We see more than enough opinions here and beyond being shared as to what is the cause, who is responsible, who offers financial and logistical support to, who is to blame, what created their strength and need and what price has to be paid for Hezbollah's existence in Lebanon.

But how can we resolve this issue? What can be done so that Hezbollah is no longer a regional threat and an instrument of terror and Muslims in the region no longer feel justified to seek and support resistance from the state of Israel?

Offer ideas that go beyond a ceasefire...what will need to be done or what needs to happen in order for lasting peace to be achieved?

Well, someone very charismatic and very powerful will have to wave a wand and... oops, no - seriously- I think the main reasons for ALL the conflicts are (with the obvious oil in the ME)

1) Making the state of Isreal in the first place- HELLO- poeple already living there!

2) Lap dog loyal support from US and UK on every stinken issue of Isreal vs Arab- even allowng them to have WMD- now come on here- that is just over the top!

3) Both sides trying to out breed eatch other

4) Small chunk of land religiously tide to very, very large % of the world population.

So- to adress those problems:

1) The state of Isreal as we know it today, will cease to exist- HOWEVER- that mostly means the goverment to me- NOT any population forced changes. Every Arab that wants to live in Isreal has a right of return. A forced constitution that is religion vague- and the nation forever run by a world body with a tricumeral set of bodies- like the US, but the Judical and Executive branches not having too much centralized power in one or 3 persons. No more local goverment for the entire Palestenian/Isreali area- it has not worked, period. Time for it to be a global body, outside the region/

2) this problem would be fixed by 1 above

3) Governing body to address all religiious turf wars, and be senstive to every religion there, no tearing down one temple to build someone elses unless it is an agreeable property sale. - so, American style property ownership laws and zoning and road and water control- a big issue with population there. Also, the world governing body would fund massive salt water reclaimation projects- to ensure the next war is not over water feeding large populations there

4) As in three, all religious sites are to be mediated if contested, if not, declared permenant holy sites- and no religoius persecution of other religions, including the absense of one. Also, Jerusalem is to become a UN city- completely autonomous city like the Vatican, with UN control and election for city day to day running and infrastructure, but no jurisdiction over religious sites that the world governing body would have.


The children over there have been playing very bad deadly games- it is time to take the players for a century or two time out and forced living together to get thier act together and stop killing folks.

And the rest of the world terminates the violent after the agreement with extreme predjudice and financial ruin.

There is one thing Israel can do to really improve its security against Hezbollah with far less loss of life to Lebanese civilians, but it would involve doing something that the "international community" would heartily disapprove of: Annex southern Lebanon. In the present situation, Israel's objective is to inflict as much damage on Hezbollah as it can, and therefore is constrained in terms of how much advance warning it can afford to give before it starts bombing. But if it were to annex the area, it could simply content itself with driving Hezbollah out. It could just go sector by sector, giving ample time for people to leave, and if Hezbollah's still in the sector, bomb it heavily.

Then, if Hezbollah continues to give Israel trouble from their new location, it could annex that location and repeat the process, and continue repeating it until all Hezbollah missile activity has stopped, or until Hezbollah is pressed up against the borders of a country that will not tolerate its presence. If it appears foreseeable that Israel would have to do that, it could warn the civlians of that border region to get out as soon as they can, because once the Hebollah terrorists are backed into a corner with no other place to go, Israel will MOAB them.

Edited to answer the final question of the opening post:

A lasting peace can happen once Israel is able to deter other countries and organizations in the region from making unprovoked attacks on it. Militarily, it's already capable of doing that. It's just being constrained by the outside world, mostly Washington.

But how can we resolve this issue? What can be done so that Hezbollah is no longer a regional threat and an instrument of terror and Muslims in the region no longer feel justified to seek and support resistance from the state of Israel?

The first task in any negotiations is to understand what each party wants. So we must ask ourselves: what does Hezbollah want?

According to the Australian government (to use a non-US source) :



So Hezbollah wants:

1. a Shiite theocracy in Lebanon.

2. the destruction of Israel

3. elimination of Western influences in the Middle East.

Nasrallah said in an interview (with the Washington Post) in 1999 that:

"Three things comprise our minimal demand: an [Israeli] withdrawal from South Lebanon and the Western Bqa’ Valley, a withdrawal from the Golan, and the return of the Palestinian refugees. "

Two of those three objectives were accomplished (before this latest escalation after the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers). The third could be a plank to use.

However, in that same interview, Nasrallah stated:


Nasrallah's other statements:





Oh wait, that one was a Hamas election advertisement.


Little choice for a defiant Israel

I guess we can stop guessing, let's check out Hizbollah's website. Nasrallah has a very frank interview on that website. He talks openly about expected more casualties on his side.





This conflict is following Nasrallah's plan exactly, even down to sacrificing the children of Lebanon:



Nasrallah lays it bare:


4 points: Shaba farms, border incursions, Hezbollah (Palestinian?) prisoners, attacks on civilians.

The main issue is the Lebanese prisoners. Nasrallah specifically mentions that any deal must include Samir al-Qintar "first". This is the guy they want. Here is a little info on him: The World Should Know What He Did to My Family

The only answer Hezbollah will accept is a prisoner swap. Should Israel swap this murdering thug (and others) for a short-lived peace which will certainly be revived over Shaba farms, or attacks on Palestinians, or Israel's very existence?

This question has no easy answers. It may have no answers at all.

What can be done so that Hezbollah is no longer a regional threat and an instrument of terror
Annihilate Hezbollah. Take no prisoners, kill every Hezbollah fighter, as well as everybody in their leadership, everybody in their direct logistical structure, and as far as practically possible, everybody who has voluntarily given them significant material support.

and Muslims in the region no longer feel justified to seek and support resistance from the state of Israel?
Force all Muslims in the region to renounce their religion, or die.

As Nasrallah said, "Our principles are clear: Palestine is a land of Waqf, which cannot be given up." This is a concept that is embedded in Islam. Unless someone can find a way of going back in time and insuring that this concept doesn't get into the Koran, it has to be accepted as a reality that will always keep cropping up as long as Islam has adherents. Almost 700 years after the Islamic conquerors were tossed out of Spain, Osama and his nutjobs still claim it.

Put simply, we need to take the jihadists at their word, and respond accordingly.

I recommend the following take on the subject... Muslims lie, Arabs die...

Interesting- I don't see any of those three last proposals doing anything but genocide for a solution.

Also, I note that all three are conservatives- and none adress the basic problem that Isreal is a construct of the UN (who you guys usually despise) that was pressed by UK and US and created this mess in the first place- I doubt very seriously that we would have such an entrenched blood fued that will probably last a century as long as we have, what is basically a european contruct, in the middle of a group of indigineous and now radicalized poeple.

I am not for genocide of either side, nor ethnic cleansing like Bikerdad, but I really do think that Isreal and the entire disputed region needs to loose all local autonomy in the region. The hot heads there are simply not capable of governing in peace.

I think a great idea is to have the people of Israel come to America and give them Texas.
It would pay for itself so quickly.
One less money spent on the military situation out there. less munituions and the like being sent over there.
Two they can probably help the illegal immigration problem down there.
They have many valuable businesses that bring lots of tax money, not to mention the increase to the tax base from all the new citizens.
We already know and are familiar with their customs.
lets not forget the badly needed influx of miltary personel--not to mention they are very defense minded and definetely supporters of civic responsibility.

We can bail on the whole Middle East.

What do y'all think?

What makes you think that they would be interested in Texas? Most Israeli dislike the desert, which is why the Negev has a hard time attracting people. Most of Israel is more like California weather wise. But they aren't going anywhere without Jerusalem. Much like Texas is centered on the Alamo, Israel is the Temple Mount.

Nice idea, but they wouldn't get along with Texans either. You think that the Palestinians have been hard to fighting Texans would be taking to an extreme level.

CR-Most Israelis came from Arab countries not Europe. To claim that they are an European construct is just plain wrong. They are an indigenous people that have been there in the region for more than 5,000 years. And stubborn to boot.

I think a great idea is to have the people of Israel come to America and give them Texas.
It would pay for itself so quickly.
One less money spent on the military situation out there. less munituions and the like being sent over there.
Two they can probably help the illegal immigration problem down there.
They have many valuable businesses that bring lots of tax money, not to mention the increase to the tax base from all the new citizens.
We already know and are familiar with their customs.
lets not forget the badly needed influx of miltary personel--not to mention they are very defense minded and definetely supporters of civic responsibility.

We can bail on the whole Middle East.

What do y'all think?

Quoted from Christopher.

You have my support, maybe Florida?

No, its wrong to give away peoples land.


Really I do not see any chance of peace over there, I said it in posts related a long time ago that cultural change needs to occur in both groups really, both feel its right of them to be whatever and that just leads to lots of @#$holes's blowing each other up. The scary part is the idea of nukes in the hands of devoutly religious folks being life on earth is only a "thing" in relation to the more important afterlife.

I think moreover its easy to see that not every Arab or Muslim is at arms against Israel, if this were true the situation would be far worse. They are of course Arab and Muslim people that are moderate on the issue, or not filled with hate, and of course I feel Israel would very much like to live in peace and hold people that want the same and moreover probably do not want war. I think that’s the avenue that should be worked on, more then that the actually realization of a Palestinian state with the resources to work through the initial turbulence and the ability of Israel to want to abstain from raining blood during this phase in the likely event some evil person or persons decides to conduct gods will. The reality of this is so large in scale I doubt it will ever really work become of interests or beliefs or whatever, and the fact it would probably take a few generations of people to complete it.

SO that leaves me with little faith on peace and more disgust in just watching more people die like that have done over and over again for nothing new but maybe a lapse in such decadence. I think the U.S paying attention to the issue in the way it does only involves a national security risk, more so in that idea it would probably take the world at large combined to really tackle this issue, which I dont see coming anytime soon either.

Is a solution possible, of course, nukes could be one, and others also exist, but really does anyone really have to resolve the world over to take on the issue, this part of the puzzle always seems to fiz out or not exist really.

Can you actually kill Hezbollah? can you actually kill that cancer of hate in the Muslim world via force? If not then other options should be taken into account in terms of planning, other then that really you would have to accept genocide, which I dont personally.

It is beginning to look like the IDF is going to be ending this conflict and yes Hezbollah is going to be consigned to the trash pile of history. Without resorting to genocide.

The IDF is reporting that they have killed approx. 20% of all the Hezbollah fighters, and most of the rocket launchers. They are moving North to the Litani. Once in position there Hezbollah's supply lines will be cut to their Southern strongholds and the Lebanese government already controls everything North of the Litani. That will spell the end of Hezbollah as a fighting force.

It seems that Hezbollah has totally misjudged the free world and it's resolve. This might actually be the start of peace in Middle East. I think that it is too early to tell for sure but we might be seeing something very important. The free world has decided that Islamic Fascism is not going to get away with murdering people this time. This is a very powerful message to those that think the West is weak and powerless.

One can but hope and pray that this is the end of the beginning in the fight against world terrorism.

What can be done so that Hezbollah is no longer a regional threat and an instrument of terror and Muslims in the region no longer feel justified to seek and support resistance from the state of Israel? Like Bikerdad said, Annihilate Hezbollah. Take no prisoners, kill every Hezbollah fighter, as well as everybody in their leadership, everybody in their direct logistical structure, and as far as practically possible, everybody who has voluntarily given them significant material support.

As for the rest of the Muslims of the region, they have the same basic choice that all human beings face. They can choose life, or death. As things stand at the moment, Islam is rapidly becoming the greatest death cult in history. It doesn't have to be that way.

If killing all Hezzies now counts as "genocide", then I guess you could sort of say my post is guilty of that. I don't think it's how most people understand the term, though. Hezbollah isn't an ethnic group. It's a terrorist group. Very profound difference.


I don't know why you're raising this point, unless your solution to the present problem involves some form of time travel.

So? Genocide works. The Islamofascists have already declared that genocide is their intent, and that intent is embedded in their holy works. Which means we either will be killed by them, will kill them, will convince them to abandon their holy works, have to keep them locked up for the rest of creation, or join them. As a father of one daughter and three sons, Options 2 and 3 are the only ones I consider to be acceptable.

Well, that's because its conservatives who have a clear grasp of the nature of the situation, a perception that escapes the vast majority of liberals. (note: "vast majority" <> "all")

See what I mean about escaping liberals? The basic problem is the Koran. Incidentally, Esperanto is a UN construct, Israel is a nation and people that are older than any existing nation on Earth today except perhaps the Middle Kingdom. Their current political boundaries are a recent innovation, but as a nation and people, they're twice as old as the Bronze Age tribal barbarians attempting to eradicate them.

Indigenous? Take a history lesson. Last a century? Yeah, what's one more century given that Islam has been working to kill or dominate the Jews for the last 14? Oh, and kill or dominate everybody else as well.

Which region? The Near East/Levant/Palestine? That doesn't encompass Iraq, Libya, or Iran, much less Darfur, Afghanistan or Chechnya. Perhaps, given the number of "hot heads" in those areas, we should revoke local autonomy from them as well. But then we examine the wonders of Islam in Thailand, India, Nigeria, or Indonesia, one wonders, just how far must we go in "revoking local autonomy"?

When History bites back...

Fortunately, even some of the Europeans are beginning to wake up (Moif already woke up), here's what one of them, Mathias Derfer, CEO of Axel Springer Verlag, a huge German publisher, has to say:

There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization's utter destruction.

It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century--a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by "tolerance" and "accommodation" but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness.

I don't have much time today but I thought I would point out that a variation of the Final Solution is not a solution. You can't just kill and destroy anyone who doesn't fit into your ideas of what society should be. I thought we already knew this was a failed policy?

And CruisingRam you are one to complain about increased violence and death, exactly how to propose your idea that the state of Israel will just dissolve itself? You think this will occur peacefully?

I have seen the words of a wise man being used to question the current tactics of this war...

What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy’s strategy. Next best is to disrupt his alliances by diplomacy. The next best is to attack his army. And the worst policy is to attack cities.

-Sun Tsu

This is why the recent passing in the UN by a vote of 14-1 demanding that Iran suspend it's nuclear activity by August 31st is such a valuable triumph for us.
And that one dissent was not China or Russia, it was Qatar.
Yeah go team go!

I was thinking North Dakota, they really need people there. Just think of all the billions we spend in Israel actually would be spent HERE!

Eliminate the state of Israel and watch the whole middle east collapse as they now have to find another group to blame their problems on.

Just create military posts near shrines and sacred places....so they can visit if they want.

I don't see how you boiled my post down to an advocacy of genocide. My post was an attempt to illuminate the leader of Hezbollah's intentions, in his own words.

To solve this, we need to view each side's desires and attempt to reach a mutually agreeable solution.

In the short term, Nazrallah wants a prisoner swap. He wants one murderous thug in particular. A convicted multiple murderer.

Should Israel negotiate with "political" groups that kidnap people and demand the release of murderers? Should it negotiate with militias that launch rockets at civilian targets indiscriminantly?

Did the last prisoner exchange bring peace?

In 1985, Israel released over 1,100 prisoners in exchange for three soldiers. In 2004, it released 400 prisoners in exchange for one businessman and the bodies of three dead soldiers.

The day of the 2004 release, a suicide bomber killed 10 in Israel. Was there peace in 1985?

In 1997, a prisoner exchange with Hamas swapped Shaikh Ahmed Yassin--cofounder of Hamas and convicted murder conspiracist--for two Mossad agents. Yassin immediately resumed his calls for violence against Israel including suicide bombings--a direct violation of the terms of his release.

In January 2004, after a Palestinian woman used a suicide bomb to kill four and wound seven, Yassin said: "Hamas views women as the reserve force... Hamas military wing saw it necessary to use a woman, and it did so." The man was an unapologetic terrorist (despite being a paraplegic) who ordered and condoned dozens of suicide bombings and other attacks on civilians. His death by IDF fire in March 2004 was not soon enough.

So Israel has done these prisoner swaps in the past, and it has had zero effect on the violence. It has not brought the sides closer to peace. In fact, it has escalated the violence when human refuse like Yassin are released. (It should surprise none that the death of Yassin was condemned by Kofi Annan who called it an "extrajudicial killing." Of course, the man was a convicted murderer and leader of a terrorist group and those arrested using "judicial" procedures are demanded to be released.

Which is exactly what Hezbollah wants now: the release of murderous thugs.

There is a reason that most governments don't negotiate with terrorists (or do so at their own peril): they cannot be trusted to keep their word and the exhort violence by citing the weakness inherent in the releases themselves. A true case of damned if you do, damned if you don't.

Then what was the point of fighting the nazi's?

Its quite a leap of logic to get from the notion of a just defence to a Holocaust.


But we have attacked the enemy's strategy as you point out yourself... will it make any difference to the Iranians though that a UN resolution has been passed against them? Will it stop Iran from building its nuclear arsenal?

We've also tried, repeatedly, to disrupt the enemy's alliances, but as we have seen, those alliances are far far stronger than our diplomacy which is seen as corrupt and biased against the poor. Their alliances reach beyond the Iran/Syrian axis and deep into our own societies where like minded Muslims gather in small cells and plot to attack our socities, infrastructure and political systems.

Right now, we are attacking his armies (for they are many) and having scant success.

There is no 'final solution' in the democratic agenda and there never was.
If left alone I have no doubt that the western world would readily grant most any peaceful demand put to it by a democratic Muslim world. The truth is, we are not 'up for a war'. No one in the west wants it.

They do.

That they do is as plain as day. Do you see children in Spain marching in lock step with rifles held tight across their chests, or Italian mothers proudly holding up banners of their suicide bomber sons and daughters? Do Irish Catholics cluster in demonstrations across the planet, waving terrorist flags and calling for the extermination of the Jews?

Those here in the west who are calling out FIRE! are being charged as arsonists because people don't want to know. They don't want to be confronted with the millions who chant DEATH TO AMERICA! or the speeches of hatred by finger wagging, bearded manics. The simple truth of what we are facing.

They seem to think that if they just close their eyes and ears and speak no evil, then no evil could possibly come to them.

Well, I don't think ANY of the solutions offered so far are any more realistic than disarming Isreal along with the entire region personally- despite Bikerdads call for opening up some ovens Aushwitz style in Syria for the Arabs- I don't even think of Genocide on that scale will work.

Look- no matter which side you turn to, niether is willing to give any quarter- they don't play well together- and they need someone outside that conflict to run things, pure and simple-

Loreng said "not without Juresalem"- that is a very telling point- all 3 religions DEMAND Juresalem- this is definately one city that no one country should be allowed to have or govern past electing local dog catchers and trash commiisionars- if even that may lead to a blood fued.

I don't advocate death and genocide to either side- I just want them disarmed and all local autonomy taken away, maybe for a century or two.

Jews and Arabs DID live fairly well side by side there for centuries- until WE started to muck up the place with all our own politics and religion.

IT IS a type of crusade we started in 1917 and 1948, perhaps for the right reasons, perhaps for the wrong reasons, -whatever, everyone is there now, and we need to get control of this cycle at some point- and trying to 'annihilate" one side or the other is not going to work.

I don't even think opening up ovens for the Arabs in the area is going to work either.

IN my ways, I do agree with Moif, and Loreng, on what is wrong with Islam vs West- the West, especially Europe, needs to get a handle on Muslim influence in thier own country, and we have what, a billion or so Islamic poeple on this planet? This problem is just going to escalate and escalate - it is only a matter of time before splinter groups DO start getting REAL WMDs, and pandora has really already been let out of the box, we won't be able to stop it forever- we can only difuse it.

If, at some point in all this- we were ever to really try to deal with the real issue- we gave a very holy area to one poeple, when there were millions and millions of poeple living in that area that had religious meaning to it as well, with centuries of distrust of European invasions in the past- that will never be workable.

The Islamic world's tactical plan here seems to be to just out breed everyone, and take over by atrition. And it seems to be working.

I don't think the west will ever have the stomach to go with Bikerdads' proposal of marching men, women and children into ovens at this time, nor any time- so the next real solutoin is to take those that don't play welll together's toys and motivations away completely.

Empower moderate Islamic voices in that area, give them some shared power along with other groups equal share- as long as they are not living in or from that region, and take away local control completely

Isreal is tough, but, if the whole world is against them, and they turn anyway against the world- nuke them too- just as we would equally any other group. Make that clear- the world is sick of thier crazy politics of both sides, and cooler heads (hopefully) outside of that tiny strip of land will be making decisions now.

You go to your corner, you go to yours, and DO NOT come out swinging!

How do you propose we disarm "all of them" when we cannot disarm even one group: Hezbollah. We cannot disarm Hamas, we cannot disarm Al Aqsa.

Do you really think these groups (including the country of Israel) will lay down their arms and be shipped out to somewhere else?

The Palestinians will not accept the current situation but would accept an "international" occupation force?

It doesn't seem very workable to me.

And demonstrating that "cooler heads will prevail" by dropping nukes is just off the charts...

Whether it's called Manifest Destiny, the Final Solution or ethnic cleansing, genocide does not work. All it does is make a large number of people dead.

As a father of one daughter and three sons, Bikerdad who is going to going to carry out this mass killing on a grand scale? You? How are you going to identify the Islamofascists from the non-Islamofascists? What will you do when other countries stand up to oppose your systematic eradication of anyone you decide is a threat to your family and way of life?

And what should happen to you should you happen to make a mistake and kill someone who doesn't deserve to die?

Advocating genocide as a solution to the threat of violence is like advocating rape to cure sexual promiscuity.

Offer ideas that go beyond a ceasefire...what will need to be done or what needs to happen in order for lasting peace to be achieved?
I have a much simpler idea, although its fair to say that nobody is going to try it. If the big countries (US, Russia, China) want Mideast peace, then we are going to have to stop selling weapons to the Mideast countries. Unfortunately, this is too much easier said than done. For years, Russia's economy has been in the dumps with weapons and natural gas exports being its primary source of hard currency. The US of course has made dirty deals with Saudi Arabia involving the exchange of petrodollars in exchange for military support.

Now, given the fact that the West and Russia made the mistake of arming all those fanatics in the first place, the only thing left to do is to wait and let them slug it out. Eventually, Hezbollah will run out of ammo, and Israel for its part is not intent on committing genocides. Osama Bin Laden, for all his large numbers of fanatical followers will never be able to get an ICBM missile over to North America. I think we all need to keep this current conflict in perspective. Some of the WW1 battles resulted in 100,000 men getting killed on one day. This current conflict, while lasting 2 weeks, has left about 500 people dead. I don't think we need to worry about WW3.

When this conflict does end, it would be very wise for the United States to take steps to drastically reduce its dependence on Middle East oil, including cutting off all funding for the InterState Highway system.

I didn't discount fighting or going to war, i question genocide. Saying you are going to kill every person that thinks a particular way is genocide. We did not wage genocide on the Germans, we defeated them and then went in and reconstructed their entire country and political system. I don't take issue with forcibly disarming militias like Hezbollah I have already stated that elsewhere. I do take issue with killing everyone who has ever been involved with Hezbollah, supported Hezbollah or feels Hezbollah has some form of justification for it's stance against Israel, that is said to be currently 70-80% of the Lebanese population. How you believe you can just walk in and kill this many people and leave peace in your wake is beyond me.




We have not attacked their strategy..we have only just begun. The current strategy was to supply Hezbollah with weapons, training and financial support. How did we disrupt this?, it went on for years without any interference. And the difference made is not always from the Iranian governments perspective , what matters now is our own alignment and our perceived stance to the Iranian people. It is easy to deflect Israeli or American condemnation in a regime that bases much of it's philosophy and military needs on a anti-semitic and anti-American stance. It is not so easy to then deflect the same condemnation from nations like Russia, China, Germany, France etc. The more and more voices we have making our demands the more and more apparent it is how isolated and illegitimate the Iranian govt is.

I don't expect UN resolutions and sanctions to put an end to Iran's current policy towards nuclear advancements, not at all. What i do expect ifs for them to be punished for their policies and for their nation to have to have the full effect of acting, behaving and conducting themselves in a manner that is totally inappropriate to their international legitimacy, agreements and commitments.


Ha! ... when!? We have not. The EU wont even condemn Hezbollah as a terrorist org. Europe attacked and proactively opposed US increased sanctions on Iran last time it instigated war with Israel though it's allies. Germany is Iran's greatest trade partner. Russia supplies Iran with military technology and weaponry.
We have not stood united and opposed. It is not that they have a stronger alliance , theirs is weak and easily exploitable. Not many others Muslims hate more than other Muslims. It is that we have no alliance of our own. And they have long exploited our differences. Our diplomacy is weak, I would even argue non existent. It is our failure not their strength that defeats us.


History has taught us that we can overcome fascism. We can defeat this mindset, we can change how people think, we don't need to kill every single one of them, societies can be altered.

And the last group of people you need to be informing of this threat to is Americans. I think it is well understood and believed here. That is why we have sent our children to fight, not because we don't want to confront this or can not face the truth. Sending our military to Iraq was not an easy way out, it was not a means to avoid a confrontation, but who in the West has supported America's claims that the threat is great and the fight must happen? Very very few, and that is why I laugh when you tell me that we have already fought this threat together, only a few of us have.

I would also add that there is a lot of support for the Palestinian cause, Iran's legitimacy and Hezbollah's resistance in Western society, as there was for Hitler, Naziism and Fascism in WW1. And as I have stated in other debates I fear what it will take to unite us or at the least make the majority of the population in the West no longer tolerate these ideologies.

Israel cannot destroy Hezbollah (without using genocide), or engage it in a permanent peace.

The solution to the current conflict is to make it logistically impossible for Hezbollah to attack Israel; via the use of a fence force. This force is already in its planning stages, and meetings in the UN are now scheduled to discuss its composition.

Problems to watch out for in the future, are Hezbollah sneaking into the buffer zone to fire at Israel, and the peace troop's home countries desiring withdrawals due to costs in both lives and dollars (or Franks most likely).

This is an extremely complicated situation, and at the moment, it’s difficult to see any kind of solution in sight.

Immediate actions that should be taken:

1. Something needs to be done to improve the humanitarian situation on the ground. If this isn’t going to be accomplished by a cease-fire, than Israel needs to help create a situation where relief supplies can be safely delivered to isolated areas.

This fight against Hezbollah, whether it is just or not, has contributed to the death of more than 900 people, the injuries of more than 3,000 people, and the displacement of more than 1,000,000 people. The infrastructure has been badly damaged as a part of Israel’s military strategy, and Israel needs to bear some of the responsibility for insuring safe travel for relief convoys.

The state of Israel has already made it clear that the people of Lebanon are not its enemy. If that’s truly the case, than this is not an unreasonable request.

2. The International community, including the United States, needs to strongly condemn the use of indiscriminate weapons in populated areas. Both sides have been guilty of using these types of weapons, and it should be of paramount importance to protect the civilian population of Lebanon.

Reports that I’ve been hearing involve Hezbollah using bombs packed with metal bearings, missiles that are nearly impossible to aim at a specific target, and the use of civilians as shields. Israel is admittedly using cluster bombs in populated areas, and I’ve also heard reports about white phosphorous, but that has yet to be verified by an independent source.

3. The country of Lebanon needs to be disentangled from the Middle Eastern mess. This can only be accomplished if Hezbollah is either disarmed (preferable) or integrated into the Lebanese Army under the control of the Lebanese government (more likely). Unfortunately, it doesn’t appear that the Lebanese government currently has the power to make this happen on their own, and the remaining options are not good for Lebanon. Now is the appropriate time for Lebanese politicians to work on positioning themselves in regards to this conflict.

My feeling is that the Lebanese government should, at the very least, make an official statement requesting that Hezbollah lay down their arms. It’s not likely to happen, but they need to make their position of separation very, very clear at this point.

They also need to make it clear that Hezbollah’s only purpose in Lebanon can be to protect Lebanese interests. If they’re using Lebanon as a staging point to fight for the interests of other countries, Lebanon can’t currently support that position. They are a country that needs to spend time focusing only on their own internal issues, particularly now that they’ve been set back by so many years.

4. The United States needs to stop sending precision guided missiles to Israel, especially without proper disclosure to the UK whose resources we used to send those missiles. This kind of secretive, rush delivery of weapons without proper disclosure is provocative to say the least. Not good policy towards our enemies or our allies.

5. Israel needs to remember that while removing Hezbollah is a good thing for them, weakening the rest of Lebanon is not. They actually have a Western friendly government in place. That’s some pretty significant progress for Israel considering the way that things have looked in the past, and that government is going to need to maintain some of the strength that they have to continue to deal with the power struggles that come from Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran.

Even if Israel is miraculously able to neutralize every last Hezbollah fighter, what will be left of Lebanon at the end of it? What is the political situation going to look like, and how is it going to effect Israel and the rest of the Middle East? Is the removal of Hezbollah, if it's even possible, going to be worth the butterfly effect that it causes or would Israel be better off exerting more energy towards deterring them? Those are the questions that I don’t even pretend to know the answer to, but I'm glad to see a thread devoted to finding solutions rather than spending time trying to determine who started the whole mess.

Edited to fix spelling.