran.

 

[Jim]

digger: It's people like you who keep the world in a state of perpetual war. Fearful and eager to follow, you believe any scare story the government can come up with. They say bin Laden did Sept. 11, and you say, "Let's get Afghanistan!" They say Saddam was involved and you say, "Let's get Iraq!"

Then it'll be Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia...how many countries need to be invaded on the basis of one incident that, realistically, happened under questionable circumstances and still hasn't been fully investigated or explained? It's absolutely insane. On Sept 11, 2001, the World Trade Center was destroyed by impacts by commericial airliners and possibly additional explosive devices. The Pentagon was also struck by a plane, and another plane ran aground or was shot down in Pennsylvania. The total death toll was around 3000 people.

Within a couple days, that event had become the excuse for just about every piece of foreign and domestic policy in the United States. The truly strange thing is that the incidents of Sept. 11 were given a less thorough investigation than a common murder. They were given the politician's form of justice; someone said something about a couple suspicious phone calls, the president got on TV and starting accusing people, some mullah in Afghanistan got on TV and said some things, and the next thing you know the United States invades Afghanistan and starts making threats at other countries. Domestic policy starts to become more and more invasive and restrictive. In the meantime, the rubble of the World Trade Center, containing most of the evidence of what happened on that day, is pulled out of New York City and sent to the dump.

Almost five years later, we are learning about illegal domestic spying programs initiated by the White House. The U.S. is at war with two countries whose people are resisiting the occupation, not to mention a never-ending "war on terror". Israel is invading Lebanon, and there is now talk about attacking Iran and Syria. People like you, digger, support these measures because the people in power push for them as necessary to keep America safe.

But the Bush gang has been planning their current foreign policy for many years, not as defense but as a way of securing military pre-eminence and global hegemony so that the U.S. will retain its political and economic stranglehold on the world. They published their plans on the Project for a New American Century Web site for all to see. Look at the names listed on the bottom of the statement of purpose, noting how many are currently in positions of power in the Bush White House. Read through the foreign policy documents and notice how closely they resemble U.S. policy since Bush took office.

The whole thing is a scam. Sept. 11 was a welcome event for the neoconservatives who wanted to launch wars on the world from the U.S. It gave them an excuse to do what they had been planning for a long time.