Lucky Shot

To enact a ceasefire, I think it would be best if Hezbollah's UN representative requested a ceasefire. Who is Hezbollah's ambasador again?

Maybe Iran should be asking for a ceasefire too. Seems to be that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard seems to be dying in Lebanon. According to http://reuters.myway.com/article/200...ANIANS-DC.html , it's their rockets that are slaughtering civilians in Israel. It's either they are now at war with Israel also, or they shoulda' turned left at albaqueque.

Lucky Shot

TheFatKidDeath

Well, it appears that the much aligned ceasefire that many on this thread have been mocking has been signed. I'm sure violations will occur on both sides, but a cease-fire is long over due. If this recent violence has proven one thing, it's that this conflict can only be solved thru diplomacy. The military option has proven ineffective. Only the mentally ill can believe that superior fire power can achieve victory between Israel and Hezbollah. The situation requires a political solution.

Ok, Iran is equipping Hezbollah with arms, just like the US is equipping Israel. The dollar amount that the US provides to Israel is nothing compared to what Iran provides to Hezbollah.

http://worldpolicy.org/projects/arms...non.FINAL2.pdf

You are correct to say that Iran should stop providing arms to Hezbollah just as the American tax payer should stop footing the bill for Israel's military.

H-Hour

Check out the attachment for data on Foreign Aid to Israel. This is a report from the Congressional Research Service. Looks like the most recent fiscal year I have is 2004: 2.6 billion dollars to Israel.

It will only let me upload 100kb to the thread, so I'd recommend going to this CRS search service, and looking for the following reports:

Foreign Aid Overview of US Programs and Policy - 98-916 F - 010406
Interesting to see all the countries. Egypt is second-highest recipient. Or was. I think Israel and Egypt were knocked down a spot since Iraq. Hmm, I just looked and I guess this newer version doesn't include an overview of every country. One of the older versions had every (or almost every) recipient country listed with different info about their aid.

Israel US Relations - IB82008 - 060316

When you search, use the codes - "98-916 F" and "IB82008" - and that will help you pinpoint the right thing. Also, look for the version with the latest date. CRS updates these reports on a regular basis which means there are lots of different versions floating around the internet.

I've got almost 30 CRS reports dealing with the Middle East and 13 dealing with Israel/Palestine in particular if anyone wants them. All can be found online.

Attached Files

	CRS - Israel U.S. Foreign Assistance - IB85066 - 050426.pdf (87.5 KB, 1 views)

leejo

Townhall.com::The Taming of the Jew::By Mike S. Adams

Good article, and my response to the "let's negotiate our way out of this" position.

I wonder how quick to cease fire Hezbollah will be on that fateful day when all their strategic efforts and international partnerships come to fruition and they start kicking Israel's ass in fights.

TheFatKidDeath

Good info. The US certainly provides aid to other Middle East countries, the most being some of the most repressive - Saudi Arabia and Eqypt come to mind and let's not forgot Saddam Hussein during the time of his worst artrocities.

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

From an interview of the author of the study that I sited on US aid to Israel dated July 21st 2006:

And your report indicates that Israel has always been the largest recipient of military aid from the United States, but that that’s actually increased since 2001?

FRIDA BERRIGAN: We’re looking at incredible increases in U.S. military aid and weapons sales to Israel. Military aid stands at about $3 billion a year. That’s about $500 for every Israeli citizen that the United States provides on an annual basis. And then, weapons sales, most recently, since the Bush administration came into power, we’re looking at $6.3 billion worth of weaponry sold to Israel.

Israel's relationship with the United States is unique in a number of ways. And one of those ways is that essentially the United States provides 20% of the Israeli military budget on an annual basis, and then about 70% of that money that is given from the United States, from U.S. taxpayers, to Israel is then spent on weapons from Lockheed Martin and Boeing and Raytheon. Most other countries don't have that sort of cash relationship, where they go straight to U.S. corporations with U.S. money to buy weapons that are then used in the Occupied Territories and against Lebanon.

What’s the precedent?

FRIDA BERRIGAN: In 1981, the last time there was a full-on invasion by the Israeli government into Lebanon, the Reagan administration cut military aid and froze weapons sales to Israel, while it did an investigation of whether or not the weapons were being used for self-defensive and internal security purposes. So for ten weeks in 1981, nothing went into Israel. Now, at the end of that ten weeks, they said, “Oh, well, you could argue ’til eternity about what constitutes defensive use of weapons.” But under the Reagan administration, while Alexander Hague was the Secretary of State, we did cut off weapons sales and military aid. And we certainly haven't done that since. And when we look at how the conflict and the war continues to unfold with so many civilians being killed and this bare use of force and power by the Israeli military, it seems like it’s time to explore that option again."

Rest of the interview -

Democracy Now! | U.S. Arming of Israel: How U.S. Weapons Manufacturers Profit From Middle East Conflict

TheFatKidDeath

Negotitation is the only solution to the conflict. What's the alternative? More war?

Invert this quote - one from the leaders of Hezbollah and the other from Israel -

"And, so, a peace settlement was established within 48 hours. But it was not established through a process of negotiation. It was established through fear, military readiness, and an uncompromising desire to offer the most disproportionate response possible under the circumstances"

Both sides are now making this ridiculous statement. Neither side can win - Hezbollah cannot defeat Israel militarily which is the fourth largest in the world. Israel cannot defeat a guerilla group that is fighting for the removal of a foreign army on it's land. A negotiatied settlement to the conflict is the only way out.

leejo

So you say.

Lucky Shot

This will be a shortlived ceasefire and I will be more than happy to be wrong here, but history does not bear it out. I think this is more along the lines of Hezbollah's Reload period. They have tried diplomacy in the past having failed in 1979 when the UN occupied southern lebanon. They failed after 1989's Taif accord and Every UN Security Council resolution since.

So why will they fail this time? The negotiating parties are Lebanon and Israel. Hezbollah is not at the table. So how do you negotiate with a guerilla army that has no nation and no representative at the UN.

Secondly, the UN when recently asked by a reporter "Does the UN consider Hezbollah a terrorist group?

Claudia Rosett on Terrorism & United Nations on National Review Online

The UN hasn't even defined what terrorism is! Guess it goes along with their refusal to use the word Genocide. Without a proper definition of the players or even the correct players at the table, it will fail.

Third, Iran is not finished in my opinion in distracting the UN from worrying about (note, not solving) Iran's pursuit of Nuclear Weapons. The longer this goes on, the less attention is paid to Iran. So watch for more missles being shipped in.

Fourth, the land giveaway in the Gaza Strip and Northern West Bank to the Palestinians made the Israeli's look weak to Hezbollah. Weak enough where they felt they were vulnerable to attack. Your comment about conflict only being solved by diplomacy reminds me of Neville Chamberlain's thoughts as he returned from Munich...

BBC - History - Arthur Neville Chamberlain (1869 - 1940)

While I may be "Mentally Ill", the definition of insanity is repeating something you did before and expecting different results. Read up on your history, cuz expecting long term peace at this point is Crazy.

Lucky Shot

H-Hour

The UN has tried to define terrorism, but their efforts have been boycotted by the U.S. based on fears that the definition would include state terrorism and, therefore, that the definition may encompass U.S. activities.

For what it's worth, there is no politically accepted definition of terrorism. The U.S. State Department maintains it's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations, but that is used as a political tool more than a valid definition of what is or is not terrorism. Mujahadeen-al-Khalq, an Iranian opposition movement based in southern Iraq, is currently on that list even though U.S. senators have worked to have them removed. Rumor has it that we've re-armed them and sent them back into Iran to stir up trouble. Rumor.

I'm looking at the list now, it looks like the Kurdish parties are also on the list, which is interesting. I'll attach the CRS report I have from October 2003. Here's a link to the FTO list as of Oct. 2005. I'll still attach the CRS report as it covers some interesting things about the FTO list, including some other lists that the U.S. government maintains.

Attached Files

	CRS - Foreign Terrorist List and Congress - RL32120 - 031021.pdf (69.9 KB, 2 views)

TheFatKidDeath

The analogy of Neville Chamberlain's Munich pact to the current Middle East cease fire seems rather dubious. Germany had perhaps the largest, most advanced army in Europe during that time. Hezbollah is perhaps a few thousand fighters with no air force, navy, helicopters, tanks or armoured personal carriers. Hezbollah's most effective weapon, beyond it's motivated fighters, are rockets that are not militarily effective but are used rather as psychological terror weapons.

Israel on the other hand has the fourth or fifth largest army in the world and one of the most advanced. Israels military can reach anywhere in the Middle East and the country possesses nuclear weapons.

Hezbollah is not going to defeat Israel militarily. Unlike Nazi Germany marching into Czecholvakia, Poland (etc.), Hezbollah is not going to invade Israel as Germany did it's neighbors.

Lucky Shot

What's being found in the carnage left by Hezbollah's positions include Iranian and Syrian weaponry. There has been evidence of Iranian Republican guard assisting Hezbollah. Hezbollah initially invaded Israel to kidnap 2 soldiers, however has backing of a more formidable military force in Iran.

Telegraph | News | Israel humbled by arms from Iran

Hezbollah did invade Israel and they have in the past. The comparison is just that, by giving up land based on appeasers desires to have a war end quickly, it emboldened the enemy as it will for Hezbollah, just like it did for Germany in WWII. It's naive to think that this ceasefire will lead to long term peace.

Lucky Shot

Steeler

It's also naive to believe that an extended bombing campaign will lead to peace.

__________________

CingularDuality

I think it's naive to think that there will EVER be peace. I think that it's simply in the nature of man to be competitive and fight, and so we find differences amongst us to fight over...

__________________

Become a supporting member!

Buy a Tactical Duck!
Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

tau_neutrino

"There will be peace in the Middle East only when the Arabs love their children more than they hate Israel" - Golda Meir

__________________



TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

Wulfyn

Many people said the same thing about Northern Ireland just 10 years ago.



oh and leejo, that article was shockingly poor. In fact I believe it was aimed purely as bait and not to add anything to this discussion.

__________________