What should Israel do?

dayan wrote:

Anyone who has followed the political situation here should be aware that Israeli concessions, such as their complete withdrawl from Lebanon in 2000, was seen as a sign of weakness, and encouraged radicals such as Hezbollah and Hamas, who interpreted the withdrawl to mean that with enough time and blood Israel could be wiped out.

Anyone who has followed the political situation here should also know that Israel withdrew from Lebanon after basically leveling the place, and capturing and imprisoning many Lebanese, and are still holding them without charges or trial. That is why Hezbollah is doing what they are doing now. They captured 2 soldiers in hopes for a prisoner exchange. The same thing happened in Gaza. A civilian doctor and his brother were kidnapped by Israeli soliders on June 24th. The following day, an Israeli soldier was captured in response to the previous day's events, and the thousands of other Palestinians that are rotting in Israeli jail cells right now without charges or trial.

miller8966 wrote:

How bout after they give gaza to the palestinians, the palestinians dont use it to set up rockets and mortars? THen cry when their shit gets owned by israel....

they "gave" gaza to the palestinians, but it's like a prision, plalestinians cant go out from gaza, they have no work, nothing to do... nothing...

dayan wrote:

I know that, but I'm arguing that air strikes have proven to not be very effective. Boots on the ground would be able to do more damage to Hezbollah in combination with air power than air power alone is capable of. I'm in Israel now, and I'm telling you that is the case, not because I think that, but because that is what the IDF is saying.

I'm sure you know a hell of a lot more than me, but most if not all of the generals I've heard on the news say that the air strikes were necessary to soften up the area so as to allow the ground troops to operate more effectively.

Saturnal wrote:

Anyone who has followed the political situation here should also know that Israel withdrew from Lebanon after basically leveling the place, and capturing and imprisoning many Lebanese, and are still holding them without charges or trial. That is why Hezbollah is doing what they are doing now. They captured 2 soldiers in hopes for a prisoner exchange. The same thing happened in Gaza. A civilian doctor and his brother were kidnapped by Israeli soliders on June 24th. The following day, an Israeli soldier was captured in response to the previous day's events, and the thousands of other Palestinians that are rotting in Israeli jail cells right now without charges or trial.

We returned almost all Lebanese prisoners in 2003, after Hizbullah had kidnapped 3 Israeli soliders inside Israeli territory and one civilian in a foreign country. The ones who were left are 3 prisoners: Samir Kuntar ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar ), a prisoner who was sent into life time in prison for killing the Haran family members (including a 4 years old girl) inside Isreal. Nisim Naser, who was accused in spying for the sake of Hizbullah, and there's another one which I can't remember his name at the moment, but I know he was accused in storage of illegal weapons. This is it - 3 Lenabese prisoners who got a fair trail and sent into prison.

About the case in Gaza: no one knows whether this story is true or false (=only one website in Turkey reported that case, family neighbors said to the reporter they know the father is in fact a Hamas-loyal, Hamas itself never mentioned this case so this is just a blurry story, don't relate it as a fact), but even if it is true (=the detainees were actually innocent civilians): That case happened only 2 days before Gilad Shalit was kidnapped in Gaza via a LONG tunnle dug all the way from Rafich to Kerem Shalom in Israel ==> one got to assume it takes MORE than just 2 days to dig a long tunnle without anyone to notice you ==> the whole thing was LONG planed in advance, and has nothing to do with that blurry story.

In general: Hizbullah has no right to kidnap anyone for the sake of no one - Not the Palestinians, nor the Iraqi people, or maybe do you think its ok for the Hizbullah to kidnap a few UK/US soliders inside their countries?

dayan wrote:

I'm trying to keep this thread from following other threads into meaningless namecalling. My understanding is that the doctor and his brother were arrested under suspicion of being involved in terrorist activity. That is not the same as being kidnapped. I've already said in another thread that attacking civilians is an illegitimate means of trying to obtain the release of prisoners. Such a tactic constitutes terrorism. Furthermore, Hezbollah violated an international border. That constitutes terrorism. If Hezbollah was a national army it would be an act of war. As for Gaza, the tunnel used to kidnap the Israeli soldier took months to dig. That operation had nothing to do with any Israeli arrests that happened the previous day. This was in the planning far in advance and would have happened with or without Israel's arrest of this doctor. Now, if you have anything to say with regards to the question of this thread I'd be happy to hear it. Otherwise please refrain from posting here.

Well you'll have to get a moderator to stop me from posting, sorry.

So you say "attacking civilians is an illegitimate means of trying to obtain the release of prisoners". I agree, however Israeli soldiers were kidnapped, not civilians. The response from Israel to this kidnapping was to kill civilians along with the people who kidnapped the soldiers. The response from Hezbollah was then to kill civilians along with Israeli soldiers.

To answer your original question, here is what Israel can do:

1. Adhere to a ceasefire and stop their terrorist activities
2. Make a prisoner exchange
3. End the occupation

Here is what Hezbollah and Hamas can do:

1. Adhere to a ceasefire and stop their terrorist activities
2. Make a prisoner exchange
3. Accept a 2-state settlement

dayan wrote:

So I've been reading a lot about how terrible Israel's actions have been in Lebanon on all sorts of different threads on this site. And I am willing to give many people (although not all of you) the benefit of the doubt, and assume that your anger grows out of a genuine horror at the loss of human life, and not out of a hatred of Israel itself. I accept that the death of an innocent civilian is a tragedy. My question is what would you have Israel do? And this is a political question. Please think politically when answering. As a sovereign state Israel's first priority must be to protect its citizens. How would you prefer that Israel fight Hezbollah, a group religiously committed to Israel's destruction, that hides among civilians while attacking Israel? I am not interested in hearing how morally wrong it is to kill civilians. I know this already. I want to know if anyone can actually give me a well thought out political alternative to what Israel is now doing.

Firstly Dayan I wonder whether you took your screen name from that of Moshe Dayan? In my opinion he was an awful brutal racist man, the amount of times his words have not only made my body cringe but shake with anger are probably uncountable especially when he said things like
" We should tell the Palestinians we have no solution for you, that you will live like dogs and whoever will leave will leave, and we'll see where that leads"

Anyhow the reason I firstly mention Palestine is that I firmly believe the conflict between Israel and Palestine is the root of many issues within the Middle East. I have read previous comments throughout this thread that call for a return to the green line and even those that go further stating a return to 1948 borders ( I wonder if they mean pre or post the establishment of the Israeli state).

In my own personal opinion I believe that any solution to the current tradegy unfolding in the Middle East requires Israel to firmly look in the mirror.

(Bear with me as I outline my own ideas on the situation.)

I begin my discussion with the detainment of one soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, on June 25th 2006. Shalit was detained by unidentified Palestinian militants (alot tend towards blaming Islamic Jihad) in response to the detaining of two Palestinian civilians, Osama Muamar and Mustafa Muamar, in Rafah in an overnight raid the previous night. This has mostly gone unreported and instead media sources worldwide tend to report the Israeli military line of stating Palestinians esculated an already tense situation by " kidnapping" a soldier.
In accordance with international law the taking of a soldier is not aquaided to that of taking civilians. The taking of soldiers is a regular event in times of war and provisions are set in international law to detail as to how they should be treated during their time of detainment. However international law frowns upon the " kidnapping " of civilians.

The militants asked initially for all female prisoners and those under the age of 18 to be released. On the 1st July Palestinian's asked that 1000 Prisoners held to be released and an end to the Gaza assault named by IOF as "Operation Summer Rain", that targetted civilian infrastructure and was seen by Palestinians as punishment for electing the Hamas government in January. Palestinian's where then blamed by Israel and the international media for the esculating the situation.

Politically I understand the concept that a soverign nation's first priority is to protect its citizens, but assualting Gaza in such a way surely cannot be the best thing to do to protect your citizens as anyone with half a brain cell could see that inevitably there would be retaliation from those within Gaza who hold the Qassam rockets in their hands (Not one Israeli civilian was killed by these Qassam rockets fired from Gaza ).

Unfortunately however this is the same old story that has continued for decades as to whom to blame for continous death and injury to civilians on both sides.

Operation Summer Rain continued and reigned down heavy. The IOF entered North and South Gaza and subsequently went about arresting members of the Palestinian Government democratically elected by the people. ( 64 Hamas officials to be exact) Human rights organisations including those within the UN called for a cessation of IOF activities stating that it was creating a vast humanitarian crisis. The operations in Gaza and eleswhere within the Occupied Territories continued leaving those on the most highly populated area in our planet without electricity and other essentials for daily life. It is estimated it will take as much as 18months to fully repair the damage doen by the IOF. This collective punishment is also against international law.

Next we have the detainment of two soldiers by the Hezbollah, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Eight soldiers lost their lives trying to further travel into Lebanon to retrieve the soldiers the same day as their "abduction".
This action was claimed by the Hezbollah and in similair circumstances to the taking if Shalit the Hezbollah demanded the release of three Lebanese political prisoners. ( there is a precedent for these behaviours as previously Israel have negoiated and released political prisoners both Lebanese and Palestinian)
The response on part of Israel was the following within two hours of the "abduction" Israel's chief of staff, Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, told Israel's Channel 10, "If the soldiers are not returned, we will turn Lebanon's clock back 20 years."

This was a major mistake politically for Israel in my opinion. Instead of levelling Lebanon and collectively punishing an entire soverign nation diplomacy would have went a long way.
Diplomacy did not exist however and any moral ground Israel could have stood upon in stating its need to protect it's citizens was blown away with the first incursion onto Lebanese soil.

Lebanon has suffered greatly at the hands of Israeli occupation and is itself a soverign nation so do they have as much right to protect their citizens as Israel does?

THe first Katyusha rockets where fired in retaliation for Israel's actions not beforehand. Israel then uses this to qualify to itself and the international community as the reasoning behind the unprovoked attack on Lebanon.
No where in this history of this world have we seen such an action because of the detainment of soldiers.

Had I the opportunity to have stood in Olmert's shoes the last thing I would have done is begin this war with Lebanon. It cannot be quantified as the best response to the taking of soldiers, instead it can only be seen as a fulfillment of an expansionist policy that sees Israel wishing to take and hold onto as much land as they wish to.

This expansionist policy has been identified by its actions in building the "aparthied wall" and its ever increasing theft of land. To get away from the expansionist policies of the Israeli government.

In my personal opinion for Olmert to call the Hezbollah action "an act of war" and respond as such is kinda stupid as Hezbollah are not the Lebanese government nor an armed wing of the Lebanese army - they are a militant organisation established in 1982 in reaction to Israel's occupation of Lebanon so therefore their very existance is linked directly to Israeli actions.

Olmert would have been better served consulting with allies both nationally and internationally and using diplomatic persuasion to deal with Hezbollah. Instead of immediatly placing blame on the Lebanese government they should have at least attempted a discourse with them but instead Israel in it's tradition of blood lust lashed out at civilian infrastructure of a soverign nation killing to date 850+ civilians and injurying an estimated 3,289 and further displacing over 900,000.

Israel has created more support for Hezbollah nationally and globally than it ever had. People who would have never supported such an organisation are currently on the streets waving flags and wishing them luck in their fight for justice - as they see it.

Israel has done itself no favours politically, socially or economically. The fear generated on all sides has fuelled the possibility of decades of pain and for this conflict to continue far beyond the borders of Israel.
The immensely close connection Israel has with the US has been thrown into greater light as many globally who where unaware of the extent to which US arms Israel can now see it clearer than ever.

Dayan you asked the question how should Israel fight Hezbollah my answer would be that they had no real reason to. Hezbollah where not a threat to Israel's existance as some would have us believe - but now generations of arabs and others have a reason for joining this militant organisation and others to revenge the deaths of those they love - Israel has given generations a reason to further hate it. (as if it hadn't given them enough reasons already with their actions towards Palestinians)

Israel now stands before the world as a state without care for the value of Arab life - a vengeful state intent on destruction and death. It has further alienated neighbouring arab countries and their entire populations.

Imagine the scene had Olmert had the balls he was born with and acted as a leader with the ability to talk to others not just to bomb them into non-existence. Olmert could have possibly created a situation where diplomacy became a tool of intervention.

Others have used various examples of other militant groups that have progressed from bombs to politics and the IRA was one of them. As an Irish republican I am only to well aware that this progression was facilitated by the British structures and political machine – the exchange for bombs/guns to a ballot box was not won over night but rather was a process that began with Irish nationalists and republicans voting Sinn Fein into areas of power firstly in local councils then as members of the British Parliament.

However this has not been possible in the Middle East – World powers have fought wars and killed thousands in the name of bringing democracy to other areas of the world. I.e. Iraq. But what happens when the Palestinians democratically elect a Hamas government? Exactly what the US and Israel stated they would do …. Punish them.

Israel’s mistakes will indeed create a legacy of violence. If the aim was to alienate itself from the world and continue as a law onto itself then Israel has accomplished it.

Truly I think I could write forever on where I feel Israel has gone wrong from its very conception – but I don’t feel this is the time and place to do so.

For those who will put my opinions down to nothing but anti Semitism (as it’s easier to label than to understand) I have absolutely no issue in declaring my anti Zionism. This not mean I hate Israel rather that I would stand against any racist ideology set upon the destruction of others – just as I would consider myself anti Nazi or anti racist…. Etc.

I have the right as an individual and human being to defend myself but that does not give me the right to go around bombing and killing people who have yet to harm me.

The same goes for nations - self defense can not be equated to pre planned killing and maiming.

Puck78 wrote:

dayan, I'd like to ask your opinion, as someone living there, on the fear that all of this could lose control and turn into a kind of new Iraq. It is a scenario feared by the Italian foreign minister in a interview today. What do you think?

I really believe it won't be the same case - we don't want to interfere in the Lebanese politics, just to get rid of Hizbullah's constant attackes since 2000. Remember both Lebanon & northern Israel were simply blossoming after we moved out of there, and Hariri (a great Syria & hizbullah opposer) was in the lead. After he was murdered and replaced by Sinyora, there were still some diplomatic contacts between Israel & Lebanon in order to achieve a peace process. In addition to that, unlike the situation in Iraq the world's public opinion as well as most govts opinion was extremely against the whole thing right from the start.

So, another Iraq? I say no.

In the end, this whole story is not (only) about Israel. Hizbullah are Shi'ite Muslims, and their real goal is to bring the Shi'ites into the lead in Lebanon (and not only there), just like in Iran. Israel role in that process is:

1. Destroying Lebanon: Hizbullah knew that Israel will have to draw the line sometime and react, and their latest action finally succeed to pull us back into Lebanon.

2. Raising Hizbullah popularity: Hizbullah knew Israel will react in an aggressive way (as we tend to do all the time), and by doing so Lebanese public opinion will show some great support for Hizbullah and any other actions they'll decide to pull out.

3. Israel is evil: Increasing the anti-Israel (and US) "mood" around the world, cause its always a god thing to do if you want to wipe us off for "dessert". That includes assistance for the Hamas and other radical militias who are acting against us.

What else is on their plan?

4. Take control over Lebanon by killing all of their opposers llike they did before (you can also find that "next step" in the end of the interview I've posted here).

5. Expanding attempts: Hizbullah will try to take over other arab countries such as Jordan or Saudi Arabia on behalf of the Shi'ite religion (also mentioned in that artical) and Iran.

That's what I think about this whole case.