No More Foot-Dragging - New York Times: "What the people of Lebanon and Israel urgently need is a cease-fire followed by the swift deployment of a well-armed force with a mandate to aggressively keep the peace. That must be accompanied by an international guarantee that Hezbollah will be forced to halt its attacks on Israel permanently and disband its militia so Lebanon can regain control of its borders and its sovereignty."
I'm not dumb enough or naive enough to think we could ever live in an ideal world. Sometimes I dream, though, what it would be like.
In this present crisis of the Middle East in Lebanon, the world would join together to solve the root causes of the problems. First, terrorism would be outlawed in practice as a technique of political persuasion. If Hezbollah would bomb an Israeli market, then the United Nations would join Israel in disarming Hezbollah and destroying their capability to make mischief. The United States would go into Lebanon alongside Israel and help them finish the job quickly and forever.
Second, the Arab and Islamic states would pressure the Palestinians to accept a two-state solution to the problem of Palestine. If the Palestinians would flaunt any peace agreement, the Islamic states would cut off economic aid to them. The United States would follow suit.
Third, then the United Nations could get on with other trouble spots in the world, like Darfur.
I think all this would be easy as pie. It would mean peace in our time.
Instead, Hezbollah attacks Israelis civilians. Israel, alone, defends itself. The world condemns Israel. The United States is "big enough" to allow Israel to defend itself, this time. At least Condoleeza Rice and the Bush administration are talking root causes, which is something new.
This Post's Technorati Tags: ideal world, opinion, Israeli, Palestinian, war, peace, Hezbollah, root causes, two-state solution, truth
8 comments:
rock, your naivety would be cute, if it cease to be so horrendous as your this last post.
First, terrorism would be outlawed...
whether something is "terrorism" or not is a matter of opinion. Who is going to decide? You? Just think: White House, UN, Brussel are calling: "Hi, may I speak to rock, please... Oh, hi rock, sorry to trouble you, but there was an incident... can you tell us, was it terrorism or not?..." you found yourself a nice career, rock!
If Hezbollah would bomb an Israeli market...
and if they bomb an Israeli power station ? What about airport?
Second, the Arab and Islamic states would pressure the Palestinians to accept...
Why not pressure Israel to accept that they are not welcome in the Middle East and should abandon their whim of having their own state there. After all, there are a lot of relative uninhabited places of palestina-like deserts in the world. Southern California seems ok - I bet 90% of Israelis would go there in an instant! Bonus: then US tax tollars would be spent within the US of A!
Third, then the United Nations could get on with other trouble spots in the world... - under your supervision, no doubt.
my, my, you really want the WWIII, don't you? The question is: are you going to fight and die yourself, or are you planning to just watch Fox/CNN? Yes, yes, I know you can fight if needed, the question is: would you? (like Bush who could fight in Nam, but choose not to ... probably he thought that communism should be allowed there...)
=========================
generally, what appals in your post is your rocky (stoned?) conviction that you know best who must do what in the Middle East and elsewhere, and that those who dare to have diccenting opinion must be killed (if they are muslims, that is. You generously allow fellow americans to disagree with you. Whould you allow diagreeing from, say, french?) And UN must do as you say. You are very like bin Laden, you know...
Thank you, igor, for revealing your true self, and your real aims.
I think I've answered your questions quite cogently in previous posts and comments.
Keep commenting, as it is good for people to know how your side thinks.
you did not answer ANY of my question.
for example, in the above post I asked the following questions:
1/ who is to decide what is terrorism and what is not?
2/ is it ok for hezbolla to strike at power station or airport?
3/ why not pressure Israel to leave the Middle East?
4/ if jews want their state so desperately and if USA supports them so much, why don't US set aside part of Southern California for Israeli state?
5/ are you going to fight and die in the WWIII you so want to rage around the world?
did you answer any of these questions? Nope. Same with my previous questions.
Just like a politician, you just said you answered them. Do you expect me to buy this bullshit?
if you don't want to answer - don't, it's fine with me. Just don't embarrass yourself by claiming you answered when you did not.
and last but not least.
for some unexplainable reason you think that I am on the "side" of muslim extremists. Nothing could be farther from the truth.
I believe I clarified my position re: jews-muslim conflict in no uncertain terms, clearly and consisely.
still - to repeat (for especially dumb readers) :
I DON"T GIVE A SHIT TO BOTH SIDES ! it's not my fight.
Thank you igor for sharing your thoughts and feelings. I appreciate it.
Sometimes readers just don't get the gist or twist, do they? My favorite line was:
If Hezbollah would bomb an Israeli market, then the United Nations would join Israel in disarming Hezbollah and destroying their capability to make mischief.
Mischief. Now THAT was cute.....
Lynn, I'm a little slow sometimes. I don't quite know how to take this comment.
Post a Comment