TCS Daily

Israel: "Act of War"

By J. Peter Pham & Michael I. Krauss - July 13, 2006 12:00 AM

"This was an act of war." Thus Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert succinctly summarized the facts, the law, and the consequences of the raid Wednesday by the Lebanese terrorist group-cum-governing-partner Hezbollah into Israeli sovereign territory that resulted in the abduction of two Israeli Defense Force (IDF) soldiers.

Olmert is correct in the careful distinction that he made, one that has been unfortunately lost on many in the media and even on the White House. The Hezbollah action was "not a terrorist attack but the action of a sovereign state that attacked Israel for no reason and without provocation" -- that is, a pure casus belli. As Olmert patiently tried to explain to the media, "Lebanon is responsible and it will bear responsibility." After Hamas's incursion near Gaza, Israel has been attacked in two locations, by two governments.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Sinioura's claim that his government was "not aware of and does not take responsibility for, nor endorses what happened" at what he conceded was "the international border" of another sovereign nation rings hollow considering his was the first ever government in Beirut to bring Hezbollah into its cabinet. The Hezbollah leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, who claimed responsibility for the attack on Israel was Mr. Sinioura's chief interlocutor in the negotiations to set up his cabinet last summer.

In fact, since then, as we have previously noted, the Lebanese government has allowed Hezbollah to control Lebanon's border with Israel, and to act as a government in the largely Shiite southern part of the country. In so doing, Beirut ignored a United Nations resolution calling upon it to assume control of its frontiers and to disarm the terrorist group. Note that pleas of helplessness are unacceptable; the Lebanese government has never invoked its inability to control its territory or asked for foreign assistance in fulfilling its obligations. No, Hezbollah controls its territory as part and parcel of Lebanese sovereignty. That case is closed. Israel was invaded by a foreign power. That foreign power killed Israelis and kidnapped soldiers. Israel has demanded the soldiers' safe return (and, we presume, the rendition of the invaders for punishment in Israel). Lebanon has declined to help, which would have been the only way to rescind the casus belli. Israel is now free, indeed obliged by its own sovereignty, to use all necessary force to accomplish this goal.

Beyond Lebanon's responsibility, of course, Syria and Iran are also sine qua non causes of the invasion of Israel. The former, despite its much ballyhooed withdrawal from Lebanon last year still, exercises considerable influence and enables Iran, as we pointed out last week, to reinforce its Hezbollah client. A strong legal case can now be made that Iran and Syria have become legitimate targets of Israeli self-defense.

So war it is -- a war of self-defense against unlawful Lebanese aggression in which the Israeli government has the obligation to its citizens to inflict maximum damage to the infrastructure of those who have attacked them. But this responsibility is not Israel's alone. If the international community wishes to vindicate those most sacrosanct principles of national sovereignty and the right to self-defense, it must assist Israel. It must condemn the attack and demand both the safe return of the IDF soldiers and the bringing to justice of all Lebanese officials who have been complicit in this act of war. It must demand the dismantling of the Hezbollah infrastructure, which it has already (toothlessly) called for.

Of course, we do not hold our breaths for the UN to do what it must. Its new Human Rights Council was elected in May with high hopes that it would stop coddling human-rights abusers tolerating atrocities (e.g., Darfur) as its predecessor, the disgraced Human Rights Commission, had done. With streamlined membership and new rules, there were claims that things would be different. The UN's new council finished its first session recently. So how did it do? Did it call on the world to get tough on human-rights abuses in China? Oops. No. China's on the Council panel. How about the abysmal state of women's rights in Saudi Arabia (see our description here)? Sorry. Saudi Arabia's a member too. Russia? Cuba? Sorry. They're members. No, the Council panel took direct aim at a familiar target: Israel.

The Cold War preceding World War III arguably began when Iranians occupied the US Embassy in Tehran under Jimmy Carter. It's just heated up immeasurably, as a bastion of the West has been formally attacked twice. Time for all good nations to come to the aid of freedom.

J. Peter Pham is director of the Nelson Institute for International and Public Affairs at James Madison University. Michael I. Krauss is professor of law at George Mason University School of Law. Both are adjunct fellows of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.


Borders were crossed.
Soldiers were killed or captured.
Anyone who argues that acts of war have not been committed against Israel has questionable motives.

Israel: "Act of War"
Yes, it is an act of war and Lebanon, Iran and Syria are legitimate targets of Israeli self-defense. Let us hope that finally all good nations will come to the aid of freedom. We know where France stands - France immediately came to the defense of Hezbollah when the first Israeli solder was taken from Israeli land. We must, yet again, ignor the nonsense from France. It is past time for Israel to declare war on these three rouge nations and fight it like a fully declared war - no holds barred.

Is Hezbollah still just an effective border patrol protecting Lebanon from Israeli aggression? My position on Hezbollah, that they are terrorist organization with strong ties to Syria and Iran, have been pointedly and sadly proven correct.

It is my hope that Olmert does not cave to pressures to negotiate with Hezbollah or Hamas. Who seem to be working together nicely despite some people's belief that they have nothing to do with each other.

Kadima's Strong Response
In the run-up to the recent Israeli elections many of America's neo-conservatives believed a defeat of Israeli conservatives would cripple Israel. Today, we see that Olmert's centrist party Kadima (which easily defeated the former power, the Likud party Likud) is indeed strong and swift on defense. The notion that only conservatives can protect Israel is dead.

Isreal is tired of it...
Threatened with extinction by every extremist group, bombed repeatedly, now their soldiers are being kidnapped...

They're getting tired of being s__t on, and now they're fighting back.

You would figure that giving Gaza back to the Palestinians would bring them some good will.

They don't have to put up with it anymore.

Kadima's Strong Response...
If only we could say the same about the American Democratic Party.....!

Because Israelis understand the stakes
I have not heard much about this. Which neocons said that? The main thing I have heard about Olmert is that people believed him to be an appeaser of terrorists. Boy, they got that wrong.

The difference between our Right/Left and Israel's Right/Left is that, in Israel, both the Right and Left understand that they face an enemy that seeks their utter destruction and both have no qualms about protecting their country when threatened. In most cases, the response to terrorists acts and acts of war seems to blur the divisions between Right and Left.

Our own Left could learn something from Israel's Left.

Because Israelis understand the stakes . . . Tlaloc
Amen, brother.

Yes Virginia, There Is A Center
Again, this is an important (and I believe deliberate) oversight by many Americans.

Kadima is politically CENTRIST whereas Labor is left-wing and Likud is right-wing. Unfortunately, we have no centrist party in the United States and are paying dearly for it.

Let's discuss your willful oversight
No matter what party is in power in Israel they all seem to try the same things: negotiation, concession, and then ass-whuppin'.

While I know that each party has differences in economic and domestic policy, they all seem to have a crystal-clear understanding of what forces oppose their very existence. Being much more civilized than the death-worshipping cults of the Palestinians and Jihadists, they give back land, prisoners, and provide services to the people who seek their bloody end.

What did the Palestinians do with Gaza after the Israelis gave it back without a single concession? Turned it into a launch pad for Qassams. The Kadima party, like all the other Israeli political parties, understands that the time for negotiations are over. Just like Likud and Labor have done in the past.

In US terms, this would be like the Democrats actually standing behind their votes to use force and their calls to depose Saddam. We don't need a centrist party, we just need both of our parties to understand the enemy and the war we are in.

reality disconnect
Unfortunately Hamas and the Palestinians seem to think that Israel was driven out by terrorism.
One of these days Israel will come to the conclusion that concessions and civilized behaviour don't work against terrorism and an enemy that wants Israel wiped out. That's when all out war will occcur and the infrastructure in Palestine, Lebanon, and Syria will be destroyed, giving them something more concrete to worry about than Israels existance.

Neoconservative Predictions
There's simply too many stories to link to, so here are two that provide a brief overview of neo-conservative discontent and another two that convey their prophecies of doom...


Prophets in Their Own Land
by Michael C. Desch
The American Conservative, June 19, 2006

Ha'aretz's Bradley Burston has become so disenchanted with hard-line Jewish-American second-guessing of Israeli peace overtures that in a recent column he confessed, "I used to be an American Jew. And then I read Daniel Pipes," the leader of Campus Watch, an organization devoted to purging American universities of Israel-critical sentiments. Admitting that the leadership of the American Jewish community was far more intransigent than most Israelis, former Barak adviser Daniel Levy said, "the pro-Israel position in the United States needs to start approximating more closely just where the debate is in Israel."


Americans unite against West Bank withdrawal
by Aaron Klein, March 22, 2006

A number of Christian and Jewish American groups have announced the formation of an umbrella organization that will lobby against acting Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's plan to withdraw Jewish communities from the West Bank, arguing in part any withdrawal would be against United States interests.

"Olmert's plan means the destruction of the Jewish state. Judea and Samaria is part of Israel's biblical homeland. It borders Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and most other major Israeli cities. There is not a single doubt if Israel vacated this heartland it would be turned over to Islamic terror groups for use to attack Israel with missiles," said Susan Roth, founder of the United Front for the Land of Israel, the new coalition of American organizations acting against an Israeli West Bank evacuation....


Israel's electoral system creates governmental impotence
by Ben Shapiro, April 5, 2006

Ehud Olmert is that man. His Kadima Party, created by recently incapacitated former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, plans "disengagement" at all costs. Kadima won 28 out of 120 seats in the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) ... There is a reason for such continuity of inane policy over time: Israel's system of government is deeply flawed. The coalition government system means that only the most middle-of-the-road policies are pursued, even in the face of terrorism...


Israel's uninformed electorate
By Caroline B. Glick, March 20, 2006

...Israel's political spectrum is divided between the Left, represented by Kadima and the Right represented by Likud. Kadima wishes to contend with the Hamas threat by making a public show of shunning Hamas while surrendering Judea and Samaria to the terror organization. The Likud points out that surrendering Judea and Samaria to Hamas will make it impossible to defend the rest of the country...

Prophets in Their Own Land
by Michael C. Desch
The American Conservative, June 19, 2006

...[The Israelil Lobby] is not a monolithic force but rather a loose coalition of like-minded people -- Christian Zionists, opportunistic gentile politicians, uncompromising Jewish community leaders, and a reflexively pro-Israel American Jewish community. The problem “The Israel Lobby” highlights is not a cabal of the sort concocted in The Protocols of the Elders of Zion but just ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF GOOD OLD AMERICAN INTEREST-GROUP POLITICS RUN AMOK.

Indeed, rather than Jews, the largest constituent of the lobby, in terms of raw numbers, are EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS WHO EMBRACE CHRISTIAN ZIONISM. Adherents of this creed believe that God gave the land of Israel to the Jews through his covenant with Abraham in Genesis and that the re-establishment of the state of Israel will herald the coming of the end of days foretold in the Book of Revelation. It is hard to say precisely how many American gentiles embrace the notion that unquestioning support for Israel has divine sanction, but they number in the tens of millions. Televangelist John Hagee recently teamed up with other prominent evangelical leaders, including Jerry Falwell and Gary Bauer, to inaugurate a Christian Israel lobby to add their voices to the pro-Israel chorus in Washington. Since support for Israel is, by their lights, divinely sanctioned, it is hardly surprising that the topic would not be something they would have much interest in seeing debated.

...On March 28, the same day as Israel’s general election, the Jewish Agency staged a mock election among diaspora college students. These young Jewish voters, the target of much of AIPAC’s attention, gave Likud and other rightist parties a great victory. This hypothetical result stood in marked contrast to the outcome in Israel, where THE CENTRIST KADIMA and dovish Labor parties, running on platforms that promised unilateral withdrawals from occupied Palestinian territory, TROUNCED THE PARTIES OF THE NATIONALIST RIGHT...

Excellent post...
because it shows that the Neocons were right once again. Kadima DID give away too much without getting anything in return and Gaza DID become a Hamas stronghold and staging ground for terrorism. The only thing wrong is that they believed Olmert would remain inactive in the defense of his country. Olmert, like any Israeli politician, understands when the big guns have to come out and the time for talk is over.

But now Olmert sees the fruits of his party's policy of trying to please the world audience by pretending that if Israel gives enough its enemies will leave it alone. Thankfully Kadima's concessions are at an end and Israel can get down to dealing with terrorist regimes in the only fashion that works.

Interesting but tell me...
which party is moving across the border of Lebanon, wiping Hamas and Hezbollah off the map, and finally threatening Syria?

The centrist Kadima.

Even the "Doves" of the Israeli political situation have fangs. That is my point. You mistake our problems in the US as not having a centrist political party when, in reality, our problem lies in the fact that the Left side of the aisle can not rally behind the need to fight terrorism because of a mere hate-fetish they have with our President.

As I said, they could learn a thing or two from the Israeli left.

Where is roy?…
Let me post for our friend roy - Hez and Ham, the benign and benovelent political parties and defenders of Gaza and Lebanon are at it again. These poor, misunderstood groups are just defending the people they are committed to protecting. It is not their fault the Israeli aggression is now killing civilians in both countries, Israel has no right to act this way!! How barbaric and criminal these Jews are.

Just because Hez and Ham members raided across the border and killed and captured Israeli soldiers doesn't mean the overall organizations, let alone the innocent Palestinians and Lebonese are responsible! It was just uncontrollable hard-liners who did this, it is not the fault of Hez and Ham. These groups are peaceful and did nothing.

Yes, they still hold the destruction of Israel and the annilation of the Jews as a basic tennant of their organizations, but it is meaningless.

Look at all the destruction and killing the Jews are now doing. All of the Hez and Ham rocket attacks, kidnappings and suicide bombings are nothing in comparison.

It is all the Jews fault, the Jews and Israel are just plain evil, isn't that right roy?

Get real. This is just another in the long list of reasons that the Israelis should quit messing around and clean out the West Bank so they can have a real opportunity to to protect their borders and their people.

It was like you were channeling Roy's leftist spirit.

Sure Thing
Kadima may have fangs, but that does not mean they agree with Likud as how to best defend Israel.

Likud persued an aggressive, expansionist policy whereas Kadima is persuing a moderate policy of talks and limited withdrawal. In any case, Israelis of all types will defend Israel when attacked.

Now, I am not Democratic Party backer, but they did support a war with Afghanistan when Al Qaeda (not Iraq) attacked us on September 11. And you can't deny that there are Democrats and Bush-critics among our armed forces who are serving in Iraq despite their political misgivings.

That's why it's absolutely necessary for a US centrist party, because the Bush Amdinistration's approach to the War on Terror is crippling us with bad decisions, poor strategy, and uncontrolled costs -- leaving us, the voters, with the option to take it or leave it.

Funny, but that's not how Olmert sees things:

Atmosphere of war in cabinet meeting
July 13, 2006

...Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said at a press conference with visiting Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi a few hours after learning of the attack that it was clear that as a result of this "act of war," Israel would respond in "an unequivocal fashion that will cause those who started this act of war to bear a very painful and far-reaching responsibility for their actions."

"I want to make it clear, THIS MORNING'S EVENTS WERE NOT A TERRORIST ATTACK but the action of a sovereign state that attacked Israel FOR NO REASON AND WITHOUT PROVOCATION," he said.

"The Lebanese government, of which Hizbullah is a member, is trying to undermine regional stability," Olmert said. "Lebanon is responsible and Lebanon will bear the consequences of its actions."

I've argued the points of Israel vs. the Pals with him so much I know what he would say!!

GET OUT OF MY HEAD OH DEMONS OF EVIL!!!!! Help, is there an exorcists in the house…

Centrists? We don't need no stinkin' Centrists!
>"Kadima may have fangs, but that does not mean they agree with Likud as how to best defend Israel. Likud persued an aggressive, expansionist policy whereas Kadima is persuing a moderate policy of talks and limited withdrawal. In any case, Israelis of all types will defend Israel when attacked."

Small differences as I pointed out. When ass needs to be kicked it doesn't matter if it is a Labor, Likud, or Kadima boot that does it. When it comes to such responses the parties come together. Not so for us.

>"Now, I am not Democratic Party backer, but they did support a war with Afghanistan when Al Qaeda (not Iraq) attacked us on September 11. And you can't deny that there are Democrats and Bush-critics among our armed forces who are serving in Iraq despite their political misgivings."

The first thing I need to say is that I am not talking about mere "Bush critics", many of whom do serve despite their political leanings. They are to be commended for their service.

What I am talking about is the Democratic PARTY itself. Let us not forget that the removal of Saddam Hussein by force was called for by two Presidents, a Democrat and a Republican, and two acts of Congress. One in 1998 and another in 2002. It was authorized by large majorities of both parties, and in both houses of Congress.

This should have been a time for Democrats and Republicans to unify behind the action they approved. Yet, within three months of the fall of Baghdad, they launched a political war against the nation’s commander-in-chief, calling him a liar who was sending American youth needlessly to their deaths. This was not coming from the political fringe mind you, but from the leadership of the Democratic Party itself.

There was a time when politics were checked at our borders when our troops were in harm's way. No longer. The false claim of supporting the troops rings hollow when your Congressman says you are dying for lies, accomplishing nothing, and are, in fact, the greatest threat to peace on this planet.

>"That's why it's absolutely necessary for a US centrist party, because the Bush Amdinistration's approach to the War on Terror is crippling us with bad decisions, poor strategy, and uncontrolled costs -- leaving us, the voters, with the option to take it or leave it."

Exactly how are we crippled? It's good rhetoric but it means nothing if you can't prove it. The score stands at this: a thriving economy, 50 million people have been freed of tyranny, Iraqi elections, Iraqi constitution, Libya gave up its nuclear programs, Bush did not lie, and a restrained but potent hunt for terrorists and their supporters continues.

I would say the voters had a good choice. G.W. Bush.

how does this differ from what I said? I said Olmert sees the times of concession are over. He pretty much says the same thing. It is time to make them pay.

The Center Speaks
Party Affiliation Trends
Rasmussen Reports, July 5, 2006

During the month of June, 37.0% of Americans identified themselves as Democrats, up from 36.4% in May. Only once in the past year have a larger share of American adults identified themselves as Democrats. The number of Republicans remained essentially unchanged -- 33.5% in June and 33.6% in May. However, the number of Americans unaffiliated with either major party dipped to 29.5% in June.


A Turning Tide in War on Terror?
July 11, 2006

...The number saying the U.S. and its allies are winning moved up to 44% from 40% a month ago ... President Bush also regained some lost ground with 36% of respondents rating his handling of the situation in Iraq as good or excellent ... most of that jump resulted from increased confidence among GOP supporters.

However, not all indicators show an upward trend in confidence. Forty-six percent (46%) of American adults believe the situation in Iraq will get worse over the next six months ... furthermore, looking long-term, the majority of those surveyed -- 46% -- believe America's mission in Iraq will be judged a failure with only 34% believing it will be a success.

Responses are nearly evenly divided on the question of whether the United States is safer today than it was pre-9/11 with 42% indicating the country is safer and 45% saying it is not.

Conservatives feared that concessions would prompt Palestinians terrorist attacks, not a war with Lebanon.

Worse 2
I predict, Pauled, that Roy and like-minds will modify their position since it is tough to ignore the rocket blasts and kidnappings by their soulmates in the PAL. I figure they'll use the line that is already in use in Europe: Israel's response is DISPROPORTIONATE! The Yids...uh, I mean Jews...are killing too many of the badguys who aren't as efficient as the Israelies. So Israel should immediately cease and desist...Or, at the very least, allow the Islamo-facists to kill more Jews so the response won't be so disproportionate....That way, it would be more fair!!!!

I don't know
roy's stand has always been that this is all the Jews fault as they came in and took the land from the Palestinians starting around the turn of the 20th century. He blames the Zionist movement and European Jews for all the troubles caused by the creation of the Israeli state in British Palestine.

He ignores, the fact that all the Jews who moved to Palestine prior to WWII purchased land there and were legal immigrants in every way. He decries the fact that the land buying Jews then kicked the Palestinian "squatters" off the land as being evil.
He refuses to believe that the partitioning of TransJordan into Jordan and Israel was a U.N. move in direct response to the German caused Holocaust of WWII. To him it is all a Zionist plot.

After 1946, When Jewish settlers began arriving in Palestine in droves, he blames them for alienating and suppressing the Palestinians. He seems to blame the Arab-Israeli wars of 1948-56-67-73 on the Jewish evil in Palestine.

To him, the terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians are because of the Israeli counter-attacks against terrorists; not the other way around.

No, I believe roy would blame this whole thing on Israel. He would blame the Hamas attack on the Israeli attempt at securing it's border with Gaza and Hezbolah's because the Israeli's attacked Gaza. See, it's all Israel fault.

What a load of CRAP!!! I hope Israel finally gets something done over there instead of some limited response.

Pauled - Where is Roy
You obviously know nothing about what is going on and you don't care. You are obviously anti-semetic and it would make NO difference what the terrorists did to Israel. You would continue to be on their side. I hope one day you are the victim of your own ridiculous thinking.

what do you call rockets being fired from Gaza and tunnels being burrowed into Israeli territory? Are these not Palestinians attacks?

But what is it saying?
Great polls. Are these registered voters that are polled or just adults who are home during the day?

Although there are politically unaffiliated members of our society that does not means that they can't find candidates to get behind. A third, forth, or fifth party actually has to have supporters and a base. These parties generally fizzle out due to lack of support. You can't force a centrist party on the people if they don't want it.

LeslieDell, unless I am misreading your note, I think you've got the wrong guy in your sights. Pauled is, from what I've seen, a supporter of Israel's right to exist. Like me, he is a consistent critic of the American Left which increasingly is becoming anti-semitic (in my humble view.) Whenever there is a flareup in the Middle East, the Left sutomatically blames Israel. Like they automatically blame the U.S. whenever something goes wrong in the world. Seventy years ago they would have happily found a home in the Third Reich.

Dave Smith "Pauled???"
My apologies, Pauled. It should have read "Roy". Don't want to shoot one of my own. Thanks Dave.

Another post to an absent Roy
Please check out this link:

Now look at and read the first page. This stands in direct opposition of your point that the wonderful Hezbollah boys, who protect the Lebanese border and take care of widows and orphans, are supported by the Lebanese people.

Come out of your spider-hole and tell me where you went wrong.

do you consider Israel the terrorists or do you not understand sarcasism?
Read the end of my post.

May the Israelis finally clear out the vermin.

Also, may the fleas of 10,000 camels infest your armpits for not reading my post fully!!

If I might speak up?
Leslie-- If you want to skewer my opinions, please be my guest. But do me the favor of reading my actual words, not just Pauled's parodies of my positions. His approach, overwhelmingly, has been to try to twist everything I say to the point he can declare it to be "antisemitic". If he can do so to his satisfaction, he then can trivialize my whole message and discount it without having to prove anything.

You can tell which messages come from me and not from Pauled. Check the name on the line marked "name".

I don't deny that Hezbollah and Hamas pursue badly flawed policies. I think, in fact, that they are their own worst enemies. I also highly disapprove of using civilian casualties to make a political point. However I do stand for strict accuracy in discussing such facts as are clear in the record.

I would, for instance, point out that the Hamas cease fire held for well over a year and a half, with only a handful of incidents occurring that were all attributable to a different group, Islamic Jihad. This cease fire was only declared to be over on the occasion of the IDF shelling a beach in Gaza, resulting in the murders of a family of eight, out for a day of sun and surf. The IDF, in such cases, invariably issues the pro forma statement that this was just an accident, and that they were idly shelling a beach full of citizens never dreaming that such might result in civilian deaths.

So let's admit both sides of this sorry tale of mutual self destruction. Let's also recall that both sides in the game, last I saw, were thoroughly Semitic. I am against neither, but deplore the intentional taking of innocent life on all sides.

So true
And so sad! I've spend hours aruging the history of the Zionist movement and the present Israeli state with roy. He is actually very knowledgeable about the subject and very anti-Israel.

Israel and the Russian Republic are the best in smashing terrorists.....
When Israel is attacked a heavy retribution is guaranteed to follow. Israel makes it official government policy to spend all money and other resources to ensure that the planners and murderers of Israelis will be exterminated no matter what critics or political parties may say. They will protect their citizens and people from a gang of islamic cutrhroats who have declared war on the entire planet...not just Israel.
Russia is now in the process of hunting down the cowards who severed the heads of a clerk and cook several weeks ago and promptly displayed it on the world wide web. Putin declarded "These gangsters will be hunted down and destroyed. Eventually they will be caught. It may take months or years, but the cowards will be terminated by Spetsnaz or a timely cruise missile. Nobody in Russia cares to correct Putin or say we must act in accordance with the Geneva Convention. Where were the rights for the dead Russian employees? They were not soldiers. They had no weapons. These are the same islamic gangsters who want our money and political sympathy when money is short and food is low. Feed yourselves.
Why is it when Bush said "Bring it on" that was considered so offensive to our traitorous media and had liberals and leftists crying? This was said after thousands of citizens were dead and there was a moon sized hole in NYC and still he could not talk as he desired to a bloodied nation.
Americans have grown too soft politicially and need to realize-remember what it takes to win a war. War is ugly, bloody, and people die, but it needs to fought unconditionally when it has been declared on us. Our Congress, the NYT, and others need to look at Israel and Russia to see the correct method of waging a proper war and leave all forms of foolish political correctness back in the closet.

No problem Leslie
It isn't the first time one of my sarcastic posts have gotten me in trouble with the side I support. I should know better, but sometimes I just can't resist.

The real roy asks for the floor
Hi Paul. Glad to see you're carrying on the work-- in my absence-- of vilifying my good name. Among your many lying canards is that I ignore the fact that the Zionists started out purchasing land from the local landowners-- when in fact you know we have discussed that subject at great length. And I think in fact that I was the one who first brought it up.

So let me give you a hand with your litle project of tarnishing my every comment.

It's inexplicable to me just what Hezbollah hopes to achieve at this moment by escalating what has to this point just been a persistent little brush fire down at Shebaa Farms. If the timing was at all thought out, it would seem calculated to bring down the wrath of both the Lebanese government and Syria on their heads. Hardly a productive venture, IMO.

But is it terrorism? Let's see, the target of this escalation has been purely military, and there have been casualties from among the ranks of the IDF. No known civilian deaths.

Now let's look at the Israeli counter escalation-- the bombing of civilian neighborhoods in Beirut. As of this morning they've counted something like 55 fatalities. Most if not all are civilians. So-- IDF, 55; Hezbollah, zero.

Clearly it's Hezbollah who are the inhuman terrorists in this latest round. Would that be your view, based on the facts?

Sorry - I can't accommodate you. Your positions are so ridiculous and outrageous I now close any postings unread with your name at the top. This is THE last one that I'll read by you. Ugh!

Hi old bean, where ya been?
Don't make me go back and find the many instances where you have called Hamas "mainly a political party" or some such and the more recent explaination fo Hezbollah as "a force to deter Israeli agression on the Lebonese border".

You are knowledgable and intelligent on this issue. You are also very anti-Israel to the point of being anti-semite to some extent. I believe that you aren't intentionally anti-sematic and I don't think, nor have i ever said, you hate all Jews. However you side with the Palestinians, and the rest of the Arabs in the region, almost to exclusion of any other consideration

If you want to appologize for mis-characterizing the two groups I'm listening; just don't try and backpeddle.

Whining about the Gaza incident doesn't cut it now. If Hamas and the Pals wanted to have a leg to stand on they would have stopped the rocket attacks on Israel long ago. Using Israeli retaliation as a sign of Israeli aggression is a common and frayed tactic.

Heavyvinter - Israel and the Russian Republics are the best . . .
You've told it exactly as it is. Well put. Obviously the Israeli's are "bringing it on" and I hope they take out the Iranian nuclear site and hit Syria really, really hard at the same time. Wanna **** the big boys off and kill their citizens? Well there's a huge price to pay.

Imagine if the Red Hat Society set up a military arm with "camps" in Laredo and started kidnapping Mexican boarder patrol people and firing deadly missiles into Mexico. Would the Mexican government hold the US government responsible for not dealing with these mad red Hatters (as Lebanon is ridiculously trying to declare with respect to the Hezbollah)? I think they would.

The point that you miss, R, is that the terrorists are in POLITICAL control in the Palestinian territories and Southern Lebanon. Thus, what would previously have been an act of terrorism is now an act of war by nature of the transition of terrorists to political power, which, of course, now gives the terrorists all of the resources available to nation-states. And which puts the obligation on the rest of the world to admit that an act of war is an act of war, and must be condemned by all nations. Lebanon and Palestine are reaping what they sow. The amazing thing is that the left cannot understand this at all. The terrorists are not freedom fighters (Isreal has been abandoning the land to them, after all). Instead, the terrorists are merely scum dedicated to the destruction of Israel and the imposition of Islamic law. Giving them political power doesn't reign them in, it sets them loose.


Provocative acts
Hamas and Hezbollah both have tried their best to transition from being purely military to being political parties. That muxch should be beyond dispute. That Hamas has rescinded their one way cease fire in light of repeated Israeli provocations should also be beyond dispute. Since the inception of the Olmert government, for instance, some eighty Palestinians have been killed in sloppy "targeted" assassinations that kill more family members and innocent bystanders than they do actual Hamas members or suspected perps. Are you really being fair and unbiased to totally discount such provocations?

Why don't you give us your best total of how many innocent Israelis have been killed by Hamas during that same period-- i.e. since Olmert has been in power. Do you get eighty or more?

Hezbollah has made a disastrous blunder, IMO, in escalating the flap at the Israeli border. Again, though, could you please provide us with the number of Israeli civilians who have been killed so far? According to the BBC this morning, casualties from shelling in Beirut now amount to some 55 individuals. There is no reason to believe this indiscriminate shelling of densely populated neighborhoods has somehow singled out only terrorists for death. You know that. I know that. So why then do you refuse to acknowledge it?

Why do you support a known and admitted terrorist organization?

allow me...
From the BBC:

Here's 2005:

And 2006:
January 19: 20 injured in bombing at fast-food restaurant in Tel Aviv
February 5: 1 killed, 5 injured in stabbing attack on taxi bus en route to Tel Aviv [1].
March 1: 1 killed in shooting attack at gas station near Migdalim, West Bank [2].
March 28: 2 killed (incl. 1 child) in explosion of Qassam rocket found in western Negev area.
March 30: 4 killed (incl. 1 child) by suicide bomber posing as Jewish hitchhiker [3].
April 17: 11 killed (including 2 Romanians, 1 French citizen, 1 US citizen and 1 dual Israeli-French citizen), over 60 injured by suicide bomber outside a fast-food restaurant in Tel Aviv after being prevented by a security guard from entering [4].
June 09 - an explosion on a Gaza beach, of undetermined origin, kills 7 Palestinians.[5]
June 25 - Palestinian militants infiltrate Israel through a secret tunnel and start a gunbattle at a military checkpoint - 2 Israeli soldiers and 3 militants are killed and an Israeli soldier is reported as missing and is later found out to have been captured by the militants.
June 28 - Israel starts a military operation in the Gaza strip, deploying a large number of tanks, APCs and troops in order to rescue the soldier captured in the attack three days before that.

talk about biased
So if Israel responds to attacks it's a provocation?

sloppy "targeted" assassinations????

Israel is carefull to attack the terrorists where they are, it's not the fault of Israel if the terrorists deliberately hide amongst the general population in an attempt to make the Israel response look bad.
If the terrorists don't want their family killed, they shouldn't hide/live amongst them.

This cannot be considered a provocation by anyone with their thinking based in reality.

What you appear to be saying is that Israel must respond in an equal manner, ie equal casualties, equivalent response etc. what a crock.

If so it would be valid to randomly target civilians as a response just like Hamas and Hezbollah does.

Roy the Distortionist..
Yet again, Roy manages to see a different world than the rest of us. Roy failes to see the raining of rockets down on Israeli cities as being an attack on civilians? Are you blind, an idiot, or both, Roy?

Furthermore, it is no surprise that Roy does not understand why Hezbollah would do this, because he has continuously failed to understand the true motivations of the terrorists. No, Roy, they are NOT freedom fighters. Otherwise, they would NOT have immediately filled in the land abandoned by Israel with rockets to attack Israel with.

But if one understands the truth, namely that the terrorists (1) are controlled by Iran (and thus are being used as pawns to distract the world from the Iranian nuke program) and (2) are dedicated to the destruction of Israel and (3) believe that God is on their side, and thus they cannot lose, then "why" they do this is obvious. But of course, the left, epitomized by Roy, is blind to these truths, preferring to believe that these terrorists really are merely freedom fighters.

As to whether or not this is terrorism, what does it matter? It is an attack on Israel that requires a firm response. Anything less only invites additional responses.

But when reality confronts Roy's illusion, he can show only confusion. Too bad, Roy. Your world is all smoke and mirrors, but you are happy there, aren't you?


Thanks for again showing that Roy is quite myopic, only seeing what he wants to see. Anybody who thinks that Hamas has tried in the least to become a merely political organization is about as blind as can be. After all, Hamas has made it quite clear that there is NO WAY it will change its declaration that Israel has no right to exist, and must instead vacate all of the mideast.

Roy must be a stooge for the terrorists, for how could anybody be so clearly out of touch with reality?


The Obvious
It's saying that neither party is producing what the majority of Americans believe to be an effective "War on Terror"

Important Distinctions
The Isreali right-wing believed (still believes) that negotiations with Palestinians (those in Gaza and the West Bank) would only encourage more terrorism if Israel "rewarded" them with unilteral withdrawal from some settlements. Instead, Likud and others wanted to keep the settlements, establish unilaterally establish the final borders of Israel, and call it a day.

On the other hand, Hezbollah is committed to the destruction of Israel NO MATTER WHAT POLICY IS PURSUED -- it makes no difference if Likud or Kadima or Labor is making the decisions, and it makes no difference if Israel keeps the settlements or gives them away.

In any event, Hezbollah does not represent the Palestinians of Gaza and the West Bank, and were never part of the peace process between Israel and Palestine, even during Likud's reign.

TCS Daily Archives