Indiscriminate bombing and punishing civilian population are not only indefensible, they’re war crimes. Their [sic] was nothing “precise” about the air campaign.

THeDRiFTeR on August 13, 2006 at 3:27 AM

Again, you’re entitled to your uninformed opinion.

Indiscriminate accurately describes firing rockets into non-military civilian residential areas. It does not accurately describe destroying Hizbullah military targets, even though those targets are located in, around, and under civilian residental areas.

You can’t possibly be arguing that Hizbullah was anything other than indiscriminate, so I have to assume you take exception to my description of the Israeli targets in Lebanon. For that issue, time will tell. We have now finally started seeing Hizbullah funerals, even though they categorically denied they had suffered any losses, that all the “victims” were innocent civilians.

You won’t see pictures from Israel that include dead children exhumed from their graves to be paraded around for the leftmedia’s cameras. You only see that behavior where the truth of the situation, i.e. that Hizbullah intentionally committed war crimes agains Lebanon by positioning military targets in the middle of the civilian population, doesn’t serve their agenda. And the fact that such staged events are deemed necessary lends confirmation to my original description of the Israeli bombing. If Israel had been indiscriminate, no staged shots would be needed.

Before you again accuse Israel of war crimes, perhaps you should first read the rules…

Yes, I know that’s a Canadian document. I figured you might be more swayed by the version from our generally more pacifist neighbors to the north. Be sure not to miss paragraphs 406 and 407.

We need to “see” and “hear” what they are saying every minute of every hour of every day. The Ahmadinejads or Nasrallahs are not the least little bit interested in what is right. They are using our own humanity as their weapon to achieve their goals. We will either stand up or be forced to bend our necks for decapitation but only after we watch our babies and children suffer that fate.

I truly fear the fate of my great grandchildren who are yet to be born. I am afraid that the liberal/socialist thinking rampant throughout the world is creating a future where the scenario outlined above will come to pass.

Hezbollah attacked Israel on July 12th and kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. The attack, dreamed Nassraleh, will force Israel to release thousands of Palestine terrorists. A month later, he awakes to a new reality.

UN Security Council Resolution 1701…

Caroline Glick isn’t the exactly the only columnist who believes that accepting resolution 1701 is a major mistake. Elan Journo isn’t exactly happy about it either. …

So, should Israel, which has been at war with these terrorists longer than we have, go in first with ground troops and be criticized for “occupying” Lebanon again?

on the Mark… on August 13, 2006 at 12:45 AM

They should indeed have. Indiscriminate bombing and punishing civilian population are not only indefensible, they’re war crimes. Their was nothing “precise” about the air campaign.

I could point out that I do believe that Israel has the right to defend itself using whatever legal means at its disposal. If that mean invading Lebanon, from which a barrage of rockets have been launched, then so be it, and to hell with being “criticized”. But then I’d have to say also that Israel should be doing everything in its power to make peace with its neighbours, which of course would include the withdrawal from all occupied territories and a viable 2 state solution with Palestine. This land grab has just got to stop. Fair is fair, and if there’s one thing I like to believe, it’s that we are fair.

Trying to get me to buy into that biblical holy land shit shuts me down. That nonsense is as valid as the bin Laden bullshit. The other face of the same extremist coin.

Where are the days of James Baker III as Secretary of State, and Brent Snowcroft as Security Advisor? You may find this an interesting read, I certainly did.

Riehl World View

I’ve been negligent in keeping up the general links for war coverage – posted below. As disappointed as I and many others are by developments, the end game is extremely far from clear. Allah has been tracking today’s developments. I…

The only immediate hope is that Hezbollah doesn’t honor the ceasefire thus giving the Israelis the excuse for annihilating them. Other than that who will actually disarm the Hezbollah? The miserable Lebanese Army? The equally miserable UN “Peacekeeping” Force?

THE ONLY THING A CEASEFIRE WILL ACCOMPLISH IS FOR HEZBOLLAH TO REPLENISH ITS ARSENAL.

As far as critcism for Israel, well, I never attempt to defend the indefensible, and their air campaign in Lebanon was just that, in my opinion.

THeDRiFTeR on August 12, 2006 at 6:26 PM

And, of course, you’re welcome to your opinion, uninformed though it may be.

Left-wing pundits also said that the US air bombardment of Iraq in 1991 and again in 2003 were both indefensible. The latter of those precise to the point of virtually eliminating collateral casualties. Our forces bent over backwards to limit civilian casualties. Saddam had violated international law of war by positioning military assets in population centers, using civilians as shields. Had we chosen to use more conventional bombardment, the civilian casualties would have been much higher. We decided to go far beyond the requirements of international law and use precision weapons, at much greater expense, in hopes that we could spare the people, who had already been victims of Saddam’s special brand of horror, from any more than absolutely necessary.

Hizbullah has done precisely the same thing as Saddam, launching rockets at Israel from populated areas, and trapping civilians in those areas precisely to expand the civilian casualties. Israel has, wisely, moved as many of their civilians out of range as they could. Even worse, they are holed up in apartments, religious facilities, hospitals, and schools. Sometimes they dart out to fire their rockets, other times fire right from the civilian locations. How does Israel target the terrorists without also targeting the civilians which have been trapped there with and by the terrorists? Not possible.

So, should Israel, which has been at war with these terrorists longer than we have, go in first with ground troops and be criticized for “occupying” Lebanon again? That seems to be, short of just absorbing the constant rocket barrage, the only alternative to the aerial bombardment you deem indefensible. Or should they attempt to strike at Hizbullah with the best information they can get, recognizing that sometimes they will hit civilians (as opposed to hitting military targets hidden inside or under civilians), and attempt to minimize their own military losses by not going in on the ground until after sufficient disruption of Hizbullah forces? I would choose the latter, as did they.

This is not to say that Israel has been perfect in all this. Anything but. Unfortunately, Olmert is a lawyer, not a warrior. The generals had a very different plan that would have ended this with far fewer civilian and Israeli military casualties. The politicians did not allow the military to proceed until after first proving that lawyers don’t know squat about conducting military operations. With that proof now firmly documented, the military is going in and will try to make up for lost time.

It remains to be seen just how well this “cease fire” is likely to work. If Hizbullah will quit attacking Israel, I suspect it will hold. That’s a big “if” and not likely, especially after the comments today by Nasrallah. The cease fire allows Israel to remain in Lebanon until they are relieved by the Lebanese army and UN forces. Nasrallah has said that his forces (which he commands with great cowardice from Iran and Syria) will continue to attack Israel as long as they remain in Lebanon. The cease fire plan allows Israeli forces to defend themselves and attack any force which attacks them. Israel is using this last day or so before the cease fire takes effect to prepare to do just that, and is taking up positions they can defend successfully. With any luck at all, Hizbullah will give them plenty of opportunity to do that and be eliminated in the process.

Hizbullah started this latest mess by firing rockets from Lebanon into Israel. The Lebanese government and military, aided by the UN, did nothing to stop them from doing so, making them just as much at fault as Hizbullah.

You call Israel’s response “indefensible.” The world media seems to be on your side. I call it “inescapable.” I guess it will be interesting to see how many are on my side when this is all over.

Death to Islam, and
their mediot stooges!
Duty, Honor, Country
(in THAT order)
Rowane

I’ve been negligent in keeping up the general links for war coverage – posted below. As disappointed as I and many others are by developments, the end game is extremely far from clear. Allah has been tracking today’s developments. It…

Pathetic dhimmitude. We should have wiped them out then when we had the chance. What the hell was Reagan thinking?

Personally, I’d far prefer the Jews to be angry, aggressive and alive than meek, mild and dead.

This is a stern message for all the ‘non-super-creepy Jews’ and their friends everywhere!

Nothing has depressed me more in the last few days, than the depression displayed by my Jewish friends and their friends, many also on this board.

This war will be long and will be fought on many fronts, and in many ways, Lebanon being a tiny part of it. Setbacks will also happen. It will also be fought on many fields, the media and the field of ideas being two very large ones.

We must all remain ‘angry, aggressive and alive’ and do our part, no matter our expertise, capability, or medium. Depressed people are mostly not alive enough to be effective at much. Our times are too serious and much is, or should be, asked of all of us.

Here my favorites:

and Yvonne Ridley (kidnapped by Islamists, then became one) getting their chadors in a twist about big swarthy men with tea-towels on their heads

I always thought those ‘tea-towels’ were diapers.

All across the board, Lebanese civilians are referred to as “civilians” where Israeli civilians are referred to as “Israelis” – an eerie and sinister difference pointed out by the non-Jewish stand-up comic genius Natalie Haynes, and one which very few people appear to have noticed – even me, until then.

A surprising number of British people – especially the super-creepy British Jews who recently signed a treacherous letter to the press distancing themselves from Israel’s actions – seem to think Israel should exist not as a real, imperfect country full of real, imperfect people led by real, imperfect leaders, but as some sort of collective kosher Mater Dolorosa, there to provide a selfless, suffering example to the rest of us.

I wonder if we could use the term ‘creepy American Jews’ here in the U.S., even though I can think of a few qualifying specimens?

Just heard on the “Beltway Boys” that a new poll shows that Republicans at a rate of 2/1 support Israel. What happened to the other half of this country?

You’ve just given me a link to an opinion penned by Alan Dershowitz, hardly evidence. But anyhow.

He gave you a citation for the quote, down to which column it appeared in.

I’ve just given you evidence of genocidal intent

You’ve just given me a link to an opinion penned by Alan Dershowitz, hardly evidence. But anyhow.

As far as critcism for Israel, well, I never attempt to defend the indefensible, and their air campaign in Lebanon was just that, in my opinion.

I try to be careful before labelling anyone a terrorist. That word seems to have lost all of its meaning in the past few years. Its become synomimous with the words “our enemies”, and that just seems unwise to me.

In passing, I love these discussions, and look forward to reading your stuff everyday. Makes for good debate with the wife, who also reads your posts.

Let’s not forget that Hamas is still holding an Israeli soldier in addition to the soldiers that Hezbollah is holding. ‘President Mahmoud Abbas is under pressure to demolish the Palestinian Authority because of anarchy in the West Bank and Gaza,…

Point me to the evidence that shows them to be “genocidal”. I can find such accusations nowhere outside of Israeli invective.

How hard did you look, TD? Or did you bother to look?

Quote:

Never before or since in world history has a tyrannical regime sought to murder all of the members of a particular racial, religious, ethnic or cultural group, regardless of where they live–not until now. Hezbollah’s aim is not to “end the occupation of Palestine,” or even to “liberate all of Palestine.” Its goal is to kill the world’s Jews. Listen to the words of its leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah: “If Jews all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide.” (NY Times, May 23, 2004, p. 15, section 2, column 1.)

Hezbollah’s also a proxy of Iran, of course, whose president has vowed to wipe Israel off the map. “Ah!” but you say, “Israel isn’t a race!” True enough — although if his plan ever comes to fruition, it’ll be interesting to see if he spares Israeli Arabs from the sword. I have a crazy hunch that he will — just like how Nasrallah apologized last week for one of his rockets having killed two Arab boys in Israel. Suggests a certain racial component to their thinking, no?

I don’t mean Muslim when I say “jihadi,” and frankly I’m puzzled that you suggest that I do. If I’d meant “Muslim,” I’d have said “Muslim.” I deliberately chose the word “jihadi” because it describes a subset of Muslims, not the entire group. Riddle me this: if you’re capable of making such fine distinctions between Israel and Jews as a whole, why aren’t you able to distinguish between my use of “jihadi” and “Muslim”?

And finally, as for “irredentist,” it’s true: there’s nothing pejorative per se about the word. It all has to do with means and motives. I’ve just given you evidence of genocidal intent; and the past few weeks have made the methods clear enough. Irredentism tends to go hand in hand with fascist movements, including/especially in the 1930s, so I do think it’s worth noting when strains of it appear in the enemy.

Although perhaps “revanchist” would have been better.

You know, I genuinely don’t mind criticism of Israel, which you seem to relish. But I must tell you — it goes down a lot smoother when it doesn’t come packaged with apologies for Hezbollah.

What you’re seeing here is the elevation of a genocidal, irredentist jihadi organization to the status of nationhood

Good god Allahpundit! That is way over the top, and I’m sorry, but I just have to call you on it. Point me to the evidence that shows them to be “genocidal”. I can find such accusations nowhere outside of Israeli invective.

If you mean muslim when you say “jihadi”, then you take liberties that I wouldn’t.

You use irrendentist like it was a four letter word. Could you tell me why that is, or did I just misunderstand?

I will agree with the main premise of the sentence however, that Hezbollah has been elevated to a status of equals at the negociating table. It’s why I’ve been saying, here and elsewhere, that Israel has lost this war.

So, Israeli tanks are at the river, and the ceasefire (nudge, nudge) is supposed to take effect (wink, wink) at 7 a.m. Monday. It has been speculated that this “peace” is just a trap for Hezbollah. Let’s hope so….

Either Olmert is a craven fool who has sentenced his people to more bloodshed the moment Hezbollah can re-arm, or he has trapped Hezbollah and it’s master, Iran, in a realpolitik form of amber.

I can imagine scenarios that devolve from the “cease fire” and Israel’s acceptance of it that result as either a masterstroke or an utter disaster for Isreal.

It’s quite possible that Israel is simply pausing momentarily, regrouping, knowing that it won’t be long before Hezbollah violates the terms of the cease fire allowing Israel to continue. The first time they catch Hezbollah with any weapons; or the first time Hezbollah launches one of their remaining rockets; or the moment that Hezbollah tells the UNIFIL or Lebanese army to go stuff it could be the excuse Israel needs to continue the war.

It would also “raise the bar” for a subsequent attempt for a “cease fire,” resulting in better terms for Israel.

Or, it’s possible that Israel has reason to believe that it can crush the remains of Hezbollah in another 48 hours.

Or, maybe the situation with Hezbollah will take care of itself after Israel strikes Iran’s nuclear capacity (a likely scenario, IMHO). I would assume that any direct conflict with Iran would result in Hezbollah breaking the cease fire, giving Israel the excuse to complete what it started.

Or, it’s equally possible that the Olmert government is too incompetent or cowardly to tell the world to “stuff it,” and this action could lead to Israel’s destruction as a country.

It appears, despite our MSM being Hezbollah’s cheerleaders, that they are on the ropes right now. And there will be a period of time for Israel to search out and destroy weapons that are illegal for Hezbollah to possess as it will take time for UNIFIL to deploy and for Israel to protectively withdraw.

In any event, I am convinced that Israel does not want to sit in Lebonon indefinitely and “administer” it — and repeat their experiences there. Staying in Lebanon is a guarantee of “Intifada Part III,” and I’m pretty sure that the Israeli “man in the street” wants nothing to do with that!

Time will tell whether Olmert is a genius or a fool. For the Israelis, I hope it is the former.

Sorta continued from Peace in our time — Post 3, but also sorta from Re: Peace in Our Time and Re: Re: Peace in our timeBreaking: IDF reaches Litani; ceasefire set for 7 a.m. MondayAllahpundit IDF officials said yesterday, before…