Let It Bleed

[Mallory Claire]

I'm liberal. You know how college kids are with Bush. And this whole Israel-Hizbullah tea party sucks major ass. So the title of this article originally caught my attention because of the Rolling Stones, but then I read it and went HMMMM GOOD POINT. So I'm sharing, with anyone who cares about the state of the world. I, for one, am very embarassed. Read carefully, or not at all.

Let It Bleed
Leaders at the Rome summit on the Mideast are ignoring the real bottom line: Hizbullah is winning.
By Christopher Dickey
Newsweek

July 26, 2006 - Worthy-sounding meetings of ministers, like the International Conference for Lebanon held in Rome today, rarely get very much done. The participants here were high-powered, to be sure: U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, the prime minister of the country in question, Fouad Siniora, plus a slew of Europeans and Arabs (but no Israelis or Hibullahis). Instigated by Washington, it was all for show.

The assembled dignitaries expresed their "determination to work immediately to reach with the utmost urgency a ceasefire" in the war that started two weeks ago today when the Hizbullah militia crossed the border to capture two Israeli soldiers, and Israel responded with a massive counterattack the length and breadth of Lebanon. But, at American insistence, the ceasefire would have to be one that's "lasting, permanent, and sustainable." Which means the flames searing Lebanon, threatening Israel and endangering the most volatile region in the world will go on for weeks, if not months, to come. The consolation prize? A promise of "immediate humanitarian aid."

Imagine, if you will, that arsonists have set your apartment block on fire. You call 911 and plead for help. The dispatcher tells you of her "determination to work immediately with the utmost urgency" to douse the flames, but only if plans can be agreed on for the new building to be erected when the decrepit old one has gone up in smoke. She's stalling, hoping the arsonists will be eliminated by the conflagration. And she's got a great vision for the way that block should look some day. That's what counts. Not your furniture, or for that matter, your family inside.

No wonder Siniora looked distraught as the conference closed.

But as irrational as the politicians who make the policy may be, the professionals in their entourages often understand reality quite well. And in the corridors of today's conference, I met several men and women who, on background or off the record (meaning they were afraid of losing their jobs if caught talking too frankly) laid out a picture of the situation in the Middle East right now that was convincing, frightening, and seems to have escaped the notice of Dispatcher Rice altogether.

The bottom line: Hizbullah is winning. That's the hideous truth about the direction this war is taking, not in spite of the way the Israelis have waged their counterattack, but precisely because of it. As my source Mr. Frankly put it, "Hizbullah is eating their lunch."

We're talking about a militia - a small guerilla army of a few thousand fighters, in fact - that plays all the dirty games that guerillas have always played. It blends in with the population; it draws fire on innocents. But it's also fighting like hell against an Israeli military machine that is supposed to be world class. And despite the onslaught of the much-vaunted Tsahal, Hizbullah continues to pepper Israel itself with hundreds of rockets a day.

The United States, following Israel's lead, does not want an immediate ceasefire precisely becayse that would hand Hizbullah a classic guerilla-style victory: it started this fight against a much greater military force - and it's still standing. In the context of a region where vast Arab armies have been defeated in days, for a militia to hold out one week, two weeks, and more, is seen as heroic. Hizbullah is the agressor, the underdog, and the noble survivor, all at once. "It's that deadly combination of the expectation game, which Hizbullah has won, and the victim game, which they've also won," as my straight-talking friend put it.

Neither U.S. nor Israel policymakers have taken this dynamic into account. If they had, they'd understand that with each passing day, no matter how many casualties it takes, Hizbullah's political power grows. Several of my worldly Lebanese and Arab friends here in Rome today - people who loathe Hizbullah - understand this problem well. Privately they say that's one of the main reason they are so horrified at the direction this war has taken: they fear not only that Lebanon will be destroyed, but that Hizbullah will wind up planting its banner atop the mountain of rubble.

When I heard Condi talking in pitiless academic pieties today, about "strong and robust" mandates and "dedicated and urgent action," Iactually felt sorry for her, for our government, and for Israel. As in Iraq three years ago, the administration has been blinded to the political realities by shock-and-awe military firepower. Clinging to its faith in precision-guided munitions and cluster bombs, it has decided to let Lebanon bleed, as if that's the way to build the future for peace and democracy.

[Dave Shields]

It's tough to talk Middle East (or any politics in the world) without bringing up the fact that religion plays a major role in war. I do not follow a set religion for many reasons, but one of the main reasons is the fact that religion is supposedly to guide us into what is right and good. Well, how is it that centuries of war over this part of the world is STILL going on? It makes no sense to me and it really is sad that we as entire group of people could be doing so much better with ourselves and each other. I used to go to church, but I just couldn't handle the contradictions I see in this world and feel ok with one religion.

I feel so bad for all the innocent people stuck in the middle of this, the true victims.

btw, I have nothing against others who do follow a religion or go to church or whatever. I am not anti-god or an atheist or a satanist or whatever. I am just a person who has more questions and more confusion everytime I try to "get involved" with a set religion. I am spiritual - but I see the world though my own experiences and they do not relate to one religion or another, if that makes any sense.

[Mallory Claire]

Yeah, I perfectly understand what you're saying. I'm the same way. I kind of have my own set of beliefs (or I've at least theorized and pondered different ideas) about the world and "God," etc. I took a philosophy class that talked all about death and the possibilities of an afterlife that shook me up and such, kinda scared me, too. Haha.

I think if you lead a decent life and don't do your neighbor harm, you'll end up as best as you, a human being, can at the end of your life, metaphysically and spiritually.

Which is why I get so distressed about our war/oil/destruction-hungry administration. Blargh. The world is crazy and sickening these days. I think we should just evaporate all borders and create one global community with one government and when you have clusters of bad people you dissipate them. Hehe we'll send the Taliban to Greenland.

On second thought, that sounds like exile and/or the foundations of a concentration camp. :blink:

[Sara Kendall]

Mallory, I am totally opposite of you on this issue. I do respect everyone's opnion. But it's 1 am here and I am not gonna get on my soapbox. I for one am glad that Bush is the President instead of a democrat right now. But that's me...I am definately not a liberal. I am a repulican, and proud of it.

This whole thing was building....Hezbollah just had to really egg it on by taking those soldiers...first Hamas took one and Hezbollah took note and did the same...Israel is NOT afraid to fight...I think we can agree on that. What I do NOT like about this situation is the number of innocent people that are dying because of the offensive. But I believe that we cannot negotiate with terroists and Hamas AND Hezbollah are terroist groups.

Something's gotta give and I am not sure. I don't think that there are any easy answers to solve this royal mess that is Israel-Hezbollah war. When it will give is really anyone's guess....I just really don't like watching the news anymore you know....just all bad news. My hearts go out to those who have lost loved ones in this war over there.

I am not a real spiritual person either. Dave, I can see your point about not being ok with one religion.

See we all have different opinions about politics....that's what makes it a touchy subject cause it definately can spark a fight at any given time! I know that we can discuss this maturely though!

[Mallory Claire]

Eh, everyone's got a right to an opinion, and the only true judge is time. At least we agree that people are dying and it should stop. :rolleyes:

[Daryl Dennis]

Beware, this post is long, but I took a nap earlier today and I am bored since I haven't taught a history class in about a month Forgive me, as I have a fair amount of knowledge on the region in general and the intricacies of this dispute in particular. I am glad you posted that article Mal, because it is interesting on several levels. Plus, it is good to be young and liberal. Heck, I am just gald to see some of you youngins actually care about politics, whatever the side (Dave, you don't count since you are old like me).

Now, most of the following is citable, so I don't imagine any hurt feelings for anyone. I am hopeful that it is enlightening and furthers the debate as a description of the major factors at play as I see them. It is sticky, but I would enourage everyone to have a rule about political discussions: don't take anything personally. You will VERY rarely (if ever) change a passionate person's mind about a political issue, so focus on simply learning about opposing viewpoints which will allow you to understand your own side even more.

First off a caveat: going to Rolling Stone for balanced political analysis is like going to Wikipedia as your one and only source for a research paper. They have an agenda, are not balanced, and pander to the audience that buys their magazine. Not that there is anything wrong with those things, but Rolling Stone is trying to sell papers to a certain demographic (one that gets * easily, but never votes). You have to take RS with a grain of salt. I subscribe to them, have very moderate/libertarian views but am occasionally quite embarassed with what those editors let pass. As the bias creeps into their musical discussions, the magazine has become increasingly less reliable. That said, the material is a good starting point as a discussion piece, so long as the vaildity of the article is understood to be incredibly suspect.

Their stance that Hezbollah is "winning" the conflict is quite hasty given that escalation began a mere 7-10 days ago. Relying on soley a shadowy mix of "background informants " and off-the-record statements (by one person it seems) to produce such an article is journalistcally suspect. I understand that Rolling Stone thrives on music industry standards of under 4 minute singles to satiate basal interests, but no conflict involving urban warfare will ever be over in 10 days. This is especially true when one side doesn't wear uniforms, hides their weapons in schools and the "innocents" around them allow this to happen. As an aside, I think Isreal (or anyone) would be justified in razing the entire southern region because I am of the opinion that you lose your status as an "innocent civilian" when you knowingly harbor such a group and their weapons.

More specifically though, there are several reasons to help understand the response of the Israelis and why the response has been measured so far.

One is that Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia are staying outwardly opposing the Hezbollah tactics. This is quite substantial considering the House of Saud runs the model fundamentalist Islamist regime in the world. For them to actually consider the Isreali response to be reasonable should mean a lot. Sure there are sectarian differences and the only thing historically bloodier than war between religions is a war within one.

Second, is that the following connection: Hezbolla=>Syria=>Iran is going to be the logical progression of escalation (and I personally don't see the cycle ending before it at least envelops Syria). The bread crums are heading that direction. The most dangerous country in that region (Iran) has their money and fingerprints all over the Hezbollah and the Arab world is waking up.

Third, is that this isn't about religion...it is ethnic. Keep in mind that Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia (and a multitude of other Gulf states) have far more in common with each other, than with Iran. Iran is almost uniformly ethnically Persian, NOT Arab, which makes you consider that the Holocaust was the only primarily religious-based genocide in the 20th or 21st century. Every other mass-killing was based on ethnic differences. When regional sides are picked on this one, it won't be religious (otherwise the Arab world would have Hezbollah's back right now), it will be ethnic.

Fourth, the rest of the world leaders (even those uniformly opposed to Middle East entanglements or Israel in general) are starting to come to grips with the fact that when the public in certain areas allow groups like Hezbollah or Hamas to have safe haven in neighborhoods means that there are NO innocents in the area. Those groups (and others like them) do not keep their weapons stockpiled in one location, they spread them out and keep them in schools, hospitals and living rooms. So long as the general public (which supposedly outnumbers these small "militias") stand up and stop allowing that access, they have chosen sides and are actively participating in the bloodshed. On a larger scale, the Afghan Taliban sheltered Al-Quada the same way and the world was uniformly behind actions against both the primary actors and those that harbour them. The same is happening in Southern Lebanon (and Syria, and Iran).

Fifth, the cycle will NOT end because the issue of Palestine will NEVER be resolved to the exacting demands of extremists on either side. Since extremists perpetuate the violent aspects of the cycle, appeasing them is the only way to stop it. Since that is not possible (if you can think of any solution that would satify both extremes, I would love to hear it), the cycle will continue.

Sixth, the UN is pointless to deal with this conflict. It might surprise you that the UN force in southern Lebanon comprises 2400 individuals (mainly troops but some professional monitors/diplomats). It has been there since the late 1970s to maintain security and eventually return authority over the area to the Lebanese government after the Israelis pulled out during a previous arrangement. So, in over 35 years they weren't able to secure and turn the area over to the Lebanese government because the region was full of both Hezbollah and a civilian element that supported the Hezbollah. They needed more resources, but seemed ok with setting up observation posts right near obvious Hezbollah targets and not disarming the militia despite their mandate (one such post was hit a few days ago by sheer accident, and accidents with "precision" munitions mean the true target was likely less than a few hundred yards away). Can you blame Israel for not trusting the UN to follow through when they couldn't handle a smaller job in over 35 years?

Finally, the real target is Iran. For reasons stated above, I wouldn't be surprised if the Arab world takes the lead (not the UN) in future pressure (internally through economic means and externally through diplomacy) on Iran, anticipating that Israel will do the dirty work if push comes to shove. The UN is impotent because three members of the UN Security Council have their hands in the oil fields of Iran (surprise, the US isn't one of them; they are Russia, China and France). Those three will NOT allow sanctions or anything greater to progress even in the face of terrorist support (which is admitted), a nuclear program (which is admitted) and interference in neighboring countries (admitted and observed in Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian Auth.) Most importantly the rest of the Gulf states fear a nuclear Iran more than anyone in the world (because they are the ones within range of their ballistic missile technology).

My prediction is that as a western front is opened and expanded from Southern to Eastern Lebanon, something will happen in and around the border with Syria. I give that a week or two to develop since Israel is taking it slow. That will be the start of actual war between sovereign countries (Israel and Syria) as I doubt the Lebanese government will put up too much resistance for fear of having their entire country obliterated from above. After that, it all depends on if either Isreal or Iran wants to make their move. My opinion all along has been that Israel wants to take out Iranian nuclear facilities now as they did Iraqs after the 1st Gulf War. Their measured response in Lebanon has likely been to garner international support which will be hard to lose when they follow those bread crumbs east from Hezbollah to Syria to Iran.

Sorry for the rant. I am not trying to call anyone out on this, as it is simply a recitation of facts as I know them on a complex subject that the average person only thinks to be about oil or religion. It is more than that and oil is a reason to stay OUT of the region more than it is an invitation to entangle yourself. Everytime the region has been unstable over the past 40 years, oil prices rise or supply drops. Thus, there must be other reasons or every world leader would stay away from sticking their nose in there. Religion matters, but only to extremists. So long as they control the cycle of violence, there will be religious undertones. However, you have to add regional politics, education (which I didn't touch on), ethnic disputes, and tactics to the equation. All of which are as important as religion in the region.

The above are fairly well founded claims (I could give citations for those interested) aside from my predictions which are strictly educated guesses. Heck, I hope to wake up tomorrow and watch footage of Hezbollah leaders dancing around a maypole with those Israeli soldiers and civilians from Haifa and Beirut. Sadly, that can never happen.

-Daryl

[Mallory Claire]

Hehe one point: this was from Newsweek, I meant the title caught my eye because of the Rolling Stones (band) album of the same name.

But I understand your point about that magazine and other media directed at college-age audiences, which is why msnbc.com is my homepage and I read it every hour or two at work, to keep up on a general level. For example, I learned Lance Bass of Nsync came out yesterday right when the story posted. Haha. My interests in politics and ridiculous celebrity gossip is appalling.

But yes, this is an impossibly sticky situtation that I do love to converse about but I'm already going to be late for work this morning. I appreciate your post because you're an educated individual on the subject (plus you're liberal so I like you haha). And I also agree that religion doesn't play as large a role as some people would think.

And I'm also glad to see some SIMsters care about the world outside the SIM. :rolleyes: Hahaha

[Daryl Dennis]

Well, my critique of Rolling Stone applies to Newsweek as well However, this is the first of their articles that I have seen that has zero corroberative sourcing. Pretty brutal, especially in the wake of all of the news scandals of the past few years (Nightline, NYTImes etc). Newsweek is better than nothing, but Time is much better. Online news sources have to cater to all tech-savvy audiences, so you get items like the Lance Bass news listed ahead of suicide bombings. That said, the material is all still there which is good.

Actually, I am not liberal. Libertarian is sort of a weird amalgam of social liberalism (in many ways) and economic/internation conservatism. Oddly enough, I would never vote for an "actual" Libertarian (they are usually crackpots)

Daryl

[Dave Shields]

Al Queda has officially come out in support of Hezbolla, which does not surprise me in the least, and I am begining to wonder when we (we meaning U.S.) will officially start sending troops on a "peace keeping" mission or to "shock and awe". My little rant above was about religion, but I also know there are many many factors involved. If you boil down all the little factors, it seems to me that war comes down to 3 main catagories.

Religion (which I would include ethnic stuff here),
Power (control is our biggest goal and our weakest "achilles heal")
Greed (with power to control land and religion to control the mind, this is ripe for corruption)

It's a very condensed version of course (think Readers Digest), but after studying Humanities intensely, I found the pattern to repeat itself over and over. Unfortunately violence is a part of humanity and of the world around us. And for some reason I don't understand, this part of the world seems to be the most contested in all of known history. I have never ventured there myself but my curiousity always made me think one day I would like see this area - providing there is a sense of peace.

I know this isn't all about religion and oil, that would be too simple and this area of the world is a very complex place. However, I guess my point was more that I find it ironic when people wage war/terror. It's like they set aside the part of their belief systems that teach/preach good or just completely remove it all together (in the case of extremists). I just get memories of being in like 3rd grade on the playground of the school when play time errupts into a battle because Timmy said he was not out of bounds and Jimmy said he was. First the words, then the shoving, then the fists fly and so on. The really sad part is there are many people who are not caught up in the passions of one or another and they usually end up being right in the middle of all the action. I am very thankful to be living where I am. I may not agree with all the decisions or all the "leaders", but I do appreciate what we have. I guess I used to have hope for a Eutopian world, but after years of seeing the reality of our world it seems further and further away. For some reason, we as humans are drawn to violence. I just find it interesting what we call "acceptable violence" (many sports could be here) and "unacceptable violence" (when it goes to far).

I am just hoping for peace in our time.

[Teri Lawrence]

I'd like to point something out.

Israel's 'world class' army has a fundamental flaw in its very basis.

The reason why the Israeli army can't take out a few terrorists is tied to the reason why Israeli soldiers fire on civilians often enough that it's hardly a scandal any more.

What are the lower ranks of the Israeli army primarily made up of?

Conscripts.

In the modern military, conscription does not work. Conscription *especially* does not work if you are trying to use your military as a police force. And using one's military as a police force is a bad idea at the best of times.

A Palestinian kid, frustrated, throws a stone at a representative of what he considers occupying forces.

Scenario 1: The representative is a soldier, in fatigues, armed with a machine gun. The kid gets shot.

Scenario 2: The representative is a policeman, wearing light armor and armed with a baton. The kid gets beaten up.

Scenario 1 results in dead kid. Scenario 2 results in painfully chastened kid who may or may not learn his lesson, but in any case has a good chance of growing up.

This country's blind support of Israel is also part of the problem. Yes, Israel is our ally. Our friend. Friends do not support friends when they do something stupid. Friends *tell* friends what they're doing wrong. The Israeli government has made a string of mistakes in dealing with the conflict within, and on the edge of, their borders. And anyone who says that, in this country, is branded an 'anti-Semite'...mostly by so-called liberals!

Well, go ahead. Call me an anti-Semite. I *will* pass judgment on the Israeli government and regime, not to condemn, but in the hope that they might learn a few lessons and start *thinking* about what they're doing. Things were improving, and now this.

Times like this? Times like this, I am embarrassed to be Jewish.

[Daryl Dennis]

As for conscription not working, I beg to differ. It has allowed Israel to exist despite being outnumbered about 100-1 by neighboring, hostile, countries. All the U.S. tech in the world can't help you without the numbers with which to implement it.

Plus, Hezbollah isn't fighting with rocks (and the days of Palestinians relying on rocks is long gone with Hamas having such a strong foothold politically, financially, and socially)...they are using fairly sophisticated short range rockets and today they used a tactical range missile. I understand your point about rocks versus guns, but that is a whole other issue.

I don't think criticizing Israel is anti-Semitic, and I bristle at how easily terms like that are thrown at people in our society. I feel bad if that has ever been bandied about towards you. You are making a political statement, and that should always welcome in open society. When it isn't made to feel welcome, it is unfortunate.

Daryl