[Rain]

Watercooler currently goes by less rigid rules than BBO itself and the other threads in BBF.

This moderator believes so far the posts have been on topic. The easiest rule to remember is this:

Quote

In general, please follow this rule of thumb (which is a good rule I've picked up from another forum): If you aren't comfortable emailing a post to your grandmother/mother/colleague, then it probably shouldn't be posted here.

Posts quoting the bible or possible propaganda are probably allowed, unless they violate other watercooler post rules.

However, although so far on topic, from experience, it appears as though this thread has a real danger of spiralling into the personal attack arena. You don't need to insult someone by saying "you're a pig!" to launch the first missile. Oftentimes its obviously just as incendiary to attack a religion or a country.
If that happens, this thread will be pulled and posting rights may be affected.

Some posts in this thread have been edited to remove potentially upsetting contents.

[rona_]

Quote

maybe richard is correct that the world holds israel to a higher standard... that's all well and good, but an enemy who uses another's standards against them (and uses its own women and children as shields because of a fear to fight otherwise) can't be given carte blanche

Jimmy I don't believe everything that I read:) I know for a fact that Israel has been bombing buildings and areas that they shouldn't have come close to. I agree with you that we can't go back and back in history and I believe in Israel's right to exist. But they are turning the whole Arab world against them and making Nasrallah a hero which he is not. I think both Israel and the US have been very short-sighted starting with the war in Iraq and now this vicious attack on Lebanon where they had so much support. Now I am really going to bed:)

[mike777]

rona_, on Aug 11 2006, 06:07 PM, said:

Quote

Not only do we not support political manifestations in the lobby; they are against the Rules of this Site. The same applies to political views in player profiles.

Threads in the BBO Forums are a different ballgame altogether. Almost anything is allowed in the Water Cooler, although Uday earlier has expressed doubts.

Roland

Who is WE anyway..are you part of the bbo management now?

You are welcome to your opinion that Israel isn't a terrorist state just as I am happy to state that I think they are and so are Hez and Hamas. There are many speeches that I could post here that are one-sided, however I don't feel it's fair to do so. Goodnight. Oh and before I go just remind Bush not to insist on democratic elections in Egypt because then whoops, here comes the Moslem Brotherhood with 70 million inhabitants and counting.

Well I think you do not carry through with your thinking.

It may very well be that having the Muslim Brotherhood or similiar groups coming to political power is a necessary step to a more peace loving group coming to power?

I do not know but at the very least I think it is an issue worth discussing. You just seem to dismiss it out of hand?

[jtfanclub]

rona_, on Aug 11 2006, 06:15 PM, said:

But they are turning the whole Arab world against them and making Nasrallah a hero which he is not. I think both Israel and the US have been very short-sighted starting with the war in Iraq and now this vicious attack on Lebanon where they had so much support.

Because God knows the Arabs were on their side before.

Hezbollah is the most powerful military force in Lebanon right now. It's hardly the ragtag few hundreds they claim to be. This is a war that's been going on for some time. Israel pulled out of the Litani River area just six years ago- do you think the people there have lived in peace and prosperity for the last six years?

If you asked the citizens of Berlin in 1942 what they thought of the bombing raids of the Allies, what do you think they would have said? That the Lebanese don't like being bombed shouldn't come as a shock. Doesn't mean they won't like the result if it ends up with them having a free country. I'm sure they won't forget it, any more than Japan has forgotten Hiroshima. Somehow, they manage to do business with us.

As far as the rest of the 'Arab World', riiight. I don't see Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, the UAE, etc. doing anything exciting. I don't see their people doing anything exciting. I do see a proxy war with Israel on one side and Syria and Iran on the other going on, but in case you didn't notice, Syria has been having a proxy war in Lebanon against Israel for almost 30 years now, and Iran's leaders were talking about destroying Israel long before this started. As far as the protests are concerned, I seem to recall protests of the same size going on before. It's not like there was a shortage of "Death to the Jews" marches a couple of months ago.

This is old wartime propaganda. Every war brings out the usual protests about how the other side is killing civillians and how everybody loves us so you should stop fighting us. No country who stops fighting because civillians might be killed or because killing the enemy might 'inspire' more enemies will survive as a country for long.

[kenberg]

mike777, on Jul 17 2006, 12:20 PM, said:

What do the Muslim/Arabs/Iran want from Israel and why does not Israel just give it to them.

Old Indian saying "If all men want the same thing, every brave want my squaw". Updated a few years back to "different strokes for different folks". Here is one answer to the question, from a recent newscast.

A Hezbollah bomb wiped out a dwelling, killing the man inside. His brother contacted the hospital and told them his brother's organs could be taken for medical use. A doctor called back and said an Arab man was on the list of recipients. The man said fine and the operation was done. In this case, an Arab wanted a cornea, an Israeli did give it to him, as you suggest.

Here is another answer. Some Arabs see every inch of ground within the state of Israel as properly Arab ground. They want it back, the Israeli's want to keep it. So they won't give it to them because they want to keep it.

No doubt most folks are less generous than the man in the first answer, less determined to the total destruction of Israel than those in the second answer. Is it possible for an agreement strong enough that those who accept it will rein in those who wish to sabotage it? I seriously doubt it.

As to claims of injustice, no doubt any partisan on any side can supply plenty. I suppose a Comanchee could make a convincing claim that my house is on acestral tribal lands. It may well be true. He can't have my house.

God has some responsibility for this. He told at least two different religious groups that this land was theirs by divine right. This leads to trouble.

Ken

[rona_]

[QUOTE]Well I think you do not carry through with your thinking.

It may very well be that having the Muslim Brotherhood or similiar groups coming to political power is a necessary step to a more peace loving group coming to power?

I do not know but at the very least I think it is an issue worth discussing. You just seem to dismiss it out of hand[QUOTE]

The organisation's motto is: Allah is our objective. The Prohet is our Leader. Qu'ran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

An important aspect of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology is the sanctioning of Jihad such as the 2004 fatwa issued by Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi making it a religious obligation of Muslims to abduct and kill USA citizens in Iraq.

Yes I do not carry through with my thinking.

[luke warm]

kenberg, on Aug 11 2006, 06:37 PM, said:

God has some responsibility for this. He told at least two different religious groups that this land was theirs by divine right. This leads to trouble.

Ken

i didn't know that... does it come from the same or different sources?

[Walddk]

rona_, on Aug 12 2006, 01:15 AM, said:

I think both Israel and the US have been very short-sighted starting with the war in Iraq and now this vicious attack on Lebanon where they had so much support.

What did you expect Israel to do when Hezbollah kidnapped their soldiers and launched rockets all over the place? Lean back and let it happen?

Exactly that happened during World War II because the Jews had no defence. Things have changed. The Jews are capable of defending themselves now, and they have every right to do that when they are attacked.

So the Israelis are trying to destroy Hezbollah whose fighters hide everywhere, not least among what is known as "innocent women and children". Therefore, it's hardly a shock that there will be civilian casualties.

Name a war that hasn't caused the deaths of civilians. It's deplorable, but also unavoidable.

Roland

[mike777]

[quote name='rona_' date='Aug 11 2006, 06:46 PM'] [QUOTE]Well I think you do not carry through with your thinking.

It may very well be that having the Muslim Brotherhood or similiar groups coming to political power is a necessary step to a more peace loving group coming to power?

I do not know but at the very least I think it is an issue worth discussing. You just seem to dismiss it out of hand[QUOTE]

The organisation's motto is: Allah is our objective. The Prohet is our Leader. Qu'ran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

An important aspect of the Muslim Brotherhood ideology is the sanctioning of Jihad such as the 2004 fatwa issued by Sheikh Yousef Al-Qaradhawi making it a religious obligation of Muslims to abduct and kill USA citizens in Iraq.

Yes I do not carry through with my thinking. [/QUOTE]
Good Grief we know all of that. Do you not think anyone knows about these groups or the history of the mideast besides you.


Please tell us something we do not know.

With all of that said I will repeat, yes the they may come to power or some similiar group. I do not know but it may or may not be worse than what we have now. Worth discussing at least.

[rona_]

Quote

Please tell us something we do not know. smile.gif

Where do I begin..........

[pbleighton]

"It may very well be that having the Muslim Brotherhood or similiar groups coming to political power is a necessary step to a more peace loving group coming to power?"

Unfortunately, I think that this is true.

The West has installed and supported brutal, corrupt dicatorships in the Middle East for decades (not to mention colonization before that). The only force in these societies which the governments dared not mess with too much is religion. This has led to the rise of various "political Islams", which are:
1. Fundamentalist, and wishing to overthrow the secular governments, and replace them with theocracies, as in Iran.
2. Anti-Israel.
3. In many cases anti-Western. The degree of this varies. This is frequently misinterpreted in the West as being "destroy the West". This is, in fact, a very small minority view. The majority view is "kill as many Westerners as necessary in order to get the West out of all Muslim countries". The CIA reported that even Bin Laden, who initially opposed the 9/11 plan, changed his mind after the U.S. continued its support of Israel's handling of the Palestinian situation.

This has become the dominant political force in the Muslim world, particularly in the Middle East.

It is a poisonous situation, as is always the case when religion and politics mix. Theocracy will have its day. Iran shows hope, though. Most of the younger generation has turned against the mullahs, and is thoroughly sick of theocracy.
In the meantime, expect fundamentalist, anti-Israel parties to win elections, as they have in Palestine and Iraq.

Israel is a huge sticking point. It strengthens the fundamentalists' position immeasurably. As difficult as it will be, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians is necessary for the Middle East, and for the world, especially in these nuclear times.

As an analogy, see Northern Ireland - the support of the Irish Catholic Church in the Irish struggle against the British has made Ireland the most Catholic country by far in an otherwise increasingly secular Europe. Religious divisions make the Northrn Ireland problem a lot more difficult. The position of the Northern Irish Protestants/British descendants is somewhat analogous to the Israelis - even though they should not have been there originally, in their words "It's our country too", and they are not going anywhere. OTOH, they finally started to negotiate seriously, and peace, while not quite there, is visible.

And, of course, the invasion of Iraq was a huge gift to the more extreme versions of political Islam.

Peter

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Aug 12 2006, 02:50 AM, said:

 

>What did you expect Israel to do when Hezbollah kidnapped their soldiers and
>launched rockets all over the place? Lean back and let it happen?

Simply put, yes...

An occassional kidnapping and a rocket here and there is not a threat to Israel's existence. These types of incidents are certainly very regretable, however, I don't think that there is any good way to stop them. Consider this as a cost of doing business. The Israeli's made a concious decision to act as colonial overlords and used military force and ethnic cleansing to seize large amounts of Arab land. The Israelis deliberately subsidized the colonization of the West bank by granting large tax breaks to settlers. In return, the Israelis get to live with the occasional rocket attack and suicide bombings.

>Exactly that happened during World War II because the Jews had no defence.
>Things have changed. The Jews are capable of defending themselves now,
>and they have every right to do that when they are attacked.

The Israeli's aren't defending themselves - the rocket attacks and suicide bombings aren't stopping - they are simply inflciting pain on their neighbors and radicalizing whole new generations of Arabs. You might buy a temporary cessation of hostilities this way, but its no way to build a lasting peace. WMD strikes against Haifa and Tel'Aviv are inevitable consequences of this set of policies. Keep heading down this path and you're going to get a whole new Holocaust to accompany the last one.

Golda Meir famously said "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us". I think that there is a corollary to this: The Arabs need to believe that the future offers some hope for their children. Take away away this hope and the only think that folks have left is violence. The Israeli attacks on Lebanon destroyed the economic infrastructure of an entire country and devasted the tourism industry. The Israeli's deprived generations of Lebanese any hope to better their lives. I suspect that this is going to have some ugly consequences for border security.

Furthermore, the Israelis demonstrated that they have a handsome ability to bomb bridges, hospitals, and apartment complexes, but they're not doing nearly so well on the ground. Yes, the Israelis are advancing, but they are losing large numbers of tanks and men. Hezbollah is providing the Arab world with an example of Arabs "successfully" standing up to the vaunted Israeli army. The Arabs can afford to lose a lot more people than the Israelis and i'm sure that they're thrill to trade RPGs for Merkavas.

In short, this conflict is

1. Antagonising the Arab population
2. Unifying Arab support behind Hezbollah
3. Providing a model on how to oppose the Israeli army

The ONLY thing that is going to bring peace that hellhole is providing economic opportunity for impoverished Arabs, and you aren't going to achieve this with airstrikes, artillery barrages, or tanks.

[luke warm]

hrothgar, on Aug 12 2006, 08:46 AM, said:

An occassional kidnapping and a rocket here and there is not a threat to Israel's existence.

huh? ... would other countries do the same?

Quote

The Israeli's made a concious decision to act as colonial overlords and used military force and ethnic cleansing to seize large amounts of Arab land.  The Israelis deliberately subsidized the colonization of the West bank by granting large tax breaks to settlers.  In return, the Israelis get to live with the occasional rocket attack and suicide bombings.

ahhh... it's their fault, so take it like a man

Quote

The Israeli's aren't defending themselves - the rocket attacks and suicide bombings aren't stopping - they are simply inflciting pain on their neighbors and radicalizing whole new generations of Arabs.

certainly they're defending themselves... the fact that an enemy presses an attack isn't proof of a lack of defense... maybe it's proof of a lack of a suitable (or preferred) defense, but that's all

Quote

WMD strikes against Haifa and Tel'Aviv are inevitable consequences of this set of policies.  Keep heading down this path and you're going to get a whole new Holocaust to accompany the last one.

if wmd strikes are lauched, some country in the mid east will be vaporized, i think...

Quote

Golda Meir famously said "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us".  I think that there is a corollary to this:  The Arabs need to believe that the future offers some hope for their children.

my gut instinct tells me that a child has more hope when s/he isn't told, "here, strap on this backpack and take the 715 to haifa... don't worry, i'll keep supper warm for ya".... or when a family is told, "nah, there's no danger - we'll put the rockets in the upstairs room and lauch from the roof.. everything will be fine"

Quote

Hezbollah is providing the Arab world with an example of Arabs "successfully" standing up to the vaunted Israeli army.

yes, invade israel, hit and run (preferably with some kidnapped hostages), come back to your cities and lauch from those areas... when the israeli army enters, be sure they can't get you unless they get women and children... then sit back and wait for the world to tell israel why they should just take it

Quote

The ONLY thing that is going to bring peace that hellhole is providing economic opportunity for impoverished Arabs, and you aren't going to achieve this with airstrikes, artillery barrages, or tanks.

the only thing that will bring peace is the quote you used from meir... it appears that won't happen anytime soon...

[hrothgar]

luke warm, on Aug 12 2006, 05:19 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Aug 12 2006, 08:46 AM, said:

An occassional kidnapping and a rocket here and there is not a threat to Israel's existence.

huh? ... would other countries do the same?

The Indian and the Pakistani's (for that matter the Indians and Chinese) regularly trade artillery rounds on the border

The British didn't launch a military assaults on the Repblic of Ireland (or for that matter the USA) despite widespread aid given to the IRA

The Spanish didn't launch airstrikes againtst ETA

Thailand doesn't appear to have any plans to invade Indonesia

Yes, to some extent countries need to suck it up and take it like a man and exercise restraint because the alternative doesn't work...

The age of the colonial empires is gone...
Stealing territory by force doesn't work any more.

[Walddk]

hrothgar, on Aug 12 2006, 03:46 PM, said:

An occassional kidnapping and a rocket here and there is not a threat to Israel's existence.

9/11 wasn't a threat to USA's existence either. So your compatriots should also just lean back and take it as men, I suppose. What a morbid way of thinking.

Or maybe you have other moral standards when it comes to the USA? If it same applies to *your* country, I would like to hear how you will be feeling if *your* family members are blown to pieces.

Shrug?

Roland

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Aug 12 2006, 06:00 PM, said:

hrothgar, on Aug 12 2006, 03:46 PM, said:

An occassional kidnapping and a rocket here and there is not a threat to Israel's existence.

9/11 wasn't a threat to USA's existence either. So your compatriots should also just lean back and take it as men, I suppose. What a morbid way of thinking.

Or maybe you have other moral standards when it comes to the USA? If it same applies to *your* country, I would like to hear how you will be feeling if *your* family members are blown to pieces.

Shrug?

Roland

First and foremost: People whose families just got blown up are the last ones who should be engaged in any kind of decision making processing. They will (naturally) be motivated by feelings of hurt/loss and go out seeking revenge... Michael Dukakis was famously asked whether his own feelings about capital punishment would change if his own wife was raped or murdered. My own answer to that question is that my personal feelings might very well change, however, the feelings of one aggrieved individual should not have a disproportionate impact on public policy.

Second: I agree with you. 9/11 was a terrible occurance, but it certainly wasn't any kind of existential threat to the United States. Personally, I feel much more threatened by the rise of the authoritarian right post 9/11 than I do from some supposed new Caliphate.

I think that the United State's reaction to 9/11 was completely insane... I was opposed to the war in Iraq from day 1. I have mixed feelings about our intervention into Afghanistan. Personally, I think that some kind of response was necessary. However, I think that the core of this effort should have been composed of foreign aid and trade liberalization rather than military intervention.

The United States deliberately cultivated the rise of militant madrasah in Pakistan. The CIA armed and trained the Mujahadeen. We tried to use Islam as a weapon that could be selectively wielded against the Soviet Union. When the Soviets were forced to retreat out of Afghanistan, we left Afghanistan to rot. We cut off (almost) all aid and allowed the country to collapse into civil war and anarchy. The decision came back to bite us. The most recent US intervention in Afghaistan seems to be failing. We did a great job driving the Taliban out of the major cities, but we are failing miserably at "nation building", and nation building is what is necessary to build a lasting peace.

9/11 was a defining moment for the US and Bush had enormous political capital. I wish that Bush had chosen to use this opportunity to create some kind of Marshall plan for the Islamic world rather than squandering this opportunity trying to show his daddy up by invading Iraq the "right" way...

[pbleighton]

"9/11 wasn't a threat to USA's existence either. So your compatriots should also just lean back and take it as men, I suppose.."

A silly distortion.

"What a morbid way of thinking"

I suppose you are cheering the great success the U.S. is having in Iraq?

Peter

[Walddk]

pbleighton, on Aug 12 2006, 07:15 PM, said:

"9/11 wasn't a threat to USA's existence either. So your compatriots should also just lean back and take it as men, I suppose.."

A silly distortion.

"What a morbid way of thinking"

I suppose you are cheering the great success the U.S. is having in Iraq?

Peter

It's not a distortion at all. Israeli lives are as precious to Israel as American lives are to Americans, and Lebanese lives are to Lebanese. Percentagewise Israel and Lebanon have lost many more lives during this conflict than USA lost on 9/11.

Populations:
USA: 295,737,134
Israel: 6,352,117
Lebanon: 3,874,050
(July 2006)

The ongoing war in the Middle East is a tragedy, as was 9/11, and yes I cheer the USA, Israel, the United Kingdom, France, etc. for trying to fight terrorism, regardless of where in the world you encounter it. This is far from easy, but in my opinion it's dead wrong just to lean back and let it happen.

You can't and should never negotiate with terrorists, so you have got to fight them with war.

Roland

[hrothgar]

Walddk, on Aug 12 2006, 10:02 PM, said:

The ongoing war in the Middle East is a tragedy, as was 9/11, and yes I cheer the USA, Israel, the United Kingdom, France, etc. for trying to fight terrorism, regardless of where in the world you encounter it. This is far from easy, but in my opinion it's dead wrong just to lean back and let it happen.

Some would argue that its possible to combat terrorism without destroying Iraq or Lebanon... Indeed, many believe that said military actions are counter productive.

From what i can tell, the Israeli public has concluded that Olmert really screwed the pooch this time

[pbleighton]

"It's not a distortion at all. Israeli lives are as precious to Israel as American lives are to Americans, and Lebanese lives are to Lebanese. Percentagewise Israel and Lebanon have lost many more lives during this conflict than USA lost on 9/11."

My reference was to your obnoxious "take it like a man" phrase.

"The ongoing war in the Middle East is a tragedy, as was 9/11, and yes I cheer the USA, Israel, the United Kingdom, France, etc. for trying to fight terrorism, regardless of where in the world you encounter it. This is far from easy, but in my opinion it's dead wrong just to lean back and let it happen."

IMO it is dead wrong to commit a war crime, i.e. attacking a country which had not attacked the U.S. (Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11). Under the Geneva convention, any country which starts a war is guilty of a war crime. Also, collective punishment is a war crime as well (you can look it up), so Israel's intentional bombing of civilians certainly qualifies.

And no, one war crime doesn't excuse another.

It's also stupid, racist, and self-destructive to lump all Muslims together under the "terrorist" label, which is the practical effect of Israeli and U.S. foreign policy. The U.S. now has far more Muslim enemies than it had 3 years ago, and is far less secure.

Peter