A first-rate riposte. Still, I wasn't suggest we stand bemused on the edge of this sea of dead souls, sipping martinis and waiting for the sun to go down while trying to avoid getting any splashes on our shoes.

Instead, we should busy ourselves with the living. Let the dead bury the dead. Good advice when it was first given, and good advice now.

http://tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=6bd11ed5-bf80-44a0-b683-a0563e11ab89

The New Republic
Can Friends of Israel--and Jews--Trust Obama?
by Martin Peretz
In a word, Yes.
Post Date Thursday, January 31, 2008

[...] speaking in Des Moines on December 18, Obama cut to the essence of the Middle East problem at a level of sophistication that ought to be a relief, if not a rebuke, to those who fret about his lack of foreign policy "experience." He raised three questions and answered them in a way that no other Democratic aspirant for the nomination has done.

[...] Obama's points, which he has made many times, should reassure anyone who is concerned about what his presidency would mean for the security of Israel. [...]

- - Martin Peretz is the editor-in-chief of The New Republic.

Were a couple of those long posts by ABAB just deleted? I ask only because I was in the process of replying to them, and am now wondering if I imagined them.

It’s almost as if Hezbollah’s blood-curdling cries to destroy Israel and the Jews, Hamas’s aim of replacing all of Israel with an Islamic state, Iran’s objective of a world without Israel, Syria’s hospitality to all the leading terrorist groups in the region, and the teaching of incitement and contempt in Palestinian textbooks don’t count for anything.

Words are not actions. If you use another's words to in turn justify physical violence, then you are the one responsible for the violence. I'm not interested in excusing any violence by any parties to the dispute, but this idea that people can be demonized to the point of deserving death because they said bad things is insane.

That's the same logic that says the US can't leave Iraq because someone might "claim victory". It is a guaranteed path to further senseless bloodshed.

Of course, the UN is no help. Israel was roundly condemned for violating the cease fire agreement for launching a raid into Lebanon. While deserved, the fact that the resolution had no teeth, combined with the fact that nobody at the UN seemed to have any problem with Syria rearming Hezbollah simply sent two messages. To the Palestinians, it was yet another example if Israel getting off with a slap on the wrist for violating international law. To the Israelis, it was another reminder than nobody will hold the other side to its agreements. The real losers are the Lebanese as in a few years Hezbollah will pick the wrong time to launch a cross-border raid and Israel will respond by flattening Lebanon again. This seems to be perfectly fine with Israel and Syria, but I’m sure the Lebanese would disagree

There are never any "winners" in warfare, least of all the civilians caught up in the conflict. But if you are trying to suggest that Israel gained anything by the incursion into Lebanon, you are mistaken. It was a tactical and strategic defeat. Seems to be going around these days. I think they are smarter than that. I wish we were.

http://www.csis.org/media/csis/pubs/060817_isr_hez_lessons.pdf

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2006/07/post.html

They are smart enough not to repeat an incursion into Lebanon. "Flattening it" from the air does nothing but make angry Lebanese. They have to go in and hold ground and they can't. They couldn't then and it will only get more difficult. Time to jaw jaw.

http://turcopolier.typepad.com/sic_semper_tyrannis/2006/07/post.html

A delicate question

Were a couple of those long posts by ABAB just deleted? I ask only because I was in the process of replying to them, and am now wondering if I imagined them.

-- William Timberman

8,400 rockets in 14 months is 'action'. 50 today alone. But if you're willing to agree they're not action feel free to live in Sderot.

Noam Chompsky--the finest name for a dog I ever heard.

With the possible exception of Bob Barker.

The only reason some might prefer Bob Barker is the slight awkwardness one might feel in yelling "NOAM!---NOAM!" out the front door to call the dog. Seems a bit highbrow...a little over the top...

They are smart enough not to repeat an incursion into Lebanon. "Flattening it" from the air does nothing but make angry Lebanese. They have to go in and hold ground and they can't. They couldn't then and it will only get more difficult. Time to jaw jaw.

You'd think the US would be smart enough to secure weapons depots following an invasion, but here we are. I have a fairly low opinion of human intelligence in these matters. There will always be people who will say "if we did it this way, we would of won" as well as people stupid enough to believe them.

Besides, the big winner in that war was Syria (contrary to popular belief, there are winners in war, it's usually the country that's bigger at the end). Israel got humiliated, Lebanon got destroyed, and Syria (it's leaders, not it's people who were probably horrified) got to sit back and enjoy the show. Plus, they still get to keep up their proxy war against Israel so they don't have to talk to them about what they have to give up to get the Golan and Sheeba back.

Hezbollah has been very specific about what they want from Israel. They want Sheeba Farms. Which is why Syria is arming them. They want Sheeba Farms too, but they want people to pretend it's Lebanon getting it. It'll be just like So. Lebanon. People will call it Lebanon, but it's not like the Lebanese army will be allowed in there.

Unfortunatly, Israel won't talk to Hezbollah because it was supposed to be disbanded after it's reason for being (Israel's occupation of So. Leb) ended. Why should they negotiate twice for the same thing? As much as it pains some people to say, Israel is in full compliance with International law here. They're not going to give up more then that just because somebody else didn't like the terms. If any actor on the other side can start asking for more once the deal is done, why should they negotiate with anybody? Which brings me to my original point. If nobody presures Syria to stop arming Hezbollah and start offering Israel with better deals than "Give us everything we want and then we'll start negotiating to see what else you should give up for peace", then nothing will change.

My point being is that Syria is getting off too easy for the whole mess. Which is why they'll continue to act in the way that caused the whole mess in the first place.